Ethics, My Understanding of Objectivism

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

How Moral is Capitalism?

This is to answer Rich Karlgaard's February 12 article in Forbes.

Yes, the purer the capitalism, the more prosperous AND more moral the society. As Ayn Rand has pointed out, her ethical code supporting capitalism is not dependent on "outside moral influences" or "religious values"(Ten Commandments or Sermon on the Mount). A pure capitalist system with Rand's ethics will not deteriorate to the "inhumane, cutthroat" society mentioned. In fact, the redistributionists' main nonsecular supports are the Sermon on the Mount and the numerous antiwealth references in Scripture.

In briefest form, man absolutely depends on his mind for survival, long range planning, and trading and dealing with other men. If he acts unethically, he damages and endangers his mind's functioning and thus endangers his survival. ONLY by acting ethically can he serve his rational self interest and protect himself on a long range basis.

Widespread understanding of this ethical approach cannot come overnight, due to centuries of philosophical corruption. Rand has the philosophical system, including ethics, in place to bring this change about.

One cannot truly defend capitalism against its implacable enemies without realization that pure capitalism is moral and therefore is incompatible with altruism or mysticism.

Norman E. Hill
Norm's Thoughts Blog
Winner and Final Chairman
BooksByHills
NoraLyn LTD

Attempt to Decipher Kant

Man gets knowledge from integrating. By perception, he starts with observing the existents all around him. He keeps them in mental grasp by conceptualizing i.e. by omitting the particular measurements of existents and grasping their common denominators. This process of integrating is how man acquires knowledge of and control over reality.

Kant also starts with existents and perception and forms an exceedingly complex conceptual chain supposedly applied to grasp and integrate the existents. He concludes that:

1. The existents he "grasps" are not those of true reality, i.e. of the noumenal world.

2. His observation of existents is from his sensing faculties that are neither omniscient nor omnipotent. Therefore, his observation is in principle distorted and, even if it was not, is not observation of true reality, i.e.the noumenal world.

3. His conceptual process and faculty are finite, neither omniscient nor omnipotent, and therefore could not mentally grasp the existents around him, even if they did represent true reality, ie the noumenal world. Therefore, his conceptual faculty is useless.

4. Therefore, in principle, man cannot grasp true reality.

Kant forms this conclusion about an unknowable reality by starting with reality and asserting he "knows" points #1 through #4 above. He accepts and uses the human process to grasp reality to form his conclusion that man in principle cannot grasp reality.

Norman E. Hill
NoraLyn Ltd.
Books By Hills