Peikoff 20 and 21

Here I catch up on my brief summaries of Leonard Peikoff's podcasts.

Peikoff 20

Should a man reveal intense romantic interest in a woman? Peikoff replies that it depends on context; it's "all a question of detail." Under the appropriate circumstances, yes, it's appropriate to communicate passion. He talks a bit about those circumstances.

What is the basis for laws against self-incrimination? Here Peikoff surprised me a bit. My first thoughts went to the abuses inherent in forcing people to testify against themselves. But Peikoff makes a more fundamental argument. He explains that we properly support a just government to protect our own lives and property. But when the government is trying to convict a person of a serious crime, whether rightly or wrongly, the egoistic justification for joining the government is to that extent broken. Egoism dictates that, while people may be punished for lying under oath, they cannot properly be forced to incriminate themselves.

Next, Peikoff discusses the cynicism often behind the phrase, "drinking the kool-aid."

What about the marriage of minors? Peikoff replies that marriage is a contract, and government can't sanction a contract with a minor. I basically agree, but I add that people do mature at different ages. I believe that a court should be able to grant adult status to a responsible 17-year-old, if petitioned. Should a pregnant 15-year-old be able to marry the father? Colorado Statute 14-2-109.5 sets an age limit for common-law marriage at 18. Colorado law provides for marriage under 18 with parental approval, and this strikes me as reasonable:

14-2-106. License to marry.

(1) (a) ...[T]he county clerk shall issue a license to marry and a marriage certificate form upon being furnished:

(I) Satisfactory proof that each party to the marriage will have attained the age of eighteen years at the time the marriage license becomes effective; or, if over the age of sixteen years but has not attained the age of eighteen years, has the consent of both parents or guardian or, if the parents are not living together, the parent who has legal custody or decision-making responsibility concerning such matters or with whom the child is living or judicial approval, as provided in section 14-2-108; or, if under the age of sixteen years, has both the consent to the marriage of both parents or guardian or, if the parents are not living together, the parent who has legal custody or decision-making responsibility concerning such matters or with whom the child is living and judicial approval, as provided in section 14-2-108...

Obviously, just because marriage under the age of 18 is allowed doesn't mean it's usually a good idea.

What are the limits to the right of self-defense? Peikoff sensibly answers that things like nuclear weapons, private armies, and biological agents properly are restricted, though he adds that a private force can be appropriate depending on one's property holdings and risks. (I imagine that a business operating in a dangerous part of the world would need a private force, for example.) However, Peikoff seems not to have finely considered the nature of guns. He suggested than an Uzi may be prohibited, but that's rather arbitrary. A reasonable standard is that, if a weapon is inherently used discriminately -- i.e., to stop a particular threatening person -- it should be allowed for self-defense. Weapons that cannot be used in a domestic defensive situation without inherently endangering third parties should be restricted. This standard easily differentiates guns from tanks and nuclear bombs (and it also comports with the historical understanding of "arms.")

Finally, Peikoff discusses some of the fiction he likes.

Peikoff 21

Should government intervene in the economy to protect the environment? Peikoff answers no, except when particular property rights are violated by a particular party. However, he notes, first-in-time rights apply; if somebody builds a home next to an established factory, the homeowner can't properly sue the factory for air pollution. One "cannot launch a claim against industrial civilization as such."

Is it possible to experience love without physical attraction? I won't try to summarize Peikoff's interesting remarks on the matter, as they're both subtle and far afield from the main purpose of this blog.

Can reading Ayn Rand become escapist? Peikoff says that reading great literature for inspiration is much different than a "refusal to face reality."

Finally, when is it immoral to help a stranger? We are "right to value human life," Peikoff notes, so obviously we should help strangers in an emergency when doing so risks no substantial values. However, if our choice is between saving a stranger and saving one's spouse, the proper choice is equally obvious. He discusses a few other scenarios.

Word has it that Peikoff is wrapping up work on his book on DIM, or "disintegration, integration, and misintegration," as an explanation for the basic flows of human history. I expect the book's publication to be a watershed event.

Peikoff 19

Here I briefly summarize Leonard Peikoff's recent podcast. My goal here is to raise interest in the podcasts and create textual markers, not provide a substitute for Peikoff's remarks. Peikoff also has a 20th and 21st podcast available.

Is it appropriate to purchase stock in tobacco companies, for instance? Peikoff replies that the harm of smoking depends on the context. Many items can be abused but are not inherently evil, including guns and baked goods. It's morally fine (but not mandatory) to invest in anything that is "legitimately legal" and possible to use rationally. Offhand, I had trouble thinking of a product that is impossible to use rationally. Even drugs that are currently illegal have legitimate medical uses. Of course, it would be wrong to promote particular groups known to be immoral, such as racist groups, but there the issue is not a product but the actions of particular people.

Does divorce harm children? Peikoff points out that, while divorce is inherently difficult for children, the level of difficulty all depends on how the particular parents handle it. A bad marriage is worse than a divorce for children.

Peikoff addresses a question regarding the metaphysical versus epistemological sense of the primary of existence.

What is an "Objectivist" person? Peikoff replies that generally it's much more important to evaluate the character of a person than whether the person is an Objectivist.

Is immortality possible? If it's true that something cannot fundamentally come into or go out of existence, then how can the soul cease to exist? Peikoff agrees with the principle that something cannot come from nothing or fade into nothing. I'll throw in this example: it's possible to burn a log, in which case the log ceases to exist, but the matter of the log is transformed into heat, light, smoke, and ash. Peikoff points out that "an action can cease to exist." Soul refers to our consciousness, a faculty that performs certain actions (specifically, the action of perceiving reality). Is it possible for the faculty of sight to go out of existence? Obviously, Peikoff points out; a person can go blind. The faculty of sight can be destroyed. Likewise, the faculty of consciousness can be destroyed.

Finally, Peikoff mentions his preferred translations for the Iliad and Antigone.

Two New Ayn Rand Resources

The Ayn Rand Institute recently has launched two new web pages devoted to Ayn Rand and her work.

AtlasShrugged.com includes various essays about the novel and its history, several hours of video by Onkar Ghate featuring a "chapter-by-chapter discussion," and audio recordings by Ayn Rand and others.

FacetsOfAynRand.com reproduces in full the book by Marry Ann and Charles Sures. For me, the highlight of the web page is a collection of audio recordings by Mary Ann Sures, Leonard Peikoff, and others. So far I've listened to only a couple of the recordings, but they are delightful and fascinating.

These two new resources join the Ayn Rand Lexicon, which makes available extensive quotes from Rand's many works, organized topically.

Finally, AynRand.org makes available media releases and essays and, on the registered users' page (registration is free), an extensive library of audio and video recordings of Ayn Rand and others. For example, so far in 2008 the page has made available the lectures "Darwin and the Discovery of Evolution," by Keith Lockitch, and "The 'Market Failure' Fallacy," by Brian Simpson.

Though this material is available for free to the user, it is extremely valuable, and those of all backgrounds and levels can find many hours of illuminating discussions here. I applaud the Ayn Rand Institute for making these outstanding resources available to the general public.

Peikoff's Tenth Podcast

Leonard Peikoff has released his tenth podcast. My brief summary here is intended to raise interest in the podcast, not serve as a substitute for Peikoff's comments. Peikoff addresses six questions.

1. Granted that the economy should be free, can real "flesh and blood," "cunning" men achieve and sustain a free economy? Peikoff answers that the notion of "flesh and blood" as inherently corrupt is a fundamentally mystical, supernaturalist presumption. If "cunning" means tempted to fraud, then many people are in fact honest, and fraud is outlawed under capitalism.

2. What is existence? Peikoff notes that existence is not an attribute of something else; it is that which is.

3. Do great works of art inspire philosophical movements, or is the reverse the case? Peikoff answers that it "works both ways," but philosophy is primary. For example, Atlas Shrugged "presupposed Ayn Rand's philosophy." Yet, even though the nature of a work of art is determined by philosophical ideas, "art is the greatest disseminator of philosophy that there is."

4. Why is Ayn Rand not taken seriously in some intellectual circles? Peikoff answers that several reasons may be possible. Many people have so automatized such ideas as altruism and the analytic-synthetic dichotomy that Rand's ideas seem alien.

5. On the other hand, why have Rand's ideas grown more respectable in some intellectual circles and in the culture at large? Peikoff gives much of the credit to "heroic individuals like Tara Smith and Robert Mayhew... who have distinguished themselves" in academia.

6. Will religious views in the culture and among politicians translate to courts and the law? Peikoff draws an analogy to socialism, which was once also rejected by the courts. Over time, dominant ideas do influence legal systems. "Religion is now in the process of replacing socialism" as a social and legal influence, as Peikoff argues in his forthcoming book about DIM, Disintegration, Integration, and Misintegration.

Peikoff's Eighth Podcast

Leonard Peikoff has published his eighth podcast. Here I briefly summarize the questions and Peikoff's basic answers (though my summaries should not be taken as substitutes for the podcast).

1. How does the role of consciousness in activating the body fit with the Objectivist view of the "primacy of existence?" Peikoff notes that the mind and body constitute "one total organism." The mind has a unique relation to the body that it does not have with external existence. Thus, for example, we can decide to move our hand. However, even in the body "existence has primacy;" what we can will our body to do "depends on physical conditions."

2. What is the source of the music played at the start of the podcast? I won't spoil Peikoff's story by summarizing it. He also tells the story in Leonard Peikoff: In His Own Words, which I was able to watch at a friend's house. It's a fun and informative documentary.

3. Is there such a thing as "Objectivist music?" Peikoff answers no. Objectivism is a philosophy, and particular concrete applications cannot be derived from philosophy. Peikoff argues that even Atlas Shrugged is not "Objectivist art," though of course it has an Objectivist theme and it reflects the Romantic view of free will.

4. Should the definition of "plot" contain "conflict?" Peikoff replies that, while conflict is implicit in the definition, it is not an essential part of it.

5. Should one put off artistic creation (such as writing a novel) in the midst of great emotional upheaval? Peikoff answers, "Within limits, yes, put it off." He discusses some examples and offers some qualifications.

Peikoff's Seventh Podcast

Leonard Peikoff released his seventh podcast today. Following is my brief review of the discussion (which again should not be taken as a substitute for the podcast).

1. Mother Teresa would not have been happy at a Fortune 500 company; does this show that productive work is not necessarily one's proper, primary purpose?

Peikoff first discusses the value of productive work as a means to sustain one's self and contribute to one's happiness; it is not itself the "primary purpose" of ethics. Nor does productive work guarantee happiness; it should be a part of a whole set of consistent values. Moreover, one cannot judge the happiness of a person from superficial appearances or statements.

A point that I was thinking of, but that Peikoff does not make, is that working for a Fortune 500 company is not necessary for productive work. For example, The Fountainhead offers examples of artists who do the work that they love, even if it means a reduced income.

2. Is it a "moral crime" to purchase the works of an artist who at some level opposes one's core values? Peikoff answers, "it depends."

3. What is the difference between the terms "hate" and "despise?" Hatred involves an element of fear.

4. Are various rules, such as mandatory auto insurance, legitimate for government-owned roads? Peikoff replies that roads should be privately owned, but, so long as they are run by the government, the government must set (and we should follow) various rules.

5. What's a good dictionary? Peikoff likes the Random House College dictionary for regular use, and the Oxford dictionary for more philosophical work.