Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Is Objectivism a dualistic philosophy?

rated by 0 users
This post has 8 Replies | 1 Follower

Top 500 Contributor
Posts 276
Points 4,320
bcyclwutztht Posted: Sun, Oct 3 2010 4:10 AM

I'm a philosophy noob, but my reading of the wiki definitions of Objectivism and dualism tells me that Objectivism is a dualistic philosophy. 

wiki-

D- dualism (re: philsophy of mind)- any of a narrow variety of views about the relationship between mind and matter, which claims that mind and matter are two ontologically separate categories.

D- Objectivism holds that reality exists independent of consciousness, that man has direct contact with reality through sense perception, that one can attain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic.

What do you think?

Thank you. 

  

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,037
Points 17,975

No, consciousness is an effect of matter.  What they are saying is that something can exist regardless of if you are conscious of it.  Consciousness can't exist without reality.  But reality can exist without consciousness.

It's the same as saying that dinosaurs couldn't exist without reality, but reality now exists without dinosaurs.  There is no special dualism for every single thing that comes in and out of existence.

When you do die, reality will still exist for the rest of us.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,249
Points 29,610

Dualism, in the philosophy of mind, typically comes down to substance dualism (cf. Descartes) and property dualism (cf. David Chalmers).

In regard to substance dualism, the assertion is that consciousness is made of radically different stuff than the rest of the universe--your body, for instance, has extension and can be broken down, whereas--as Descartes said--your mind has no extension and is unified. Property dualism, holds a monistic outlook (there is only one stuff), but that substance can exhibit two properties: what is physical and what is mental (in contemporary times, the most famous expositor of this view is David Chalmers).

Now, a consistent materialist or physicalist (such as myself) entirely disbelieves those two dualisms: consciousness is a physical phenomenon, nothing more.

"I'm not a fan of Murray Rothbard." -- David D. Friedman

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,162
Points 36,965
Moderator
I. Ryan replied on Sun, Oct 3 2010 2:06 PM

StrangeLoop:

consciousness is a physical phenomenon

What does that mean?

If I wrote it more than a few weeks ago, I probably hate it by now.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Male
Posts 1,249
Points 29,610

I. Ryan:
What does that mean?

The phenomenon of "conciousness" is actually a decentralized network of physical processes.

"I'm not a fan of Murray Rothbard." -- David D. Friedman

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,162
Points 36,965
Moderator
I. Ryan replied on Sun, Oct 3 2010 3:58 PM

StrangeLoop:

The phenomenon of "conciousness" is actually a decentralized network of physical processes.

What does "physical process" mean? Does it mean anything publically observable? And what would a centralized "network of physical processes" be, as opposed to a "decentralized" one?

If I wrote it more than a few weeks ago, I probably hate it by now.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 276
Points 4,320

Thank you for the replies! 

I need to learn some things about philosophy. 

Per this thread, I think I'll start with Mises and Clark.  Russel looks too biased---i.e. according to reports---for a philosophy noob like me who, due to time restrictions, doesn't plan on reading widely at first. 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,037
Points 17,975

I think what objectivism is saying that the universe can exist without consciousness (which is short-hand for saying 'whatever creatures have consciousness').  That's what it means by 'independent of' (without), rather than just that they are separate.  That much is true without having to explain all the details about consciousness.  And once that's established you can't say it is a dualism.  Because reality can exist without an infinite number of things; consciousness is not special.

Dualism doesn't necessarily say anything about minds and bodies being able to exist without each other (although it could be used to justify an immortal soul/mind that lives on).  Just that they are two things.

Objectivism also creates a hierarchy that doesn't exist in dualism proper.  And that is that reality is more fundamental than consciousness.   Dualism doesn't say mind or body is more fundamental than the other.  And in fact somewhat paradoxically pairs them together as inseparable for certain animals.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 28
Points 725
Initiate replied on Mon, Oct 4 2010 12:29 AM

 

 Yes, this is essentially a statement of the “primacy of existence” principle, which is just to say consciousness is part of existence, but consciousness does not create existence.

 

As for dualism, Objectivism rejects the mind-body dichotomy and thus is not a dualist philosophy. The law of identity applies to consciousness as everything else.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (9 items) | RSS