My Objectivist Philosophy

My Objectivist Philosophy

      While the beliefs of Objectivism have more definition, for the purpose of this…writing, we will say that Objectivism is, “… that reality exists independent of consciousness, that human beings have 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, that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest...”- Wikipedia

        I do believe that even if our conscious was to die, there is an actual reality that will exist whether we perceive it or not. If we die, that woman we saw the day before our death will still be there, assuming she didn’t die, after we die. I believe our conscious creates our PERSONAL realities, a reality that die with our conscious as it includes our memories, our understandings, our connotations, etc. Our personal reality is had through the presentation of A reality and the actual experiences we have in our (the consciousness) interaction with the reality. Our personal reality is not exactly real itself, but exists only in our conscious, kinda the opposite of what “reality” means, however, what our personal reality was attached to continues to exist apart from our acknowledgement of it. If one prescribed to the idea that reality is something that either or conscious or subconscious perceives, reality is not independent of our consciousness, then that old man that was just in the face did not exist until you now think about him. Not to mention, you do not know the exact specifics of the man (face, family, morals, etc.) so can a vague old man whom you may prescribe a face to when that is not his face (the man in question) exist for those who prescribe to a conscious dependent reality? You consciously acknowledge him, but not his specifics. Is our connotation of the old man enough to give him an existence since reality relies on conscious acknowledgement, regardless of what we say his face is? There is an existence in the mind where we may prescribe a face to the man and he exists, but is this the only reality? I suppose it depends on what one defines the interaction between a conscious dependent reality and the conscious as.

      Now, for the part that we may obtain objective knowledge, I do not agree completely. By interacting with an independent reality, we do definitely acknowledge objective information (subconsciously/consciously), but is this objective knowledge since we do not see the objective aspects by its self? I believe that when we consciously/subconsciously acknowledge objective information, the knowledge we acquire instantly adapt subjectivity once it enters to conscious (since, per my definition, knowledge is conscious). Connotation, feeling, blah, blah, blah, all instantly attached. We have objective knowledge in regards to a specific point in a unit of our knowledge being objective information (such as there being an object with this shape in front of me), but attached to this point of the unit is subjectivity (object’s color, the name of the object is called a crystal, it looks sexy, etc.) In general, knowledge is not objective, but points of the knowledge are objective where branching points of subjectivity are then attached to each “unit” of knowledge.

      In regards to the “proper moral purpose”, I personally do not regard it as “proper” namely because it is not formal nor the right thing to be done, but it is our moral purpose in that it is universal to humans and animals in terms of their conscious (not so much computers in that they have a different set of rules for the “conscious”)and is acted upon regardless as it is hardwired into us. I believe it is a universal moral that we all regard as right as that is how we pursue activities in our life. The pursuit is also why I believe it is a purpose. I prescribe to psychological egoism, the belief that ALL of our loves, activities, goals, etc. are set due to our self-interest, never being holistically altruistic. It is with this belief of humanity that I feel it is a moral purpose, a “right”/moral/perfectly fine purpose, that humans should seek their own satisfaction, not necessarily MAXIMIZES their satisfaction as it is rational, since they always seek their own satisfaction as we are hard-wired (we and animals) to do so. Actually, I’m not exactly sure about hive-minds, they may have true altruism.