humanities.philosophy.objectivism

On Mar 8, 6:24 pm, Malrassic Park wrote:
> On Mar 8, 1:41 pm, Fred Weiss wrote:

> > > So what you're really asking me for, I think, is the referents of
> > > universals. But they are all concepts of method.
>
> > Methods pertaining to what?
>
> Solving problems, which is exactly how Rand explained it.

Solving problems about what?

> > > Concepts of method have no referents.
>
> > It would be interesting to watch Mal teach grammar (for example)
> > without providing any examples of what he is talking about.
>
> "Infinity" is a concept of method for mathematicians. It has no
> correspondence in objects of perception.

Not a particular object of perception, of course. You can't point to
an "infinity". But that's very different from suggesting, as you are
here, that these concepts (of method) have no basis in reality.

In any case, it was certainly not her view that all "universals" (I
assume by that you mean "concepts") are all concepts of method and
have no referents in perception. That was the original pronouncement
of yours to which I was responding.

She makes this all quite clear in Chap. 4 of ITOE, "Concepts of
Consciousness", ie. what she considers concepts of method as compared
to other kinds of concepts - concepts of method being a sub-category
of concepts of consciousness.

Fred Weiss