X-Message-Number: 11037 From: "Ken Barclay" <> Subject: Appeal to authority Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 18:49:25 -0800 Mr. Smith appears to cherish authority. In #11023, he replies to Timor Rozenfeld. He refers for evidence to "Bell's Theorum" (sic), to Aspect's experimental support, to "90 years of post-classical physics," and to Godel's Proof, in order to get in a dig at Ayn Rand and Objectivism. He continually calls upon Albert Ellis to buttress his (no doubt sincerely felt) opinions about self-esteem, implying that anyone who neglects to look Ellis up has no business discussing the subject with Smith. This is a particularly cowardly version of "let's you and him fight." Is Mr. Smith's grasp of Ellis and his other authorities as slippery as his understanding of Objectivism? Ayn Rand made no "assumption that any epistemology must be based upon a metaphysics." In Objectivism, metaphysics and epistemology are seen as co-equal foundations of philosophy, the fact that metaphysics is conventionally presented first notwithstanding. He asserts that he does not "accept at least two of the three 'axiomatic principles' of Objectivism." That he doesn't identify which two is handy for him, inasmuch as Objectivism doesn't have "axiomatic principles." The philosophy does begin with axioms, identified by the ancient Greeks and made explicit by Aristotle. But axioms are just that: beginnings. Principles come later. His rather clumsy swipe at "those supporting dogma" was probably intended to refer to Objectivists, also. If so, this only shows up in greater relief his insecurity -- the reason he needs to appeal to authority. He can't conceive that anyone could read Ayn Rand and then come to his own conclusion. But that's just what Objectivists advocate. The resulting conviction is the opposite of the dependence on faith implied by the word "dogma." Reliance on authority is a refuge for those who have difficulty thinking for themselves. Mr. Smith placed himself in that category with his "Cryonics Syllogism" in #10979: "Signing up for cryonics is a no-brainer. Most humans don't sign up for cryonics. Therefore most humans are no-brainers ...(and not therefore suitable for neuros)." The obvious logical blunder in this "syllogism" was probably beyond him. Ken Barclay Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=11037