|
|
humanities.philosophy.objectivism |
Date: Wed, May 6, 1998 12:07 EDT Ask what "infinite" -- having no limit -- could physically mean. Taken If infinity does not name a specific amount, then it isn't a number that "Infinity" is still a valid mathematical concept, however, so that in The application of her statement to the physical universe is that --- Dean
Message-id: <6iq1sd$...@suriname.earthlink.net>
>This seems like a ridiculously inappropriate use of philosophy to describe Philosophy *does* describe the physical world in certain general ways.
>the physical world. Can someone please elucidate? I cannot fathom how
>objectivism disallows an infinite universe. Anyone???
It insists on identity and causation and non-contradiction. It
formalizes and validates the methods used to understand the world. To
deliberately think conceptually about the physical world in the first
place is to have (at least implicitly) done philosophy first -- to have
selected what we take to be a valid method of thinking and a valid set
of principles about reality.
literally, it means "having features or attributes embodying amount, but
at the same time *beyond* any particular amount". This means, having no
identity.
can be applied to reality. More precisely, the strategy (discovered by
Cantor) that gives it numerical meaning is indulged at the expense of
entirely abstracting away the connection to existence that gives numbers
their objective status (i.e., their connection to reality). It cannot
name any specific amount in reality.
a certain non-numerical sense Objectivism *does* allow an infinite
universe. Rand said in _Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology_, "An
arithmetical sequence extends into infinity, without implying that
infinity actually exists; such extension means only that whatever
number of units does exist, it is to be included in the same sequence."
(This makes "infinity" what her epistemological view calls a concept of
method.)
"whatever number of existents (or measures of their attributes) exists,
it is to be included in the same sequence" of progressively larger
numbers.