Objectivism vs. Materialism and Idealism

[Rade]

So much confusion about Rand's Objectivist philosophy on this thread. Rand held a philosophy against "dualism"--such as the debate here about correctness of Idealism (I) vs Materialism (M). Rand rejected the idea of such "false alternatives". For Rand, (I) and (M) share a common premise, let us call it (O). Thus, just as Idealism depends on (O) to hold true, so does Materialism depend on (O), let us call (O) the Rand Philosophy of Objectivism. Rand both accepted and rejected aspects of (I) and (M), what most philosophers do not grasp is that Rand created a new philosophy that used many sets of dualistic concepts such as (I) and (M)--rationalism vs empiricism, etc. to transcend them to form a new philosophy. I think this aspect of Rand not understood by many philosophers.

Now, to clarify some comments above, for Rand, ontology MUST BEGIN with "axioms", and the two axioms that form the dialectic foundation of all inquiry are Existence and Consciousness. However (because she a realist) Rand affirms a cosmological "primacy of Existence" over consciousness. Rand rejects that existence and identity are aspects of real existents (e.g. the metaphysical given), for Rand, existence and identity form a dialectic that together "are the existents" in a sense of Hegel of "becoming".

 

[baywax]

I happened to be "true ai is possible" believer, so when it happens, you will know. Unless you'll die before.

AI will not happen without the interactions of neurons. Humans build robots. Get the picture? If you're going to tell me that "aware" robots will some day build "aware" robots my statement still holds true in that none of it could, would or can happen without the initial function and interaction of neurons.