> i'm not very familiar with rand's philosophy, but this post
> seems self-contained. it appears to me that savant's very point is
> that the notion of telic self-gratification is unfalsifiable -- a
I'm not sure why Marilyn Vos Savant and yourself are bothered by the fact
that human 'purpose' is a bootstrap-- it seems particularly fitting to me
that this process should be self referential and self-defined. Tautology is
only a valid argument against this definition of self-gratification if one
believes in an external, objective source of human purpose.
The only problem with the circularity of this argument (as in all
bootstraps) is that it doesn't reference an objective reality. However this
is appropriate insofar as one holds the belief that 'purpose' doesn't
reference an objective reality either.
Unfortunately this means that it doesn't say very much.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:35:28 MDT