“Man’s reason is fully competent to know the facts of reality. Reason, the conceptual faculty, is the faculty that identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses. Reason is man’s only means of acquiring knowledge.” Thus Objectivism rejects mysticism (any acceptance of faith or feeling as a means of knowledge), and it rejects skepticism (the claim that certainty or knowledge is impossible).
Everything is knowable, sez Ayn. Unfortunately, not everything is provable, so how do we know things to be true that we can't prove to be true? "Acting in one's self-interest is inherently rational" is likely to be fiendishly difficult to prove, or flat-out impossible, so how do we know it to be true? Can't be mysticism, we're not supposed to take it on faith, or just intuitively feel that it's true... so how are we supposed to know it to be true?
Unprovable assertions...it's not a trump card, but it sure doesn't look good when you rely on unprovable assertions - assertions that you can't know are true - to construct a philosophy that says that everything is knowable and rationally accessible.
"Man's reason is fully competent to know the facts of reality. Reason, the conceptual faculty, is the faculty that identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses. Reason is man's only means of acquiring knowledge."
Thus Objectivism rejects mysticism (any acceptance of faith or feeling as a means of knowledge), and it rejects skepticism (the claim that certainty or knowledge is impossible).
Again... So what? -- Yes, Rands objectivism rejects mysticism as a means of gaining knowledge. Big deal. Get over it. Be as 'mystic' as you like.
Everything is knowable, sez Ayn. Unfortunately, not everything is provable, so how do we know things to be true that we can't prove to be true?
Sorry, that makes little sense. You're grasping..
"Acting in one's self-interest is inherently rational" is likely to be fiendishly difficult to prove, or flat-out impossible, so how do we know it to be true?
As I said earlier, which you couldn't refute, we learn rational self interest at our mothers breast.
Can't be mysticism, we're not supposed to take it on faith, or just intuitively feel that it's true... so how are we supposed to know it to be true?
'True' or not self interest works. You are arguing to argue.
Unprovable assertions...it's not a trump card, but it sure doesn't look good when you rely on unprovable assertions - assertions that you can't know are true - to construct a philosophy that says that everything is knowable and rationally accessible.
Until a better idea comes along, a philosophy that says that everything is knowable and rationally accessible, trumps your mysticism, im my book.