Consider Ayn Rand's notion of human nature... "Objectivism rejects any form of determinism... Man is a rational being..." Can such a medieval notion of human nature be informed by science?
It seems to me that, to embrace Rand's notion of human nature, you must turn your back on science. You must deny or ignore what is known to psychology, to neuroscience, to neurochemistry, to biophysics, to physics, etc., -- you must somehow reduce that huge body of science to Rand's mumbo jumbo of "volitional consciousness".
So, is Rand's reduction of science to nonsense the work of a serious thinker? I suppose that might depend on whether you require of your "serious thinkers" that their notions at least be compatible with established science. But why wouldn't you?
It seems to me that, to embrace Rand's notion of human nature, you must turn your back on science. You must deny or ignore what is known to psychology, to neuroscience, to neurochemistry, to biophysics, to physics, etc., -- you must somehow reduce that huge body of science to Rand's mumbo jumbo of "volitional consciousness".
So, is Rand's reduction of science to nonsense the work of a serious thinker? I suppose that might depend on whether you require of your "serious thinkers" that their notions at least be compatible with established science. But why wouldn't you?
Last edited: