Meeting of Minds in San Francisco
The failure of philosophers to establish an objective basis for mathematics, explained David Ross, has contributed to the uneasy feeling among mathematicians today that mathematical axioms are arbitrary, and that the consistency of mathematics can never be established. A solution based on Objectivist epistemology is needed.
Dr. Ross, a research scientist at Eastman Kodak Research Labs, opened the Institute's November 11 "Meeting of Minds" conference in San Francisco. The conference, which was the first Institute event in California since 1991, brought together three "greatest hits" presentations from IOS Summer Seminars, a new presentation on promoting Objectivism in New Zealand, and a packed house of 95 enthusiastic participants.
Dr. Ross went on to explain his own work by addressing three questions: What are numbers? How do we come to know them? Why are mathematical truths so certain? Dr. Ross applied the Objectivist theory of epistemology to explain how we direct our attention to groups of entities. By identifying similarity in respect of quantity among groups and omitting measurements, we form concepts of quantity—numbers.
After offering this objective basis for the concept number, Dr. Ross briefly explained the basis of arithmetic and closed by discussing the unusual clarity of mathematical concepts and certainty of mathematical truths.
Hayek and the Defense of Capitalism
Larry Sechrest, Ph.D., director of the Free Enterprise Institute and assistant professor of economics in the Department of Business Administration, Sul Ross State University in Alpine, TX, began the second presentation with a puzzle. Within the Austrian school of economics, two names predominate: Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek. In her writings, however, Ayn Rand mentions only von Mises, commenting favorably on aspects of his work, but never mentions the man regarded as the intellectual head of the Austrian school. Why? Was Hayek in fact a pro-laissez-faire economist?
Acknowledging Hayek's technical brilliance as an economist, Prof. Sechrest argued that Hayek's fundamental reason for opposing socialists was that they "overvalue reason." Hayek, in fact, stated that he had sympathy for many of the socialists' values (e.g., altruism), but thought that they had made an honest, technical error in advocating socialism over the free market. In addition, Hayek opposed socialism with, as Prof. Sechrest called it, an "anemic defense of capitalism." Hayek's free market had room for a tremendous range of activities he considered proper for the government, including limits on working hours, certification of certain professions, pure food laws, public housing, compulsory military service, and even proportional (though not progressive) income taxes. Prof. Sechrest concluded with the observation that Hayek never grasped that a truly free society must be based on sound philosophical principles.
"Objectivism Down Under"
After a lunch at which participants had an opportunity to discuss ideas with the speakers and meet other participants, Lindsay Perigo, a broadcaster and magazine editor from New Zealand, showed how he has been making waves in his country by promoting free market and Objectivist ideas on his Radio Liberty network and in his magazine, The Free Radical. (An excerpt from his presentation begins on page 4.) As a nationally known broadcaster, Mr. Perigo's conversion to Objectivist principles did not go unnoticed. Eventually disillusionment with the left-wing bias of state radio and television led to his launch of a new radio network, Radio Liberty.
The final presentation of the day was a reprise of IOS Executive Director David Kelley's 1995 Summer Seminar presentation on the Objectivist virtue of benevolence. (See the IOS Journal, Vol. 5, #3, September 1995.) His argument is presented in detail in his new monograph, Unrugged Individualism: The Selfish Basis of Benevolence, available soon from the Institute.
Commenting on highlights of the day, participants cited "the exceptionally high quality of thought, speakers and delivery," "the clear, definite presentation of rational ideas," and the "audience friendliness and the lack of hostility in the presentations."