- Reaction score
Ayn Rand can suck my left testicle. While it is true that it matters not what any person wishes to be true, empirical evidence is quite subjective. Imagine if you will a person who is blind standing in front of The Last Supper. That person would have bugger all "empirical" evidence. Therefore, the beauty of that piece would be lost on that person. Objective matters, no matter what they are, are NOT subject to a person's perception, which is exactly what empiricism is. 1+1=2 is true now, was true a bazillion years ago and will remain true for ever. One person's perception of something, an entirely civilisation's for that matter, doesn't amount to a hill of flea shit.Thucydides said:Empirical evidence is the practical means of following Aristotle's Law of Identity (A=A), which is one of the foundations of Ayn Rand's philosophy. It does not matter what you or I wish to be true, or what our opinions are, or what other people's opinions are, the empirical evidence stands quite alone and independent of subjective factors.
What is subjective is how the evidence is treated, non objectivists can and do distort, dispute or ignore the evidence to support what they wish to be true.
EDIT: I have to apologise for my tone, but the mere mention of Ayn Rand makes me shudder. (now, where is that vomiting smily?)