Why Does a Theory of Concepts Matter So Much?

What is a theory of concepts, what are the crucial implications it can have on one's life and what is Objectivism answer.

(Photo by SHVETS production)

According to Ayn Rand, the task of philosophy is to provide man with "A comprehensive view of life. This view serves as a base, a frame of reference, for all his actions, mental or physical, psychological or existential. "[1] Ayn Rand views philosophy as a fundamentally practical science aiming to equip man with the proper methods of dealing with reality. Metaphysics tells man the nature of the universe he lives in, and epistemology tells man the appropriate means of gaining knowledge. Finally, ethics provides man with a code of values and virtues that can lead one to a successful life and long-term happiness. 

Objectivism fundamentally differs from other philosophies in that its primary goal is to guide man's life for living on earth. Objectivist metaphysics tells man that reality exists independently of his consciousness. Reality is what it is. It tells man that things act according to their nature - nobody can expect miracles to happen. Objectivist epistemology tells man to look at reality with his eyes, observe facts of reality, and use his mind to form concepts and definitions. Objectivist epistemology aims to provide man with the proper methods of acquiring knowledge to help man deal with reality optimally. Lastly, the Objectivist ethics tells man that he has to in accordance act in accordance with reality, he has to exercise his faculty of reason, morally, it means to exercise the virtue of rationality, and man has to be selfish - act for his own best rational long term interest. 

Objectivism, throughout all the three main branches of philosophy, is oriented toward guiding man's life on earth. Objectivism presents a deeply unique approach to philosophy (unique in relation to contemporary schools of philosophy). I believe that at the very root, one of the main foundations which allow this anthropocentric approach is the Objectivist theory of concept. 

A theory of concepts is essentially the answer to the question, "what does a concept refer to?" Do we have a direct link to reality via our senses and faculty of reason? Or is all of our knowledge a subjective creation of the structure of our minds? Are concepts referring to reality, or is it just senseless noise? The answer to this question will direct the rest of our course of thought. If our concepts refer only to our subjective inner world, then philosophy the task of philosophy would be very different than if our concepts would refer to outer extrospective reality. For a philosophy to equip man with a comprehensive view of life that will serve as a frame of reference to all of man's actions, philosophy has to answer this question. Because the frame of reference has to be based either on the outside observable reality, the subjective self, or some higher being (God, society, etc.) Where will man have to look when looking for knowledge? When looking for guidance? It all comes down to this fundamental question. 

I shall illustrate the issue's importance, using Plato's philosophy and its leading historic derivatives as examples.  

Plato's philosophy is inherently not focused on life on earth. While he has claimed that one of the results of practicing his ethics would be happiness, it is not the primary concern. The main concern is being as close as possible to true reality - the world of Forms. Because Plato's theory of concepts claims that the origin of man's knowledge is not from this earth but rather the higher world of Forms, a breach between man's cognition and reality forms - What is observed through our eyes is a distorted projection of the real world. The perceivable reality is inherently unreal. This metaphysical downgrading of reality and this epistemological breach between man's senses and "real" knowledge inverts the whole direction of philosophy. Plato's philosophy is inherently about facing the inner as against the outer. Knowledge is not formed based on recognizing facts but through remembering what we forgot at birth. Ethics is not a celebration of life on earth but a life of asceticism whose end goal is death and return to the perfect world of Forms. Now, I would like to move forward using examples of contemporary schools of philosophy.

(I need to elaborate more about his actual theory of concepts and show why it leads to this result)

When telling man that his concepts don't refer to reality but rather to some different higher dimension, either God, the world of Forms, society, the noumenal world, etc., it downgrades the role of reality in man's life. It makes concepts inherently divorced from reality. Then, there are two options to proceed from - Mysticism and Skepticism: 

The mystic variant: If one takes ideas seriously, he will proceed with the notion that concepts refer to some other realm, either God, Will, world of Forms, the noumenal world, etc. Whatever the form, fundamentally, it is the same old idea. Historically, the most widespread sub-variant within the mystical variant is religion. It tells man that God created reality ex-nihilo, he can create miracles, etc. The most damaging sub-variant of the mystic variant in the 20th Century was Communism, Fascism, and Nazism. Essentially, according to both doctrines, what determines truth is the will of society. Whatever sub-variant within the mystical view, the truth is not achieved by extrospective means; knowledge is not a matter of looking outward and learning about facts of reality, but instead, knowledge arrives from higher sources, knowledge which requires some special carrier. This man can receive knowledge directly from the source. It doesn't matter if it's either a prophet, a rabbi, or a führer. It is never you.  

The Skeptic variant: the skeptic variant mainly exists with the ordinary unintellectual type of people, one who doesn't want to engage in complicated abstract thought and isn't interested to hear about it. He only wants to live his own life. Perhaps his disdain for philosophy comes from associating it with mysticism. The skeptic is inherently much more oriented toward this life. He is not interested in a gateway to heaven or a communist utopia. Most commonly, the skeptic accepts Kant's idea that we can't access "reality as it is," but we can discover knowledge that could be of use in the phenomenal world, so the use of reason for "practical" purposes is permittable (one gateway to the 20th Century philosophy "Pragmaticism"). As in the mystical variant, there are many sub-variants in skepticism: there are complete whim-worshippers who live on the range of the moment (because life is unexpected, anything could happen at any moment, so "what the hell"), and there are more reasonable "common sense" people, and there are people who agree with religion on every fundamental issue but don't exercise it because it's too 'difficult.'

It needs to be said that the connection between metaphysics and epistemology is largely intertwined; for some, they would start with the metaphysical premise of religion, and others, could start with the epistemological premise of Nominalism, for example.

Nevertheless, if one decides to be a sophist, a communist, a nazi, or a monk, all sides agree on their answer to the question - concepts do not refer to an outside reality - objective knowledge is unreachable. It has catastrophic effects on all the main branches of philosophy: Metaphysically: reality is unreal and not absolute. There is a god or some other supernaturalistic being. Epistemologically: knowledge comes from either mystic revelation or rejection of knowledge altogether. Ethically: moral code or guidance comes from an especially endowed person (a priest or a Lenin) or God himself. Because ethics is not about achieving human flourishing but man's subordination to other things, ethics will usually consist of duties that the individual has to exercise, no matter the costs (deontology). The moral end goal of life is death -- achieving some form of an afterlife or a utopia. Or, as in the skeptical variant, there is no guidance, no moral principles (such as pragmatism), no end goal, only the range of the moment.  

Objectivism brings an end to the breach between man's cognition and reality. According to Objectivism, the dichotomy between being a monk or being a sophist is false. According to Ayn Rand, our concepts refer to the directly perceivable objective reality. Man's unique ability to reason can allow him to acquire knowledge by himself (of course, building upon previous knowledge is mostly advantageous) because man can discover truths about reality and use his mind to form concepts and definitions that will help him to acquire more advanced knowledge, which will enable scientific discoveries, technology, and most foundationally; discovering philosophy. Using his rationality to study and progress further and further, man would never need any prophet to achieve anything at all. Man can achieve long-term happiness with the proper reality-based and rational self-interested code of ethics. But to get to that point, man has to cut out the middlemen. Man has to tie his concepts to reality through his perception directly. 

---

[1] - "The Chickens' Homecoming," Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution, Ayn Rand.