Beneath The DIM Hypothesis

Journal of Ayn Rand Studies 13 (2):160-204 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Dismissing criticisms that Leonard Peikoff's book, The DIM Hypothesis, is unscientific, deterministic, or rationalistic, this essay focuses on problems with the logical framework of Peikoff's study of Western culture. In particular, Peikoff has conflated two different kinds of rationalists and empiricists and has completely overlooked combinations of the Platonist and so-called “Kantian” modes. As a result, his three pure integration “modes” actually produce not just two “mixtures” but a total of six. Furthermore, without absolving Kant of very serious philosophical errors, the author marshals evidence that the real culprit responsible for the culturally disastrous “Disintegration” mode was one of Kant's predecessors.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,388

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-10-25

Downloads
30 (#787,710)

6 months
7 (#469,699)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

What Do We Need to Know?Robert L. Campbell - 2018 - Journal of Ayn Rand Studies 18 (1):118-163.
Modern Physics versus Objectivism.Warren C. Gibson - 2013 - Journal of Ayn Rand Studies 13 (2):140-159.
The DIM Antithesis.Dennis C. Hardin - 2014 - Journal of Ayn Rand Studies 14 (2):148-162.

Add more citations