Everyone has their own worldview.
Some are like rural tile houses, some are like urban apartment buildings; some are like uniform template houses, while others are like uniquely customized homes; some soar into the clouds, while others are practical and understated; some are magnificent, while others are simple and plain... Everyone has their own dwelling place, and everyone has their own worldview.
I also have a worldview. I just didn't realize it before. If I were to describe my worldview in one word, it would be "objectivism." "Objectivism" is not a profound theory; it is merely a term I coined to describe my own worldview. However, as the name suggests, I do believe that "objectivism" can well summarize my worldview.
The purpose of this article is to elaborate on the most fundamental and core concept of "objectivism." My house may not be beautiful, but it is definitely a heartfelt house that seeks truth. So let's clean up the house and welcome you as a guest.
The Origin of Objectivism#
Why does justice come into being? Why do laws come into being? Why does power come into being... These questions are actually asking "where do they come from?" Similarly, for the worldview, we must also ask, "Why did objectivism come into being? Where does objectivism originate?"
Nature as the Origin of Objectivism#
No worldview arises out of thin air; it includes both the indirect experiences from the books I've read and the stories I've heard, as well as the direct experiences given to me by my environment and body. The latter is crucial, like a seed, reflecting my nature and core structure. It can be said that the roots of objectivism arise from my core. This is the origin of objectivism.
The Contradiction Between Subjective Experience and the Objective World#
At the beginning of a game, there will be a distribution of skill points. Gender, appearance, physique, intelligence, talent, race... Once these choices are made, changing them becomes relatively difficult, almost unchangeable. I didn't add many skill points; I only added "self." This "self" is not about "arrogance" or "doing my own thing," but rather about the sense of self.
The world is only me, with no one else. Everyone is like an actor, setting the stage for the subject. And I seem to possess great power like a god, for this is my world. —《Individualismism》
The Need for Objectivism to Complete the Sense of Self#
Some may ask, "You've become a god, so how can your worldview be objectivism? Shouldn't it be called subjectivism, or what you refer to as individualism?"
On the contrary, it is precisely because the sense of self is so strong that objectivism comes into being.
If I am a "god," what happens to a "god" without "divine power"? A person with a strong sense of self but no talent will become a freak and a joke. Because this world will trample you repeatedly, making you understand what it means to be respected as a strong person. The more you consider yourself extraordinary, the more you will be battered. Because when you do not grasp the rules of the objective world, your sense of self will make it hard for you to breathe.
Objectivism as a Means to Gain Power#
So, what do you need the most? To become a "god" with "divine power." What is "divine power"? It is the rules of this objective world itself.
Thus, whenever something happens, I will explain it through the objective world as I understand it. I will also continuously correct my own views to align with the objective world. And in this constant correction, I question any existing views and any views that have arisen. Whether it is my views or anyone else's views, they are insignificant compared to the rules of the objective world. Because I want to gain "divine power," only the rules are the most important.
The Sources of Objectivism#
A river cannot become a great river without the influx of tributaries. The birth of objectivism is not a closed-door creation; it also needs to integrate different thoughts.
Marxism#
In Transcending the Illusions of Marxism, I attempted to refute some of Marxism's viewpoints. However, refuting something often indicates that you have common ground with it.
So what does objectivism take from Marxism? Undoubtedly, it takes a lot, because it has been continuously taught in schools, and this ongoing indoctrination is the most objective.
Objectivism Does Not Consider Distant Causes#
"Human society will inevitably move towards a communist society."
Predicting the distant unknown is neither objective nor meaningful. Because the greater the span, the lower the accuracy of the prediction. It can even be nonsense. Furthermore, even if human society really moves towards a communist society, what does it have to do with people today? Brainwashing, hypnosis, or longing for something that may be light-years away? This is the true idealism. Talking about plans for a thousand years or ten thousand years is pointless when life is only about a hundred years, and youth lasts only a few decades. If we can't solve issues that span thirty or fifty years, how can we talk about a hundred or a thousand years?
Distant causes can only serve as a rallying point. For example, Elon Musk said the sun will dry up the Earth, so we must move to space. The important thing is not what will happen to the sun in billions of years, but that moving to space is attractive in the present. What will happen to the sun in billions of years is merely a mental stimulus.
Objectivism Does Not Explore Essence#
Engels first clearly stated: "The major fundamental question of all philosophy, especially modern philosophy, is the relationship between thought and existence."
Some say, "The origin of the world is water, fire, atoms, matter, consciousness..." Is that interesting? Philosophers always want to see the essence through phenomena, but what they see through phenomena is merely phenomena. Or rather, it is just the appearance of the world. Others say, "You think not seeing the essence is agnosticism." I have no right to evaluate whether it is knowable or unknowable, but I do know some things while not knowing others. This world is too vast; how can I know whether it is knowable or unknowable without empirical evidence? Besides, what I see is only the appearance of things, and that is the only thing I can be sure of.
In this world, no one can claim to have discovered the essence of things or the essence of the world; what we discover is merely what we see, know, and hear, which is to say, the appearance.
Whether the world is materialistic or idealistic does not depend on how we say it. The discussion of materialism and idealism is meaningless because the objective world is right there. What we can grasp is only the appearance that can be denied.
Objectivism Takes "Objective" as the Highest Principle#
"Matter determines consciousness, and consciousness has an active reaction to matter."
Matter is primary, consciousness is secondary.
The objective world contains many things, but they all unify under "objective." Matter is certainly primary, but nothing is secondary. Consciousness itself is objective, and matter is also objective.
The objectivism advocated here is without "subjectivity". "And the subjective that is attached to the objective, which is usually referred to as subjective, is the thinking activity that occurs in the human brain. This kind of subjectivity is itself objective." —Transcendently Objective
If there is a secondary quality, then phenomena are secondary. Thinking is a phenomenon, justice is a phenomenon, groups are phenomena, interests are phenomena... These phenomena all have their own laws and relative independence. It is like various programming languages existing on top of computer hardware.
It is not "the economic base determines the superstructure," but "matter determines phenomena," "flesh determines spirit." If one acknowledges objectivism and recognizes that matter determines phenomena, one will not distinguish between material consciousness, subjective and objective, material and spiritual... Everything is objectivism. Everything awaits discovery, and everything can be transformed.
Objectivism Absorbs Marxism's Thinking Method that Connects "Objective" and "Phenomena"#
I do not have to accept various assertions of Marxism. Because I do not need to engage in such propaganda, regardless of how others praise or criticize, truth is truth, and error is error. And all truths, once they appear in my mind, should fall to the mundane, becoming a recognition of the world's appearance. This is the conservatism of objectivism towards everything.
What truly attracts people to Marxism is its thinking method that analyzes the material basis of phenomena and attempts to transform that material basis. While others may extol rights, freedom, and human rights, Marxism attempts to explain various phenomena in a more objective way. Others are confined within their frameworks of "rights, freedom, morality..." while Marxism can connect the understanding between these "secondary systems" and "objective."
Legalist Thought#
Marxism is the pre-installed software of today's education, while Legalist thought is the pre-installed software of rulers throughout history. The means of governing people in Legalist thought deepens objectivism.
The Penetrative Nature of Legalist Thought#
The Analects are approachable. Aside from the "ruler-ruler, minister-minister, father-son" set, the "benevolence and righteousness" advocated by Confucianism operates perfectly within the moral system. Whether sincere or feigned, Confucius makes people feel as if they are in a spring breeze. However, Legalism penetrates morality and materializes everything.
Those who advocate supreme virtue do not conform to customs; those who achieve great success do not plot with the masses. —《Shangjunshu|Reform》
A weak populace leads to a strong nation; a strong populace leads to a weak nation. Therefore, the governance of a nation with the Way lies in weakening the populace. —《Shangjunshu|Weakening the People》
"Confucians disrupt the law with culture, while knights violate prohibitions with martial prowess." —《Han Feizi|Five Pests》
The Shangjunshu begins by shattering all "customs" and "the masses." Morality and the people are not standards in his eyes; rather, they must be weakened. Increasing knowledge and experience is a good thing, but Shang Yang seeks to deceive the people. "Culture and martial prowess" are a kind of intelligence and skill, yet Han Fei seeks to eliminate the "five pests" that possess "culture and martial prowess." How can this not be shocking?
This aligns with objectivism's penetration of all values. It denies everything and strikes at the material basis of morality and humanity. Legalists do not believe in morality, etiquette, customs, or ancestors; they believe in the universality of interests.
The Pragmatic Nature of Legalist Thought#
Therefore, if a sage can strengthen the nation, he will not follow the old laws; if he can benefit the people, he will not adhere to the old rites. —《Shangjunshu|Reform》
As long as it can "strengthen the nation and benefit the people," there is no need to adhere to old laws and rites. The Shangjunshu also clarifies its purpose at the beginning: "strengthening the nation and benefiting the people," which in reality is beneficial to the centralization of power by the monarch. For this, he can disregard anything and spare no effort.
For example, Shang Yang forbids "the ministers of the state" from engaging in "broad knowledge, eloquence, and travel." Thus, farmers will "not study," focusing solely on reclaiming wasteland. To expand the monarch's power, he unhesitatingly deprives the people of their rights and attempts to change the people's perceptions through a practical method—preventing farmers from broadening their knowledge. At the same time, Shang Yang believes that the human nature of the populace is "hungry for food and laboring for ease," and human nature is nothing more than the pursuit of fame and profit. Therefore, the monarch must "control the reins of fame and profit" to manipulate the populace. By "controlling all desires and producing one benefit," he achieves mastery over the people...
Interests are certainly just one "phenomenon" of the "objective," but "interests" are more fundamental than "benevolence and righteousness," and can better explain the operating rules of society. Although the operations of Legalism are still quite crude, they have already directly changed issues from an objective level.
The Universality of Legalist Thought#
Although Legalist thought serves the rulers, if we stand on the side of the people, we can completely think in reverse.
If we do not want others to become "supreme virtuous," we can use "customs" and "the masses" to bind the rulers;
If we do not want farmers to remain farmers for generations, then we should enlighten those "wise people," enlighten the people;
If we want to violate prohibitions with martial prowess and disrupt the law with Confucianism, then we must possess weapons and culture;
If we want the people to be strong, then we must do everything possible to limit the government;
If we do not want the people to be controlled, then we need to ensure that all their desires are perfectly cultivated...
Legalist thinking is divergent, practical, and shortsighted. "Those who advocate supreme virtue do not conform to customs," and walking a new path is naturally fraught with difficulties and obstacles. Making mistakes is inevitable. Because of its divergence, Legalism dares to solve all problems; and solving problems inevitably requires effectiveness and concrete results; and precisely because it is effective, it is easy to overlook the invisible connections and become self-righteous. Thus, the initiators Shang Yang and Han Fei met with tragic ends, while the Qin Empire, which first implemented "rule of law," vanished into ashes amidst laughter. After enough trial and error, successive dynasties have mastered a complete set of means to control the populace. Looking at this matter without any bias, it is becoming increasingly refined.
The Structure of Objectivism#
We have introduced the origins and sources of objectivism. The great river of objectivism has begun to take shape. So what exactly is objectivism? What parts does it include? What functions do they perform with respect to each other?
The Core of Objectivist Structure#
The first layer of the structure of objectivism is simple, centered on "respecting objective laws," with a series of other elements aimed at better achieving this goal. Although "objective" is the soul, without a supporting second layer of structure, it can only be an empty statement. In other words, the core of objectivism actually lies in these supporting parts. As I have always said, the soul is not important; the body is important. Because controlling the body will control the soul.
Objectivism is a worldview, but it is more a methodology. The second layer of objectivism, which consists of various principles, helps us to "respect objective laws" as much as possible, thereby understanding this world.
"Transcendental Objectivity" as the Anchor of Objectivism#
Transcendental objectivity is an absolute illusion, a meaningless illusion that has no effect on the objective world, and has nothing in common with humans. It can be a material world or something else entirely. It could be heaven or hell. Whatever that world is, it has nothing to do with us. —Transcendently Objective
Without darkness, there can be no light. Without "transcendental objectivity," there can be no "objective."
Let us assume that in another world lives another intelligent life, happy or miserable. However, their world has no connection to ours. Their existence or non-existence is therefore unprovable and holds no significance for us.
Religion says that after death, one will go to heaven or hell. But I have not seen evidence of heaven's existence. So heaven may exist or may not exist. But I can be sure that believing in heaven has an effect on our world, and that believing in heaven itself is objective.
Compared to going to heaven, the conclusion that humans are neither born nor die is easier to draw. Humans once existed in the objective; as long as the objective conditions are met, then humans can reappear in the objective.
The Values of Objectivism#
Objectivism has no value. Because there is no value, it appears very utilitarian. It is amoral, inhumane, and soulless, seemingly only possessing practical functionality. But objectivism is not utilitarian; even interests are just a part of it.
Value is a fine wine; later, Legalist thought also adorned itself with Confucianism, and Marxism attracted the masses with the idea of a communist society. But objectivism truly has no value; it is merely an effort to respect the objective. If I had to choose a value, it would be "truth."
Regardless of the ideology, the life, or the religion, one should seek truth. We cannot articulate what meaning this world holds; thus, we need not "force sorrow into new words." Objectivism is the cornerstone of my worldview; I choose to be a real person, not necessarily kind, just, or gentle, but absolutely not a false person. If I must be false, I should be openly false.
The Principles of Objectivism#
The principles of objectivism are the concretization of the core structure of objectivism.
Appearanceism#
First, everything we see is the appearance of the objective world.
Anything that exists in the objective must have its appearance#
Whether it is Shang Yang or Marx, they have certainly discovered some important laws within society. But they are merely specific "uses"; whether it is capital exploitation or farmers controlling the populace, they are just a kind of lopsided law. "Body" is the objective perspective, believing that the phenomena of things have their own laws; anything that exists in the world must have a material carrier. The material carrier is the appearance of things, which is to say, what can be seen and touched.
Therefore, when thinking about problems from an objectivist perspective, one must first examine their material carriers. For example, to see who maintains morality, who upholds justice; if there are no certain conditions, is justice still justice? Is morality still morality? And so on.
Appearance is Limited#
Just like an onion, peeling back one layer of the onion allows us to recognize one layer of the onion. Through peeling the onion, we understand some appearances and phenomena of the onion, but this is not the essence of the onion. We do not know how many layers an onion has; even if we do, we do not know the essence of the onion. The essence is infinite, while the appearance is limited. With human limitations, we can only discover limited appearances.
Appearance is the Apostle of Objectivity#
The world is objective, but just like microscopic particles, observation can change their form. Therefore, appearance is not objective. Appearance is the apostle of objectivity. Believing in objectivism means recognizing that everything about oneself is not objective; it is merely appearance.
But appearance is the only thing we can rely on; we have no other choice but to understand the world.
Changing Appearance Will Change the Objective#
In front of me is a computer; if I punch it, it will no longer display. What is understood is the appearance, but what acts upon the world is the objective. We do not know which rules of the objective world are affected by that punch, but it happens nonetheless.
What is understood is the appearance, yet appearance is not a form of understanding.
Mastering the ability to destroy does not necessarily mean understanding the objective of destruction. Many times, people marvel at the magic of electric lights. Why do they marvel? Because the change from no light to light, this transformation from nothing to something, is hard to imagine, akin to magic. But for the inventor of the electric light, they were merely searching for suitable materials and experimenting to achieve results. Once electricity is applied, the light shines. You can discover more rules by explaining the electric light. But fundamentally, it is just that once electricity is applied, the light shines.
Similarly, life is a miraculous existence, but humans can also create life. This does not mean humans possess divine power; rather, it is about meeting the appearances necessary for life to exist, and life will naturally arise.
Principle of Distinction#
In front of my desk, the computer has a screen, keyboard, mouse, CPU, and hard drive. If I want to understand my computer and solve some basic problems, I should distinguish the functions of some of its parts. Objectivism neither pursues essence nor distinguishes between material consciousness; it merely analyzes problems through the appearances of things. This inevitably requires distinguishing the functions of various subsystems and components under the objective. Because distinguishing their functions is the most practical and feasible.
The principle of distinction originally referred to distinguishing between causal actions and property changes, for example, although a house cannot be transferred, the contract for the sale of the house is valid. This concept is used here to express an attitude towards things.
Previously, a friend said that telegrams are not secure enough; I replied, "Use secure software for secure matters, and insecure software for insecure matters." He expressed that he had gained clarity.
I find that in many aspects of life, people do not like to distinguish but prefer not to distinguish. For example, in various database deletion incidents, many people have hurled insults at each other due to differing political views. In fact, it is unnecessary. As long as the software is useful, that is enough. As for the specific software issues arising from differing political views, such as potential privacy leaks, that can be considered later. Similarly, many people question Taylor endorsing Harris, thereby belittling her songs as too low. In fact, it is completely unnecessary; political views are one aspect, while whether a song is good or not is another aspect.
The principle of distinction is different from analyzing specific problems specifically. Analyzing specific problems specifically refers to treating different matters differently, focusing on resolving the particularities of contradictions. The principle of distinction, however, is about distinguishing unrelated structures; it does not focus on different treatments but on differentiation. When you discover the differences between the two, you can treat them the same; it is just that at this point, you have recognized the risks.
For example, in religious issues, one must first distinguish between faith and religion. Then, one must distinguish the influence of internal religious organizations or other factors on society, identifying the truly effective areas.
Conservatism#
Objectivism requires us to abide by objective laws. If, according to the usual worldview, we can obtain what we want, why do we still need objectivism? Abiding by the laws may seem harmless, but it actually contains tremendous destructive power. Only when pioneering entirely new fields is it necessary to adhere strictly to objective laws.
The American Revolution and the French Revolution occurred one after the other; the former has one constitution to this day, while the latter has changed 13 constitutions. How much cost has been borne in between? The fact that the U.S. Constitution has been in operation until now demonstrates the powerful force of conservatism and empiricism in the Anglo-American legal system. —There is Nothing New Under the Sun, Humbly Extreme Conservative Experience
On the contrary, Marxism pursues a communist society, but how many lives have been taken by the brutal public ownership? How much damage has the arbitrary exercise of power caused to society? Legalism creates a dictatorial system for the monarch, completely severing ties with morality, leading to the loss of countless lives?
Success and failure are both due to the same factors. Objectivism must closely adhere to the word "objective," understanding that any laws recognized are merely appearances, the appearances of the world, not the essence; and recognizing that one's understanding is merely an imperfect understanding. This may seem humble and cautious, but it does not start from a moral standpoint; rather, it starts from a factual level. Pursuing objectivity inevitably acknowledges the imperfection of one's understanding, its incompleteness, and its inaccuracy.
Conservatism is to sufficiently respect the laws that existing things follow. Just like repairing something, if you cannot repair it yourself, do not recklessly attempt to fix it. If it can be left intact, do not dismantle it.
The Future of Objectivism#
We have briefly outlined where objectivism comes from; now, where is objectivism headed?
Of course, it is about continuous application, developing and perfecting itself amidst conflicts with other value systems. Objectivism will develop many sub-principles and inferences, ensuring that the core of "respecting objective laws" remains stable and enduring. For example, individualism, life and death determined by circumstances, relative spacetime. These inferences that contradict common sense are the applications of objectivism.
This article is the first to elaborate on objectivism; there are many logical inconsistencies, and I encountered many difficulties while typing. After finishing, I felt dizzy, truly embodying the saying "thinking without learning is perilous." However, it basically expresses my current understanding of objectivism. As the underlying logic of this discourse, regardless of the quality of this article, I should strive to face difficulties as much as possible. After all, it has been about two years since the term "objectivism" was coined, and I have had ample time to contemplate; I must type to uncover the shortcomings of existing thoughts for the sake of renewal.