objectivism

Again, it's not binary: you don't have to accept a moral objectivism just because you deny relativism.

Your argument works from an Objectivist stand point, but Objectivism doesn't work in the real world.

If nothing else, Objectivism is a pretty convincing argument that the left/right political binary is bullshit.

But, certainly, a substantial minority will hold that for certain kinds of tastes, objectivism holds.

So Mathew's second mistake was accepting what others say about Rand or Objectivism as representative of the truth about her ideas.

The problem with Randian Objectivism is it normalizes human death to solve micro economical problems.

The issue with Randian Objectivism is it normalizes human death to solve micro economic problems.

Especially because there is no proof that moral objectivism is true it is at least for the moment also just a subjective position.

This is nothing more than atheism with a healthy dose of Randian objectivism.

Or are you saying that Objectivism provides a magical shield against unreasonable behavior?

People often think Objectivism is right wing conservative.

Don't conflate Ayn Randian Objectivism with libertarianism.

First, Rand never offered an "Objectivist" psychology but she wrote an integrated philosophy that she called Objectivism.

There's a reason her "objectivism" isn't discussed in philosophy courses Actually, this isn't true.

There's a reason her "objectivism" isn't discussed in philosophy courses.

The ideas behind it come from management cybernetics and systems theory, whose roots predate objectivism and which also consider the social dimension in its "guide to action".

Objectivism (Rand's philosophy) didn't defend a society comprised of people with no obligations toward each other.

There are many things to dislike about libertarian and Rand Paul (his version of libertarian is kind of Objectivism, which is quite ugly).

Objectivism in a nutshell: It is more moral to let an innocent child die in pain than to require someone to help them.