|
”If you wonder why I am so particular about protecting the integrity of the term ‘Objectivism,’ my reason is that ‘Objectivism’ is the name I have given to my philosophy — therefore, anyone using that name for some philosophical hodgepodge of his own, without my knowledge or consent, is guilty of the fraudulent presumption of trying to put thoughts into my brain (or of trying to pass his thinking off as mine — an attempt which fails, for obvious reasons). I chose the name ‘Objectivism’ at a time when my philosophy was beginning to be known and some people were starting to call themselves ‘Randists.’ I am much too conceited to allow such a use of my name...." |
|
?If you wonder why I am so particular about protecting the integrity of the term ?Objectivism,? my reason is that ?Objectivism? is the name I have given to my philosophy - therefore, anyone using that name for some philosophical hodgepodge of his own, without my knowledge or consent, is guilty of the fraudulent presumption of trying to put thoughts into my brain (or of trying to pass his thinking off as mine - an attempt which fails, for obvious reasons). I chose the name ?Objectivism? at a time when my philosophy was beginning to be known and some people were starting to call themselves ?Randists.? I am much too conceited to allow such a use of my name...." |
|
“What is the proper policy on this issue? If you agree with some tenets of Objectivism, but disagree with others, do not call yourself an Objectivist; give proper authorship credit for the parts you agree with — and then indulge in any flights of fancy you wish, on your own.” [Ayn Rand, “To the Readers of The Objectivist Forum,” The Objectivist Forum, Vol. 1, No. 1.] |
|
?What is the proper policy on this issue? If you agree with some tenets of Objectivism, but disagree with others, do not call yourself an Objectivist; give proper authorship credit for the parts you agree with - and then indulge in any flights of fancy you wish, on your own.? [Ayn Rand, ?To the Readers of The Objectivist Forum,? The Objectivist Forum, Vol. 1, No. 1.] |
|
In my personal opinion Objectivism isn't a philosophical viewpoint at all. Its just the political opinions of Ayn Rand and her followers, plus some added rhetoric (much of that rhetoric consists in calling her views philosophy). (I might add I have a very low opinion of Ayn Rand as a thinker.) -- Simon J Kissane |
|
In my personal opinion Objectivism isn't a philosophical viewpoint at all. Its just the political opinions of Ayn Rand and her followers, plus some added rhetoric (much of that rhetoric consists in calling her views philosophy). (I might add I have a very low opinion of Ayn Rand as a thinker.) -- Simon J Kissane Well, you might call her work bad philosophy (though I wouldn't, and the wikipedia certainly shouldn't), but I have to suppose that if you think that her work is primarily political, you must not be very familar with the entire body of her work or the work of academic philosophers interested in her ideas. Her political ideas, while controversial and more than moderately influential, aren't nearly as well-developed in her work as her ethical ideas and her epistemological ideas. If you're interested in taking a second look at her more strictly epistemological ideas, I recommend either of [Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology]? or the excellent academic work [Evidence Of The Senses]? by [David Kelley]?, which presents Kelley's realist views on perception, which are grounded in Rand's epistemology. If you're interested in taking a second look at her more strictly ethical ideas, I recommend [Tara Smith]?'s book [Viable Values]?. Smith is a professor of philosophy at the [University of Texas]? and her book deals with a fuller exposition and defense of Rand's meta-ethical views. --Jimbo Wales |
![[Home]](wikipedia.png)