Is the acceptance of Objectivism and the use of Rand's words as if from some

Question:really a bad thing? I see criticism about people who "can't think for themselves" and who are "cultists" and who are "robots."

But Rand herself said: "those who attempt to take [Objectivism's] broad principles and apply them unthinkingly and indiscriminately to the concretes of their own existence find that it cannot be done. They are then compelled either to reject Objectivism..." which is what the critics do: reject--

OR "to apply it. When I say apply, I mean that they have to use their own mind, their own thinking, in order to know how to apply Objectivist principles to the specific problems of their own lives."

A fan once asked her, "Whose 'reason' should one follow?" thus echoing the critics.
Rand replied, "Why, yours, of course!"

Which is the use of Objectivism: a good thing or a bad thing?

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: really a bad thing? I see criticism about people who "can't think for themselves" and who are "cultists" and who are "robots."

But Rand herself said: "those who attempt to take [Objectivism's] broad principles and apply them unthinkingly and indiscriminately to the concretes of their own existence find that it cannot be done. They are then compelled either to reject Objectivism..." which is what the critics do: reject--

OR "to apply it. When I say apply, I mean that they have to use their own mind, their own thinking, in order to know how to apply Objectivist principles to the specific problems of their own lives."

A fan once asked her, "Whose 'reason' should one follow?" thus echoing the critics.
Rand replied, "Why, yours, of course!"

Which is the use of Objectivism: a good thing or a bad thing?

I see no good reason to dismiss Ayn Rand. Objectivism means putting yourself ahead of the curve. There are two schools of thought--mine--while the candle burns I watch and get hypnotized. The other belongs to my Dad--he plays with the candle until it won't stay lit. Is there room for ambition, competition and self-determination in Rand's philosophy?
An unqualified yes.

yeah.
i think god did it.

is Rand short for randy?

I think that if one takes objectivism and applies it in the ethical sense to one's life, this can result in something very dangerous. In the ethical part of objectivism the main guideline is that man lives to promote his own happiness. However, one man's happiness may destroy another man's happiness due to ignorance or due to a lack of concern of the other's feelings. Certainly, it is stated that in objectivism, people should have the ability to be free in all that does not negatively influence others. However, being human, I consider this to be nearly impossible! Even if one does the least harmful things possible to a neighbor, there are still things being done which negatively influence neighbors that can't be prevented (breathing the other person's air, making mistakes, etc...).

Why on any level would thinking for yourself be a bad thing? Ayn Rand's objectivism of course threatens many religious goers (but not all) as the core of religious belief is "faith"... acceptance without proof. A person should no more put faith in Rand than they do in the Bible for to do so would be to not think for the self! Just as a scientist does, the point is to think critically.

Ayn has some very good ideas, as does the Bible. The question for you is how does it fit into your life? It is important when thinking critically to extend the thought completely... what are the implications of this course if followed all the way?

Objectivism sees conventional morality as outmoded like the customs of witch doctors. To which i say this: i am a herbalist: i use the potions which shamans - a better term for witch doctors - have used to improve people's lives for millenia, and also either to prevent them from being harmed by contemporary establishment medical treatment or to repair the damage it has done. As a philosophical counsellor, i do the same thing with their souls. Modernity is very often a good thing, but moving away from compassion is imprudent and will leave the whole world blind.

"rational self interest" ms. Rand said to accept all of it or none of it.
some would question if this question even 'qualifies' to be in the filosofical section.
i choose to accept none of it

I think Objectivism slipped away into cult status at some point. It seems strange to me that anyone would call the notion that we should use only our own judgement somehow objective. What is objective about each for his own? It seems very subjective and broad to me. I love Rand and her literature, but those who elevate her to even more than a philosopher, a title which is disputed vehemently in philosphic circles, seems a bit much. It would make for a great study to explore why she appeals so much to the so-called intellegencia when she seems so subjective and shallow when put under a philosophic microscope. I think being a self-proclaimed Objectivist is more of a stutus symbol than a philosophic conviction for her followers. Perhaps it was Rand's total and absolute comdemntation of communisim that caught on like it did in the 1930's and 40's. But if I would have used Rand as an authority in any one of my philosophy classes, I woud have been beaten to the door with a stick.

I think you hit the nail on the head and is the way the human mind from whatever perspective they face life problems in order to maintain balance, stability, and security in their well being and life. Nice summation. Later.