3 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: Anyone can call himself an “Objectivist”
"I would say that one shouldn’t claim that one’s philosophy is “Objectivism,” because that’s the name that Rand gave to her philosophy as she laid it out. Just give your philosophy its own name."
Exactly. I think that Objectivism is the philosophy of Ayn Rand, and by being independent, that is, orienting yourself to reality primarily, you have to conclude things and have a direct relationship with reality by means of reason. Ultimately gaining clarity in terms of fundamental quesitons is a human need and the outcome its gonna be "My worldview", and if it coincides with objecitvism, tthen that's that.
Saying **"I'm an Objectivist"** feels like a very second-handed label to attach to oneself. I think it's more rational to say, **"I'm inspired by Objectivism"** or **"Objectivism (Ayn Rand's philosophy) is a major reference for me."**
Comment by coppockm56 at 16/02/2025 at 23:25 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
If that's how you took it, then I wasn't clear. Or, the "In the latter case" matters there, which you dropped. I meant to say, one should not describe one's philosophy as "Objectivism" if it is not what Ayn Rand identified, that is, if it adds onto or changes her philosophical ideas. But, I'm glad you pointed it out, because perhaps I should reword that part. Elsewhere, I was careful to say that my philosophy "agrees with Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism."
I agree more with your second paragraph.
Generally, it's an interesting question as to how one should refer to one's own philosophy. I wouldn't say it can necessarily "coincide" with Objectivism, because of course if you've read Ayn Rand's works, then any agreement isn't likely to just be coincidental. More so, I would say it's helpful that Ayn Rand did all that work, but it's not enough to just read her words and say "I agree with her and therefore that's my philosophy." One should validate what she wrote for oneself based on one's own application of reason to reality. And someone could come up with an equivalent philosophy without reading Ayn Rand, even if it's not worded precisely the same way.
So, thanks for the note. It gives me something to think about.