Why I am not a big-o Objectivist.

I posted this comment on another blog, and thought it might make good reading here.

My problems with the Randroids like not with Objectivism itself, but rather with Objectivists.

A vast majority of them seem to be stuck in the moment Ayn Rand died, able only to regurgitate her words, but not able to extrapolate her philosophy into a modern mindset.

Take Ayn Rand's view on homosexuality, for instance. She believed that it was a choice. And it was a reasonable belief at the time.

But in the years since her death, new scientific evidence has arisen that certain brain structures are different in homosexuals than in heterosexuals, meaning they are hard-wired that way.

And we all know what Ayn Rand said about people acting against their nature -- that it can't be done.

Given the new evidence, Ayn Rand would almost certainly have reassessed her belief.

But the Objectivists are still spouting the [words from the] text of a speech she gave on the matter as if they were Bible verses. Rather like androids, I must say.

Why can't they synthesize her philosophy with what is, instead of what they want to be? I guess what I'm asking is, why can't the Objectivists live in objective reality?