The respondent assumes that others will do the legwork that Randites, in their turn, often will not do because to do so will cause uncomfortable questions to occur within the individual.

The Law of Identity in Objectivist ‘thought’ is used as a device to indulge in literalism of a solipsistic nature on the part of the philosopher, and by doing so creates an ‘original sin’ of subjective interpretation leading to reinforcement of dogmatic belief structures that is non-transferable upon the masses as a universal constant, unless a precondition such as credulousness toward authoritative dogma is in effect.

As for the ‘proponents’ and their sensitivities to ‘abuse’ – unless the tack is taken that acolytes who have put Randian thought into practice within government and industry have ‘failed’ Objectivism (e.g., by not fully implementing the doctrine within a given enterprise), then the results of their efforts have been made abundantly clear to all but the most purblind, and accordingly the living who hold the philosophy as a set of truisms must bear the brunt of any resulting negativity in its myriad forms toward Objectivism, while being shunned from any subsequent remedial processes until they recant.

Unfortunate, but when one chooses to enshrine a flawed philosophy within one’s life that has had adverse effects upon many others there are always eventual consequences.

;>)

J

Whatever its logical flaws and limitations, it’s Objectivistivism’s moral philosophy of selfishness that has earned it what you call “insults” from the likes of Mike Wallace and Gore Vidal. (I’m sure I could dig up similar moral critiques but these two make the essential points.)

Additionally, believers in Objectivism reject any belief in spiritual realities. If circumscribing your conceptual universe to the limited electromagnetic bandwidth provided by your physical senses is sufficient for you, so be it.

I am curious though as to what you see as the “problems and oversights with the system as Rand put it forth.”

Oh Shit!
🙁

DB

Hopefully there’s a an enterprising cog sci doctoral candidate out there willing to investigate whether there’s a connection between sexually frustrated Rethug men dosing Viagra; and whether Viagra also causes permanent tumescence in the amygdala.

It would explain a lot ;-0

;>)

DB:

Ah, perhaps I should have said her self-assumed and deluded Objectivist rational mind.

And your observation that cognitive dissonance is a a feature of the modern conservative mind is spot on, finding empirical evidence in real time brain scans performed on groups of liberals and conservatives that show they use different neural modules of the brain to process contradictions.

I wrote about that here awhile back, citing the work of Dr. Drew Westen. Can dig it up if you want.