posted
FWIW, I'm with Lisa in that "Randian" - as a noun(*) - tends to connote a possibly sheepish follower of the person, as well as someone who's only gotten to the libertarian level of philosophical understanding. (*: I don't get similar connotations from its use as an adjective - eg: the Randian argument... -- especially given that "objectivist/m" is an older philosophical term) (which could be confused with Objectivist/m as a referent)
For those who take philosophy - especially Objectivism - seriously, "Objectivist/m" is by far the better term; it is (trademark(?)ed as) the philosophy of Ayn Rand.
Posts: 41 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
posted
*laugh* It is almost impossible to take philosophy seriously and take Objectivism seriously at the same time.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah. If you take philosophy seriously, you have to take into account the times Objectivism was brought up for philosophical review.
Objectivists refuse to do so, largely, because they want to consider objectivism to be philosophically/metaphysically valid.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
