For the immorality of theft, we observe that every man is a rational being whose individual mind can bring about enjoyment of the fruits of his labor, i.e. his property. If we hold the premise of every man's rationality (derived from observation and conceptual integration, as well as examination of one's own mind), it follows that every man has an immutable right to dispose of his own property as he sees fit.Your account here raises three concerns:
1. Not every man is rational. In fact, the point of your original post was that lots of folks are irrational.
2. Not everyone can bring about the enjoyment of the fruits of his own labor. Children are dependent on their parents for many years. Some folks due to disease or accident are disabled and dependent on others.
3. Even if your premises (1 and 2) are granted, I don't see how your conclusion (every man has an immutable right to dispose of his own property as he sees fit) follows.
"1. Not every man is rational. In fact, the point of your original post was that lots of folks are irrational."
Yet, we must still grant that every human being has the CAPACITY to use his reason, should he CHOOSE to do so. Choice is essential in Objectivist ethics. Since man is a being of volitional consciousness, his most fundamental choice is to be aware or not, from which is derived the choice to think and to reason.
If a man chooses not to reason, a society must allow him to fail and suffer for his personal mistakes, but not to inflict force upon others and in any manner impede their rational pursuits.
"2. Not everyone can bring about the enjoyment of the fruits of his own labor. Children are dependent on their parents for many years. Some folks due to disease or accident are disabled and dependent on others."
I refer you to a brief account of Objectivism's philosophy on children and their status by psychologist Nathaniel Branden.
http://www.nathanielbranden.net/ess/que02.html Children are not fully rational, but they do have vestiges of reason and the underlying means to become fully rational in the future. Hence, they possess rights to the extent of their rational capacity's maturity.
"3. Even if your premises (1 and 2) are granted, I don't see how your conclusion (every man has an immutable right to dispose of his own property as he sees fit) follows."
If my two points are granted, this means that the individual man is most fit to employ his property in his own self-interest (which Objectivism's ethical statement: every man is his own purpose and ultimate object of value) and should thus have the RIGHT to do so.
For a thorough introduction to selfishness as a moral value, see "Anthem" or "The Virtue of Selfishness."
For now, a brief commentary by Michael Miller on what happens when selfishness is NOT embraced should provide support for the argument:
http://www.geocities.com/rationalargumentator/Nihilist_Mutants.html