[elfman2]

"Since a central tenant of Objectivism is that you must think for yourself and let nobody else make moral decisions for you , the very idea of being "in the group" (or not) is rather silly. "

I think that’s both a limitation and a foundation of Objectivism. Objectivism is defined as the philosophy of Ayn Rand. She believed that it was the inevitable conclusion of clear thinking. If one concludes something else, it’s open for debate, but it’s not Objectivism. To some degree, it has to be that way, or it’s Subjectivism.

[DannyTN]

"Objectivism is defined as the philosophy of Ayn Rand. She believed that it was the inevitable conclusion of clear thinking"

What if she was wrong? What if she wasn't thinking clearly?

Then objectivism would be proven subjective and at least one form of what you labeled "Subjectivism" would in fact be Objective.

[ffusco]

Objectivism is flawed because the conscious, rational observer is not a seperate phenomenon from the observed.

There are no subjects and objects only events.

[Nateman]

I think that's both a limitation and a foundation of Objectivism. Objectivism is defined as the
philosophy of Ayn Rand. She believed that it was the inevitable conclusion of clear thinking. If one concludes something else, it's open for debate, but it's not Objectivism. To some degree, it has to be that way, or it's Subjectivism.

Given a universe that is objective you do only have one truth. Of course you can have many different perspectives. Imagine a wall that is painted black on one side and white on the other. People living on one side of the wall will claim that the wall is white , on the other side the folks will say, nope, this wall is black. Neither of these folks are being subjective, they are giving valid information. They are both correct , they just don't have a view of the whole truth.