[thinktwice]

One way of pointing out this absurdity, is to ask what happens to someone's truth, when he gets Alzheimers and forgets the natural evidence of it? (A ceases be A -- hate it when that happens.)

With reference to post 300, The problem in the above statement lies in the fact that you are reifying the concept "truth"; you've assumed that truth is a material object and - in so doing -- you've implied that truth forgotten is no longer truth.

[unspun]

What I am doing is showing a contradiction between Rand's metaphisics and her epistemology. Her metaphisics say that the only truth that exists is what we may find through objectivist means. Her epistemology goes on to say that one can only know something that is evident sensorily. That creates the conundrum that what person X may perceive as true cannot be believed by person Y, if Y doesn't have that perception. The materialistic constraints that she places upon the reason of man (no propositional reason allowed) does not allow for the universal truth that she propounds.

That contradiction comes by her position that her mysticism does not allow for anything mysterious.