(February 23, 2013 at 9:03 am)apophenia Wrote: She never said otherwise. Randian Objectivism has become a religion just as she said.
You misread the argument. I was arguing against the idea that books are written as a way for the author to work out their ideas about morality and it is when people take it too seriously that it turns into a religion. Irrespective of whether or not Randian objectivism has become a religion or how much its principles deviate from the actual objectivism, the book itself had its morality laid out from the start and the question of taking the book too seriously doesn't come up because even without it, the principles laid out there are meant to be taken seriously - according to the author and followers.
As for the rest of the post, we could argue about the finer points of Randism vs Objectivism, but that would derail the subject of the thread
