The Objectivist

Another term to the wide gamut of nice sounding an heavy looking words out there already? The capitalists and the socialists, the leftists and the rightists. An occasional centrist as well. So, why this new "objectivist" !?

Not a new term this is, mind you. An archaic, antediluvian term popularized by the one and only Miss Rand. But what does it mean? Do we really know what it is? An upholder of capitalist philosophy certainly. A firm believer in the "free market" and the "invisible hand" for sure. But is it only that? A strong advocate of selfishness. But, what is it?

A philosophy which supports our innate desires, our "rational" selfish motives. A philosophy that is, if I may borrow a term from CSE terminology, object-oriented! An OOP (Object Oriented Philosophy).

An OOP that tells us to follow our dreams. That asks us not to get bogged down by what the society imposes on us. That tells us "Go, understand ur passion, follow it, do not bother about the people around u." Further, "If u take care of urself, and each one in this world takes care of itself, there is no scope for charity". "Charity is a sham, for not only it undermines the so called beneficiary, but also destroys the fruit of hard work by the benefactor". That, strictly, is an extension of the captialist theory into the realm of philosophy and life. There is no need of a central authority to tell what is good for us and what is not. We, as rational human beings, will always take actions that ensure our existence in the best possible way. And that, in turn, would be the best for the society, the world and the universe.

Talking about ethics, does one need ethics for the betterment of this world? NO! Ethics are required to ensure our own existence. They are our governing principles, the guiding lights. In science, people talk of a "Grand Unified Theory" that will make life simpler. Why not make philosophy simpler as well. Why so many moral/social/legal/political ethics? One can do without all these. Only a single, grand, unified ethic is probably required - the one that ensures every rational being works for his own best. That is it. No more, no less. And the world would function like a well-oiled machine does and sustain itself.

Do you think we have advanced, and reached the pinnacle of civilization by guiding our energies towards "social" or "charitable" causes. Have all discoveries/inventions/radical changes occured because of them? Or is it because of a continued series of individual brilliances, that have accrued over centuries and millenia, to produce a world that is as brilliant and shining as it is today?

Wont delve on this further at present. Probably, when I find time next, I shall write more on what has seemed to become my favorite topic.