Closed minded Objectivists

Twink (
Thu, 27 Nov 1997 19:30:50 -0500 (EST)

At 10:14 PM 11/27/97 +0100, Anders Sandberg <> wrote:
>> My hope is that you will research Objectivist Epistemology and
>> recognize it as a powerful immune system for your brain and implement it
>> so you can go on to apply your admirable mental capacity to challenges that
>> will increase your happiness(and of course my selfish reasons are to benefit
>> from the products or services of a happy, rational person that will be so
>> valuable in a free society--should we ever see a free society on earth.)
>Actually, my research into memetics and philosophy, as well as
>discussions with other objectivists including you, have convinced me
>firmly that objectivism (as understood by many of its adherents) is a
>very bad immune system given my personal goals of growth and

I have to confess many Objectivists do fit this bill -- i.e., as inactive
minded, parroting, ready-to-slander-their-opponents followers. (Let's
use capital O Objectivists to distinguish those people who are
somehow influenced by Ayn Rand and her cohorts from small o
objectivism, which I take to mean someone who believes that
reality exists independent of the mind.) However, you paint with too
broad a brush. Many Objectivists are reasonable people who do
examine issues thoughtfully. This seems to be true of the Institute
for Objectivist Studies -- though even people affiliated with that
group are sometimes dead brained. There are also many splinter
groups and individuals who are independent minded... Too many
to list here, but two examples are Peter Saint-Andre, whose web page
is at:

And Chris Sciabarra (author of _Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical_),
whose web page is at:

Take a look and judge for yourself.

This said, the main issue in regards to this (or any) philosophy should
be is any (or all?) of it valid? That would, of course, go well beyond
the discussion of an open vs. a closed universe.

Daniel Ust
See also my stuff at: