Is Objectivism a Religion?

[Validus]

"Objectivism" was always sold by Ayn Rand as a philosophy, but it's pretty obvious to me that it's a religion.  

It has all the features of a religion:

1. A founder (Ayn Rand)
2. A Dogma (Complete Unrestrained Free-market Capitalism)
3. A Scripture. The Fountainhead [Old Testament], Atlas Shrugged [New Testament]
4. A body of unthinking morons who follow the dogma.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

There are many things that can be defined as religions by that standard.

[Mister Agenda]

I prefer to let theists water-down the definition of religion to the point where it would include a thousand things that aren't really religion. It doesn't have the same cache' when we do it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

"Objectivism" was always sold by Ayn Rand as a philosophy, but it's pretty obvious to me that it's a religion.  

It has all the features of a religion:

1. A founder (Ayn Rand)
2. A Dogma (Complete Unrestrained Free-market Capitalism)
3. A Scripture. The Fountainhead [Old Testament], Atlas Shrugged [New Testament]
4. A body of unthinking morons who follow the dogma.

By those criteria, Amway is a religion.

[Validus]

Amway is a religion, and so is Alcoholics Anonymous.

[Thumpalumpacus]

That rather dilutes the concept, I reckon.

[stromboli]

That rather dilutes the concept, I reckon.

Truly. Amway isn't pushing a supernatural agent or agenda. There is another component there....

[stromboli]

I don't even think of it as a philosophy. Ayn Rand if anything was a poor proponent, because at the end of her life she lived on welfare. I read "Atlas Shrugged" and all I got out of it was a lot long winded bombast about people who were portrayed as super heroic, narrowly focused and overly strident. There was never any sense of charity or caring towards those who were diminished, not by their own actions but that of others.

[Mister Agenda]

I suppose Objectivism is as much a religion as Esperanto is.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Interesting article about how Ayn Rand influenced Anton LaVey:

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/ ... f-satanism

A religious conservative magazine warning other religious conservatives of the danger of libertarian and objectivist thinking by raising the satan boogeyman.  And he confuses satanists and wiccans while he's at it.  Good source.

[Solitary]

There is more than one definition of religion. 2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects. So Objectivism and Atheism are religions by that definition. This is the very reason philosophy and logic that uses words can be misconstrued like Nietzsche is. Solitary

[Plu]

If you apply atheism directly to society, nothing will happen... you're confusing common traits of atheists in your area with actual traits of atheism, of which there is only 1, and even that one is merely the denial of the existance of something, which won't exactly be a useful ideal to build a society around.

There is nothing unifying in atheists. You merely think differently because you're only familiar with atheists in the US, who share a number of traits mostly out of neccesity.

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Interesting article about how Ayn Rand influenced Anton LaVey:

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/ ... f-satanism

A religious conservative magazine warning other religious conservatives of the danger of libertarian and objectivist thinking by raising the satan boogeyman.  And he confuses satanists and wiccans while he's at it.  Good source.

He didn't confuse Wiccanism with Satanism. It was a broad generalisation comparing various philosophies with each other. I am not a big fan of Libertarianism, Satanism, Objectivism, or Wicca.

You can replace the pentagrams of LeVayian Satanism with the dollar sign of the Objectivists without changing much of the substance separating the two. The ideas are largely the same, though the movements' aesthetics are different. One appeals to, we might say, the Young Libertarians, and the other attracts the Future Wiccans of America.

Uh, yeah, he did confuse the two.

My idea is that if you apply Atheism directly to society, you will end up with something vaguely resembling socialism, where private charities have been removed and replaced with NHS type healthcare system, etc. So, to me all of these other philosophies are easily comparable without any threat to me, even if it is a conservative magazine that calls them out.

There is one idea of atheism - that there is no deity.  The rest is baggage that you bring to it, where you replace worship of god with worship of government.  And any philosophy that threatens the divine government is therefore something you would consider a "threat to you", or in other words a heresy.

[SGOS]

By those criteria, Amway is a religion.

I heard that Amway is actually listed as a cult.  It depends on how you define cult, I suppose.

[Thumpalumpacus]

There is more than one definition of religion. 2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects. So Objectivism and Atheism are religions by that definition. This is the very reason philosophy and logic that uses words can be misconstrued like Nietzsche is. Solitary

In this context of this forum, that connotation isn't really relevant. But if you want to get down to brass tacks, that particular definition is so fuzzy as to be useless.  A religion features something that simple beliefs don't have, namely, a dogmatism so entrenched that it results in deaths.

Also, you don't need to sign your every post.  I know it was you who posted it by your user-name and avatar that the forum kindly displays for me, on the left-hand side of the screen.