What's the difference between Randian philosophy and Objectivism?

Question

I recently encountered a debate about whether Objectivism was the same as the philosophies of Ayn Rand. Wikipedia says they're synonyms. Is there another definition of "objectivism"? Has objectivism evolved beyond what Rand defined it as? What are the differences between pure, Randian Objectivism and other versions, if there are any?

Answer 1

Most people would say they're the same. Rand is associated with virtually creating the philosophy of objectivism.

Objectivism is a combination of Aristotelian & Nietzsche's philosophy. Her Atlas Shrugged has chapter titles straight out of Aristotle. Aristotle is popular among philosophers, so her philosophy is not that unique or new. Some of her unpublished work lean a little more towards Nietzsche, while nowhere near as popular as Aristotle, Nietzsche has a permanent place in philosophy textbooks and courses.

She did run a tight ship though and criticized those who didn't follow her thinking entirely. She demanded college students not call themselves "Objectivist" but only "Students of Objectivism. She was very controlling and it turned some people off as they did deviate from her viewpoint in minor or some major ways.

Some followers of objectivism, for example, believe in a deity. That was anathema to Rand. Just as you can mix Aristotle & Nietzsche, you can mix Randian objectivism with other philosophies as well, to some degree.

She was into science, technology, atheism, individualism, capitalism, reason and the nearly unlimited potential of the human mind. She was against religion, superstition, collectivism, authoritarianism. While she's a classic libertarian, she disliked that word, and distanced herself from most libertarians.

Some argue Rand plagiarized the plot for Atlas Shrugged. If so, she improved on it, or modernized it. Writers say she may be a good philosophy but only a mediocre writer. Philosophers say the reverse, although he major friend and advocate was USC's philosophy professor John Hospers, who was the original Libertarian Party presidential candidate, who got one electoral vote. Hospers wouldn't criticize her, but he probably would have his own personal brand of objectivism.

Most of her bad press comes from how she seemingly twists the meaning of words, such as selfishness and altruism, offending many who don't notice how she's redefined them. If you don't go along with the redefining, that probably makes it look like you have a different version of objectivism.