Humans are a part of every one of these systems. That’s objectively true from a broader view. That’s a point missed in idealised forms of objectivism. Hybrid systems or a tempered objectivism might be ok but it’s ideal form is best left to thought experiment.
—
Like a lot of theory, it’s all about how it’s put into practice. Being a fundamentally amoral system, objectivism needs a little moral boost from outside of itself as it can’t sufficiently promise to be compatible with existing moralities.
If humans weren’t so complicated creatures, but, well, we are.
—
It’s be great for modeling artificial things but reality doesn’t correspond to hard outlined objects of simple construction . But I have the same complaint about mathematics and logic. Great tools for what they’re good for but there’s a point where the benefits become a detriment.
===
To me it’s kind of like utilitarianism. I lean towards it “if it’s useful, it’s good”. Being American, it’s part of American culture. Yet, then there’s a crossing-over point where utilitarianism starts getting bizarre and corresponds less and less with the world around us. … or sadly, more and more like the parts of the world around us that shouldn’t be. [such as some awful political decision-making].
====
[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]