I’m sure most Objectivists would disavow Ayn Rand of any magical wisdom and insist that they came to their beliefs through critical reflection...
Not sure that’s actually true, at least if you read “magical” as “special; privileged”. Mainline Objectivism is a closed system: it explicitly disavows thinking that builds on, expands, or (especially) critiques Rand’s work, treating it as a self-contained totalizing philosophy. As far as I’m concerned that immediately puts it fairly high up on any scale of founder-worship, roughly on par with Scientology and higher than most strains of Marxism. It’s also the sort of criterion that should be accessible from an inside or an outside view, which is convenient if you’re asking questions about groups you belong to.
I understand there was a big rift in Objectivism over precisely this, with one group led by David Kelley splitting off because they were for a more intellectually tolerant Objectivism.
Not sure that’s actually true, at least if you read “magical” as “special; privileged”. Mainline Objectivism is a closed system: it explicitly disavows thinking that builds on, expands, or (especially) critiques Rand’s work, treating it as a self-contained totalizing philosophy. As far as I’m concerned that immediately puts it fairly high up on any scale of founder-worship, roughly on par with Scientology and higher than most strains of Marxism. It’s also the sort of criterion that should be accessible from an inside or an outside view, which is convenient if you’re asking questions about groups you belong to.
I understand there was a big rift in Objectivism over precisely this, with one group led by David Kelley splitting off because they were for a more intellectually tolerant Objectivism.