Examples of using Objectivist in English and their translations into Greek
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Official
-
Medicine
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Financial
-
Official/political
-
Computer
Half-baked objectivist.
Objectivist Conferences(ocon) and the Ayn Rand Institute eStore are operated by ARI.
I AM an Objectivist.
The Objectivist movement attempts to spread her ideas, both to the public and in academic settings.
The author is an Objectivist.
The Objectivist, whereby it is also an absolute value, but is dependent on general human experience;
He has given lectures at The Objectivist Center's Summer Seminars.
The Objectivist movement attempts to spread her ideas, both to the public and in academic settings.
Collective members gave lectures for NBI andwrote articles for Objectivist periodicals that she edited.
This was proven by the libertarian/objectivist Robert Hessen in his 1979 book, ironically titled In Defense of The Corporation(Hoover Institution).
You told a recent interviewer[Ken Myers]that“science itself relies on the person” in a way that no standard positivist/objectivist approach to science can make sense of.
During the late 1970s her activities within the Objectivist movement declined, especially after the death of her husband on November 9, 1979.
The objectivist speaks of the necessity of a given historical process, the materialist gives an exact picture of a given socio-economic formation and the antagonistic relations to which it gives rise.
Thus, on the one hand,the materialist is more consistent than the objectivist, and gives profounder and fuller effect to his objectivism.
In her"Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology", Rand presented a theory of concept formation and rejected the analytic- synthetic dichotomy.
Thus, the materialist is, on the one hand,more consistent than the objectivist and reaches a more thorough and more comprehensive objectivism.
It is neither objectivist nor functionalist, for the categories relate to historically-specific social forms of praxis which are simultaneously forms of objectivity and subjectivity p.
Thus, the materialist is, on the one hand, more consistent than the objectivist and reaches a more thorough and more comprehensive objectivism.
The objectivist speaks of“insurmountable historical tendencies”; the materialist speaks of the class which‘directs' the given economic system, giving rise to such and such forms of counteraction by other classes.
She also endorsed several Republican candidates for President of the United States, most strongly Barry Goldwater(surprise surprise Jewish) in 1964,whose candidacy she promoted in several articles for The Objectivist Newsletter.
In my opinion,it is an error to fall into the objectivist, materialistic, reductionist trap of maintaining an artificial divide between these three disciplines.
Branden later apologized in an interview to"every student of Objectivism" for"perpetuating the Ayn Rand mystique" andfor"contributing to that dreadful atmosphere of intellectual repressiveness that pervades the Objectivist movement".
When demonstrating the necessity for a given series of facts, the objectivist always runs the risk of becoming an apologist for these facts: the materialist discloses the class contradictions and in so doing defines his standpoint.
This observation notwithstanding, the fact that neoliberal globalisation is neither a plot nor irreversible within the market economy system does not of course mean that it should be welcome, as Hardt and Negri do,because it supposedly provides an“objective” basis on which an alternative globalisation could be built-reminding one of the usual“objectivist” type of analysis about the“necessary evils” supposedly created by Progress.
The objectivist, in proving the necessity of a given series of facts, always runs the risk to get into the position of an apologist of those facts; the materialist reveals the antagonisms of classes and thereby determines his own position.
This observation notwithstanding, even if we accept their claim that neoliberal globalisation is neither a plot nor irreversible within the market economy system, this does not of course mean that it should be welcome, as Hardt and Negri claim,because it supposedly provides an‘objective' basis on which an alternative globalisation could be built―reminding us of one of the usual‘objectivist' types of analysis about the‘necessary evils' supposedly created by the process of Progress.
The basic social principle of the Objectivist ethics is that no man has the right to seek values from others by means of physical force- i.e., no man or group has the right to initiate the use of physical force against others.
But, coming back to the authors' stand with respect to neoliberal globalisation, one may point out that if neoliberal globalisation is neither a plot, nor irreversible within the market economy system, this does not mean that it should be welcomed, as H&N do,because it supposedly provides an“objective” basis on which an alternative globalisation could be built― reminding one of the usual“objectivist” type of analysis about the“necessary evils” supposedly created by the process of Progress.
This observation notwithstanding, the fact that neoliberal globalisation is neither a plot nor irreversible within the market economy system does not of course mean that it should be welcome, as Hardt and Negri do,because it supposedly provides an‘objective' basis on which an alternative globalisation could be built-reminding one of the usual‘objectivist' type of analysis about the‘necessary evils' supposedly created by the process of Progress.
This observation notwithstanding, even if we accept their claim that neoliberal globalisation is neither a plot nor irreversible within the market economy system, this does not of course mean that it should be welcome, as Hardt and Negri claim,because it supposedly provides an‘objective' basis on which an alternative globalisation could be built―reminding us of one of the usual‘objectivist' types of analysis about the‘necessary evils' supposedly created by the process of Progress.