I don't see anything to gain from hating a deceased Jewish medicare recipient who was more likely just a product of the ignorance of her outdated era than a methodical liar. Rather, her followers are simply hocking an outdated, faith-based ideology and just like religious fundamentalists or militant "trans rights" activists, resort to denying objective reality when it conflicts with their beliefs or ideology.
The "four points" of the Objectivist cult mentioned in the OP are straight-up in conflict with modern scientific knowledge on many points, so it shouldn't be a matter of 'hating it', just a matter of it being straight-up untrue:
- Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.
Scientifically debunked. This is likely just a holdover of the outdated "Tabula Rasa" theories, but this has been largely debunked by modern science and psychology, which reveals that humans (just like all other organisms) have certain pre-encoded, hardwired instinctual behaviors and understandings.
Likewise, this is observed in other species as well, such as ants, which are apparently born with the knowledge of how to build ant mounds comparable to human metropolis (complete with irrigation and plumbing systems), despite lacking any brain comparable to the human neocortex (or "monkey brain", which is the part of the brain responsible for human thinking or reasoning).
http://videos.komando.com/watch/3782...will-shock-you- Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
This is part just a "statement of faith", part just pseudoscience. Man defined as an "individual" is just a mental construct, not an "objective reality" defined by natural sciences.
Man is biologically speaking, a collection of individual cells working in unison, so whether one defines man as an "individual" or as a "collective" to begin with is purely subjective - just as if one defines a man as an "individual citizen", or merely one of the cells which makes up the individual state, is also subjective.
Man's "individuality" could only have an objective existence if man could somehow continue to exist 'in a vacuum' even if all of the cells which compose that which he defines "his body" died, but since he cannot, biologically speaking, then neither can his "individuality" exist except as a linguistic construct.
-
So since 2 of the "core principles" of Objectivism have been shown to straight-up contradict scientific realities, the philosophy should be rendered obsolete, but I doubt that will stop peddlers from continuing to sell those books and present it as fact, heh.