You won't find much argument from me here on that most of the time, LibertyBelle, but once in a while...

I don't say she was perfect, (although I would have liked to believe she was.) Still, she was great, and her philosophy is what could save the world.

Rand's definition of Objectivism is what she says it is. Since she invented it, I'll give her that. However, dismissing someone who disagrees with her on some point as a person indulging in some "flight of fancy" is pure arrogance. She wasn't always correct in her thinking.

I'm not sure why that was so. There was also at that time, I believe, a distinction made between an "Objectivist" and a "student" or "supporter" of Objectivism; I think that (at least at that time), if one was in fundamental agreement with Objectivism, he should call himself, not an "Objectivist", but a "student" or "supporter" of Objectivism; that "Objectivist" applied only to one who was certified (like Leonard Peikoff, or Harry Binswanger.) but after Ayn Rand died, Harry Binswanger said he had dropped this distinction. As I recall, Ayn Rand said in a speech she made shortly before she died, "If you agree with some tenets of Objectivism, but disagree with others, do not call yourself an Objectivist; give proper authorship credit for the parts you agree with, and indulge in any flights of fancy you wish, on your own."

Interesting question, LibertyBelle. Let us know if you find an answer.