And I saw that and thought, “Really? I didn’t know Objectivists were permitted a sense of humor. Particularly not about Rand or themselves.” So I clicked, and all was explained.
Parody and ridicule can be done purely for humor, or they can be a particularly malicious form of criticism. When done as criticism, humor allows greater latitude for the critic to claim or imply things about the subject that could not be proven with normal arguments or evidence. This can include claims and implications that are exaggerated or even outright false. It is left for the reader to interpret the intent of the items listed below, but when considered as arguments, parody and ridicule should always be viewed with caution.
Yes. Knowing his audience, the site admin thought it best to first explain the concept of parody, presumably to avoid confusion.
I’ve read Rand. But I really could never be an Objectivist.
