My decision is clear from my other question, so all that's left is to answer what I've wondered for a while now.
Why did you personally choose Objectivism? (Instead of Theism?)
Personally, I think it's much more satisfying to think there's a God out there who loves me to the edges of the expanding universe and back, but don't mind me.
Why do you prefer to believe we're the purposeless descendants of spontaneously appearing and self-assembling molecules?
What makes Objectivism and/or Naturalism appealing to you?
From the perspective of reality and reason, one can identify numerous wrong premises in this question (and in the preceding question, linked here). But the questioner emphasizes that in this thread he isn't interested in those objections. Rather, he just wants to know why one would prefer to follow Objectivism rather than religion.
The basic answer is the same as for why one would want to follow reason rather than faith, and/or accept existence and learn to deal with it, rather than wait for a benevolent Creator to take care of one's needs, or accept any morality or philosophy of any kind, rather than drift through life without one. The answer is: to live (on earth). Objectivism is deeply and exclusively concerned with the nature of man and existence and how man should live in existence. Religion is primarily and fundamentally concerned with an alleged "higher spiritual realm" and "afterlife" beyond earthly existence. Those seeking a happy and prosperous life on earth won't achieve it through religion, and it usually doesn't take long to find that out when a secular alternative already exists all around us.
Here is how Ayn Rand expressed the choice to live in Galt's Speech in Atlas Shrugged (p. 157 in the Signet paperback edition of FNI):
It is not mere death that the morality of sacrifice holds out to you as an ideal, but death by slow torture.
A few pages earlier (p. 142), Galt explains:
My morality, the morality of reason, is contained in a single axiom: existence exists—and in a single choice: to live. The rest proceeds from these. To live, man must hold three things as the supreme and ruling values of his life: Reason—Purpose—Self-esteem.
"Must" here means required by the nature of man and existence, if one chooses to live.
Given the questioner's premises, I must emphasize again that the choice between Objectivism and religion isn't a case of choosing to associate with "Club O" versus "Club R" (meaning Objectivism vs. religion, treated as membership "clubs"). It's a question of the objective requirements of man's life qua man -- in existence (on earth), not in some imagined "higher dimension" of disembodied "spirituality." The questioner himself may not fully accept (or comprehend) religion's other-worldliness, but it's a fundamental part of religion, perhaps downplayed or even overlooked entirely by those who try to treat religion as a social club.
answered Aug 02 '14 at 18:31
Ideas for Life ♦