If it could, then you could also say that social practice is the realm where correct ideas come? If so, then Mao is correct on this point. If it could not, explain: how is objectivism neither social practice nor product of social practice?
I am attempting to see how Maoist logic and Objectivist logic interact.
This is spin-off from another question: What do correct ideas come from?
Objectivism is described as a philosophy.
As identified in the referenced thread, ideas are the product of the mind. Mao is incorrect on this point.
There is no Maoist logic vs Objectivist logic. Logic is the science which deals with principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning. One either applies logic in accordance with those principles and criteria of validity or does not.
Miss Rand identified the contradiction present in dialectic materialism. A contradiction reveals an incorrect application of the principles and criteria of validity of logic.
“It is the doctrine which denies the existence of the rational faculty in man. It holds choice as an illusion and reason as a by-product of physical environment, nutrition and "conditioning," operating without volition, automatically and unalterably. There is a catch in that doctrine, however. Its proponents claim to have reached it by rational deduction. They urge us to take action upon it, to improve our physical environment in order to improve the by-product, our brain, and they beg us to take such action through a conscious decision of—our rational faculty. It is an embarrassing contradiction which no dialectic materialist has ever explained away."
If their doctrine denies the existence of the rational faculty in man, how do they reach this conclusion by rational deduction?
The Objectivist position is summarized in the final sentence of her quote: "Until it is explained, the doctrine is not worth considering or discussing.”