Hello!
I am new to this forum and relatively new to Objectivism, recently I have tried to explain Objectivism to several friends of mine who either think that I am crazy, or they just seem to not want to talk about it. I was wondering if anyone knows of a good way to go about explaining it to people who have never read any of Ayn Rand’s Books.
First off, welcome to the forum. 
I would suggest you just refer them to Miss Rand’s books. If it took her 1000+ pages in Atlas Shrugged to explain Objectivism, it is unlikely that you’ll be able to explain it to anyone in a shorter way than that. I know I wouldn’t be able to do it. It’s best to start with the primary source anyway. 
If your friends think you’re crazy and don’t want to hear about it, there probably isn’t a whole lot you can do to “explain” Objectivism to them.
As a general rule of thumb, avoid proselytizing to people who don’t care, or who are openly antagonistic to you and your views.
You might also want to find some new friends while you’re at it!
Hello!
I am new to this forum and relatively new to Objectivism, recently I have tried to explain Objectivism to several friends of mine who either think that I am crazy, or they just seem to not want to talk about it. I was wondering if anyone knows of a good way to go about explaining it to people who have never read any of Ayn Rand’s Books.
There are many possible answers to your question. A preliminary issue is this: Why do you want to explain your philosophy to anyone in particular?
If the answer is that you are trying to spread the philosophy in order to create a better world for yourself, then the best thing for you to do now might be to spend time – years, decades – mastering the philosophy yourself, as far as your needs carry you. Keep in mind, too, the distinction between “philosophy for Rearden” and “philosophy for Ragnar.” Not everyone needs the same level of understanding.
Anyone who plans to be a professional intellectual can gain skills in describing and promoting Objectivism by attending the courses offered by ARI, as well as by independent study.
The art of talking with people is an art that takes time to acquire. Anyone can talk to people, but that is almost never persuasive – except with the kind of people who aren’t worth talking to in the first place.
So, in summary, my suggestion is to concentrate on your own study of Objectivism, and focus on achieving your own highest personal values, especially your own central purpose in life. In the meantime, if your friends bring up philosophical issues, you might gently practice the art of asking them questions to find out what their philosophies are, and then think about your own alternatives based on Objectivism.
[Edited for spelling.]
Hello!
I am new to this forum and relatively new to Objectivism, recently I have tried to explain Objectivism to several friends of mine who either think that I am crazy, or they just seem to not want to talk about it. I was wondering if anyone knows of a good way to go about explaining it to people who have never read any of Ayn Rand’s Books.
Make sure you understand Objectivism before explaining it.
Make sure your audience is motivated.
Use a lot of supporting evidence and examples.
Other than that, there is a fine Introduction to Objectivism lecture by Leonard Peikoff on the Ayn Rand Institute’s website.
Thaks to all who replyed! It has really helped me sort out a few things.
I’d like to second non-contradiction’s suggestion that you point them the Ayn Rand’s books.
As a beginner in Objectivism, I would take a different approach to conversations. Instead of telling them about your new philosophy, question them about theirs. “Why do they think XYZ is right?” And, when they give you reasons, delve deeper. “Why?” “Why?” “Why”
Celtic, after trying to describe Objectivism to those who do not/have not studied philosophy, I realize how tough it is.
I’m trying to come up with my own way of describing the philosophy without sounding overly didactic. It’s definitely hard to use philosophic terms (philosophy has its own lexicon–as does Objectivism) with someone who uses the terms in a generic way (i.e. when I use the word “selfish,” I think of a positive; most likely, when someone else uses it, it’s a “negative.”) (If you don’t believe me, imagine a doctor talking to a patient like she does another doctor and the confusion it would create on the side of the patient)
I would bet that you and your friends have certain aspects of life that you all think similarly about–try attributing Objectivism to these aspects as a way of introducing the philosophy.
Sorry, that’s all I got for you now (as I am somewhat uncertain as to a comlpete answer to your question)–hope it helped
I think your on to something here Nix. I remeber when I said the word “selfish” my friends gave me a look like I had grown a sencond head. But I also think that BurgessLau and the other are right, I have to focus on myself at this point and then move on to try to explain it to the peolpe around me. But I will have to try and speak in term they will understand. Lord knows that if 5 years ago someone told me being selfish was a good thing I would have thought they were crazy too.
This is a very important issue, since the presentation of ideas does influence the listeners receptivity to them.
My approach differs when dealing with friends versus a curious stranger or aquaintance.
Ayn Rand’s ideas are so central to my life that most anyone I deal with more than a few times, especially those who become friends, will learn of my admiration for her and her ideas.
I will not raise the issues of Rand or her philosophy unless it is appropriate given the flow of conversation. Pushing Rand onto people, in my mind, is essentially the same as running around “spreading the holy word”.
If I gauge that the person 1) could become an Objectivist with exposure to her ideas, 2) could be interested, and 3) the conversation is appropriate for it, then I will breach the subject.
I strongly believe in promoting the virtue of Rand’s ideas, rather than focusing on what wrong with America, the world, certain people, etc. That means taking the aspects of Objectivism, Rand’s life, and so on, that I am most passionate about, and bringing that into the conversation. In other words, I ask myself “Why do I love Objectivist ideas and Ayn Rand as a person?” That’s what I want to get across to the other person.
In my view, if you have a chance of turning them on to Rand, they already know about the negative things going on in today’s world. A positive message is far more inspiring than a negative one.
I will offer one of Rand’s novels as a gift to a friend once I believe it is proper, considering the depth of the relationship and what I perceive their receptivity to be. For a friend who isn’t a big reader, I will purchase Anthem. For an avid reader, the choice is Atlas.
I prefer offering a novel, given my experience that many people are turned off by philosophy in general. It’s no surprise with what most of philosophy offers them. The novels offer them an exposure to Rand’s ideas in a more appealing format for most.