tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19735223.post114727097817547682..comments2023-04-20T08:43:58.438-05:00Comments on David Wallace Croft: Optihumanist FellowshipDavid Wallace Crofthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09977171768879170784noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19735223.post-1147586387190278072006-05-14T00:59:00.000-05:002006-05-14T00:59:00.000-05:00David,I just stumbled across this tonight:Neo-Tech...David,<BR/>I just stumbled across this tonight:<BR/><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Tech_%28philosophy%29" REL="nofollow">Neo-Tech</A>. <BR/><BR/>Perhaps this is in line with what Optihumanist is striving towards? It talks about being a "brand" of Neo-Objectivism. <BR/><BR/>We may not be in agreement in this area, but when I saw this, I figured I would pass this on, since perhaps it would be helpful to you. It is certainly interesting.The CrazyHumanisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16900295827178751939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19735223.post-1147309697702825312006-05-10T20:08:00.000-05:002006-05-10T20:08:00.000-05:00I think that a non-supernatural religion could be ...I think that a non-supernatural religion could be compatible with both orthodox Objectivism and Neo-Objectivism. If you ignore the leftist politics of the American Humanist Association (AHA) and focus on groups like the Humanist Society, <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_humanism" REL="nofollow">Religious Humanism</A> qualifies.David Wallace Crofthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09977171768879170784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19735223.post-1147275946361365322006-05-10T10:45:00.000-05:002006-05-10T10:45:00.000-05:00There is certainly a difference between Neo-Object...There is certainly a difference between Neo-Objectivism and Objectivism, so I can understand how you could say a religion could be compatible with Neo-Objectivism.The CrazyHumanisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16900295827178751939noreply@blogger.com