No. It is not a sub-category of any other philosophy. It is a completely independent, integrated system.

Are you serious? Read OPAR.

Primacy of reality in metaphysics,
Primacy of reason and senses in epistemology
Rational self-interest and non-initiation of force in ethics.
Romanticism in art.

Glad you like it. Ayn Rand said much the same thing. (Not about humanism, but about the snippet.)

Me dino really digs this snippet I snipped from the link herewith~
"--so is each person a moral end in himself and not to be sacrificed to the needs of others--"

Objectivism is a subcategory of the Humanist philosophy. So like all thumbs are fingers, not all fingers are thumbs; Objectivists are Humanists, but not all Humanists are Objectivists.

Rand said this in 1962. "At a sales conference at Random House, preceding the publication of Atlas Shrugged, one of the book salesmen asked me whether I could present the essence of my philosophy while standing on one foot. I did as follows:

Metaphysics: Objective Reality
Epistemology: Reason
Ethics: Self-interest
Politics: Capitalism
If you want this translated into simple language, it would read: 1. “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed” or “Wishing won’t make it so.” 2. “You can’t eat your cake and have it, too.” 3. “Man is an end in himself.” 4. “Give me liberty or give me death.”

If you held these concepts with total consistency, as the base of your convictions, you would have a full philosophical system to guide the course of your life. But to hold them with total consistency—to understand, to define, to prove and to apply them—requires volumes of thought. Which is why philosophy cannot be discussed while standing on one foot—nor while standing on two feet on both sides of every fence. This last is the predominant philosophical position today, particularly in the field of politics."

I have an answer to this on the Atlas Society website. Basically, I say in a general sense Rand was a humanist, but as AJAshinoff notes, note in the sense of agreeing with all the tenets that most humanists embrace. http://atlassociety.org/objectivism/a...

The philosophy of which the metaphysics is A is A. The epistemology of which is reason and Ethics is rational self interest of egoism, politics are Capitalism/natural rights. Understand, there are two opposing "camps" on this. Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) would say that there is no divorcing Rand from this logical system. The Atlas Society would say that the philosophy is "open" and can be expanded upon.

Lao Tsu. I like Witter Bynner's translations best.

I am half joking. Can one define Objectivism without reference to her name?

And a staunch one at that! Lol.

No, she was an Objectivist.

The Google definition had reference only to rationality and disbelief in superstition and supernaturalism. Also I've seen Epstein using the word here and there in this book. Was not sure if Humanism belonged to the list of buzzwords antithetical to Rand's philosophy.

Humanism is a philosophical and ethical stance that emphasizes the value and agency of human beings, individually and collectively, and generally prefers critical thinking and evidence (rationalism, empiricism) over acceptance of dogma or superstition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanism

Humanism is a progressive lifestance that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead meaningful, ethical lives capable of adding to the greater good of humanity.
American Humanist Association - http://americanhumanist.org/humanism/...

Overall, based on the definition, I'd have to say very similar but no. "Greater good" & "Collectively" are kryptonite buzz words to Objectivism.

But, I'm a Conservative, I could be wrong.