Morality has to be subjective, and thus relative. However that doesn't mean you can't compare it to objective outcomes. You can still have objective standards of measure in morality. But all in all, morality is just a way to measure an action in relation to a philosophy. A certain action could be very moral to the islamists, but completely immoral to the objectivist. It just depends on what standard of morality you use.

I meant he should hold his own values above anyone else's. There is an equivocation that I implied when I made the statement that you should value your own life above every thing, and I equated the concept of life with the concept of value.

To rephrase, an objectivist should prioritize what he values above the values of any one else. This needs an added note that the difference between an objectivist and a hedonist is that the objectivist is rational and considers his future instead of living in the moment.

I meant free market capitalism. And to be sure we're both clear on that term, I mean a capitalism that protects property rights and allows anyone to do what they want within their own property.

I have. To be heroic means to be much higher than the average. Compared to the average animal, humans are heroically better. We derive this from objective standards, it is hard to name something an animal can do that a human can't do better.

The "baddest ass on the block" has a lot of enemies. An individuals happiness is heavily reliant on the people around him. Or at least the people who cane before him. With this in mind, objectivism is about rational self interest, which means not living for the here and now, but thinking about what will be good for you and the things you value in the future. The "baddest ass on the block" may be able to sustain his block, but anyone who wants to take care of their children or other values will seek out the best option to do so.

Productive achievement is measured by a time to product ratio. Produce more in less time, and you are moral.

Reason is a tool that is built around the concept of immutable rules. If something breaks a rule, then either the rule is wrong, or whatever broke out doesn't exist. Using reason is what has brought humanity to such a high standard of living, which consolidates its validity as his only absolute. Ergo, his only thing to depend upon.

Well, if you don't know, I suggest you read the writings of Ayn Rand.

This way you won't get any infomation "second hand."