“The belief that truth is purely subjective is a far greater threat than any other because that will strike at the core of our reasoning, and ultimately to our ability to choose between right and wrong,” asserted American politician and social media influencer Nick Freitas to a crowd of young Republicans at the University of California, Berkeley earlier this month. “I have never bought in to this truly ridiculous notion that truth is subjective.”
Subjectivism is the belief that reality is not a firm absolute, but something which can be altered by the consciousness of the perceiver. Objectivity is the only way to determine what is true, Freitas rightly argued. And on this point fellow Christians Matt Walsh and Tucker Carlson likewise asserted that objective truth exists and that we must agree that there ‘is’ a truth.
Unfortunately, when many Christians on the Right correctly assert that Truth can only be determined objectively, their definition of ‘objective’ is far from being so.
As Matt Walsh phrased it: “The reason why there is an objective truth is because God designed the universe and everything and everybody in it. Objective truth is derived by the belief that we are not the creators.”
In stark contrast, Objectivist Ayn Rand explained that “Objectivity is both a metaphysical and an epistemological concept. It pertains to the relationship of consciousness to existence. Metaphysically, it is the recognition of the fact that reality exists independent of any perceiver’s consciousness. Epistemologically, it is the recognition of the fact that a perceiver’s consciousness must acquire knowledge of reality by certain means (reason) in accordance with certain rules (logic). …this means that man does not create reality and can achieve his values only by making his decisions consonant with the facts of reality.”
Thus, while both Walsh and Rand appear to agree that man is not the creator of the universe or reality, they have arrived at this similar conclusion by completely incompatible means.
In stark contrast to Rand’s view of objectivity – and also in contrast to his own earlier assertion about the objective nature of truth – Nick Freitas argues that “I belong to Christ. He gets to dictate the terms with respect to right and wrong and truth.”
Philosophically, this statement is neither ‘objective’ or ‘subjective’ but can best be described as ‘intrinsic.’
As Rand explained: “The intrinsic theory holds that the good is inherent in certain things or actions as such – regardless of their context and consequences. It is a theory that divorces the concept of ‘good’ from beneficiaries, and the concept of ‘value’ from valuer and purpose – claiming that the good is good in, by, and of itself.”
“The source of objective morality is Christianity,” argues Freitas, whereas Rand argues that “Axiomatic concepts are the foundations of objectivity.”
Given their seemingly similar moral values, but completely incompatible means of arriving at those values, the question arises as to whether these two groups on the Right can nevertheless be viable political allies in their mutual opposition to all things Left. So far, although willing to co-operate, the most resistant to such an alliance have been the religious intrinsicists.
One might say that ‘truth’ comes in three philosophical flavors: subjective, objective, and intrinsic. All claim to be objective, yet only one is – the one that is Just Right.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.