I was able to preach at my church recently and I mentioned something that I have received a number of questions about. I made a comment that we live in a society and culture that operates with a subjective and relativistic approach to life and morals. But what does that even mean?
I had hoped my comment would have been easily understood, and I think it was for the most part. But the questions that came to me were ones of inquiry. Many simply wanted to know the difference between an objective standard and a subjective one. And how does preference and relativity play into that?
To understand subjectivity you might need to have a basic understanding of what objectivity is. To be objective is to be uninfluenced by opinion, preference, or emotions. Supposedly, Judges are to be objective, teachers are to be objective in their grading, and umpires are expected to be objective in their umpiring. That is to say, Judges - whether for the Olympics or in Law - are expected to make judgments from the actual performance uninfluenced by their personal opinions, preferences, and emotions related to the athlete and/or their country of origin. In Law, the Judge is expected to rule based on the facts and not on hunches, feelings, opinion, or personal vendettas. In these cases objectivity is an adjective - something that modifies a noun.
Another way to look at objectivity is to
look at it as a noun. For something to be objective, as a noun, is for that thing to be understood as actually existing in reality. I objectively exist. Regardless of your preference of my existence, emotions related to my existence, or opinion about my existence, I EXIST. I exist objectively.Contrary to your freshmen level philosophy class, or some metaphysics philosophy books, things do objectively exist. That is, things exist in reality whether or not you want them to, think they should, or wish they didn't. I know this sounds silly, but here is a very short list of a few things that exist objectively:
- the Sun
- the Earth
- Me
- You
- Numbers
- ice cream
If someone were to come to you and say that they believe the Sun no longer exists, you might think they're crazy. Or, if one day they decide that the Sun is too hot and they're tired of being sunburned and they tell you that they've decided that the Sun should not exist anymore, you might think that they're unrealistic because they don't have the power to make the Sun unexist. This is because the sun exists objectively.
So, now that we've discussed what objectivity is, we can attempt to understand subjectivity.
To be subjective is to be the opposite of objective. If to be objective means that you are uninfluenced, then to be subjective is to be influenced. That is, it's the mindset that decisions are made with emotions, preferences, and personal opinions exclusively. Usually subjectivity is when something is created with, or proceeds from, the mind of an individual or select group. Subjectivity can also be understood as something that exists only in the mind as in illusions.
Here is a simple example:
The speed limit in my neighborhood is 25mph. There are signs posted which tell all driver's that the legal speed limit does not permit driving faster than 25mph. The speed limit is objective. The signs are not partial to feelings, preferences, or opinions. It is expected that all driver's will abide by the objective standard that the driving speed must not exceed 25mph. However, subjectivity is when someone decides that they are an excellent driver and that 25mph is far too slow for their driving experience and so they choose to exceed the speed limit of 25mph whenever they wish.
So when I mentioned that we live in a society and culture that is highly subjective what I mean is that most people do not recognize the objectivity of rules, standards, or morals. What is most prevalent in our society and culture is subjectivity where people will choose, in their own minds, whether they like certain rules, standards, and morals. Subjectivity results in people doing whatever they feel like doing regardless of anything, or anyone else. They create, in their minds, a personal standard that is fluid and constantly fluctuating by which they orient their lives, goals, standards, rules, and morals. Subjectivity results in people doing whatever they think is right in their own eyes, with their own opinions, and based on their emotional desires.
In a society or culture that is permeated with subjectivity it is not difficult to project where the society will be in the future if subjectivity is allowed to persist unchecked. A society that determines that everyone will decide what is best for themselves will ultimately crumble under the chaos and oppression of people that have decided that what is yours will be theirs. A culture of subjectivity is also susceptible to the oppression of government because the people will no longer know how to live harmoniously and will therefore be dependent upon the government to legislate morality and decide what the people are allowed to do, and not do. The common ground between legislators and the people will be dried up and there will be an insurmountable gulf between those that determine the rules and those that undermine them.
Today, we live in a society where subjectivity is becoming more accepted and encouraged. What we're seeing today should not be surprising. We live in the most prosperous, free, and powerful nation in the world (for now) and yet we have more unhappy, anxious, and depressed people than the rest of the world combined. We live in a society that must be told how to live by politicians that must pass laws to enforce certain behaviors. There are new laws that force parents to send their kids to school. Why? It's not because parents are unsatisfied with the public school system and are choosing to home-school or somethings else, but because parents don't care about their kids education to the point where young children are simply at home "hanging out."
Unfortunately, subjectivity is creeping into the church in increasing measure. I'm not worried that the church will cease to exist because Jesus is the head of his church and he continues to reign on his glorious throne. What does worry me is that when subjective lifestyle go without correction the result is a life that is full of guilt, confusion, anxiety, depression, worry, sadness, enslavement, and hate.
I see the church in the West trending more towards relief aid in terms of food, clothing, and shelter. Those things are good but they are also things that Jesus himself said we ought not to focus on (Mt. 6). Jesus focused a lot of his energy and emotions on setting the record straight and providing people with hope, freedom, clarity, peace, joy, love, and faith. I would love to see the church trend more towards these things. However, hope is dependent upon something objective. Freedom is an objective truth. Clarity is to see something objectively. Peace is to be consistent (objective) in mind and heart regardless of external circumstance. Joy is objective because it is not conditioned on circumstances. Love is founded on objectivity in that it is directed toward real people in tangible ways. Faith is assurance and confidence in things that are objective (Heb. 11:1).
If Christians do not recover the objectivity of the Christian ethic and worldview, we will have nothing to offer those who are hurting most. There will come a time when the subjectivity of our culture will grow distasteful and those seeking truth, healing, and life will come to the church for answers. What answers will they find? If the church is seeped in subjectivity then there will be nothing new to offer and our answers will be just as distasteful as what the world is providing. We must offer people the objective answers they so desperately desire. So, what are those objective answers?
Phil, I love the way you think and communicate. Clear, well structured positions, and passionate. And starting with definitions is a very wise thing to do as it's where many discussions go way off track. But it is possible to so narrow a definition that the resulting conclusions can be less than inclusive of the full scope of the issue at hand. I'm concerned that in defining objectivity as, being "uninfluenced by opinion, preference, or emotions," does exactly that. To create a operational definition, we need to consider the context of it's application. I think your definition works well, for instance, in the sports example you used because sports are (for the most part) strictly objective by nature (i.e., with the ball is IN or it's OUT.) But in the worlds of relationships (with God and others), faith, theology, philosophy, etc. things are not as clear-cut. The issue I have with the definition is that it doesn't encompass the fact that opinions, preferences and emotions ARE objectively real! They exist. They also vary across generations, genders, nations, cultures, families, and individuals. You site the example of our justice system -- it's a good one. While its design certainly depends on a level of objectivity, there is also allowance for the fact objectivity alone does not result in justice. The very fact we are to be judged by a jury of our peers suggests that only those who share the accused's perspective can truly be trusted to see clearly to see their guilt or innocence (which is, at least in part, affected by their state-of-mind.) Then, as a check and balance, the judge -- not jury -- decides the punishment, and is given latitude to insure that punishment is just. So the design of the system recognizes that justice cannot be determined without weighing the objective reality of the case -- which varies from circumstance to circumstance. Though the system isn't perfect, its design demonstrates intent driven by an understanding that objectivity doesn't always look the same.
ReplyDelete