A Modern Poison

Progress in science has led humankind to a new level.  A level that allows us to study our own rational thought as an object, which works solely by chemical and electrical signals. From this study a new philosophy has emerged called subjectivism.  The dictionary says “Subjectivism is the belief that reality is not a firm absolute, but a fluid, plastic, indeterminate realm which can be altered, in whole or in part, by the consciousness of the perceiver—i.e., by his feelings, wishes or whims.”  In response of this modern thinking, C.S Lewis wrote The Poison of Subjectivism to explain to the new followers of Subjectivism and those thinking about converting about its folly. The reason that Lewis had an issue with subjectivism is that intellectuals started applying subjectivism to practical reason. So that where was no longer a line between what is thought of as good or evil because everything is in the mind of the perceiver. This contradicted Lewis’s believe in a God given moral law. Subjectivism was the modern choice of philosophy because its followers thought that they could be better people if they weren’t tied down to solid truths about right or wrong. However, Lewis says that without defined moral lines there is no such thing as a better man because there is no basis for good so how could a man be better. Lewis gives the example that if someone doesn’t believe in a God given moral law he only has to look into the past to find that a crossed cultures there has indeed been consistency to what is ultimately right and wrong. Another argument that subjectivist claim to why they follow this philosophy is that now we can understand better our instincts. Once again, Lewis claims that this is yet another reason to not follow subjectivism because without a moral law there is no way of telling which instincts are good to follow and which aren’t because there are no lines only a large grey area.

In response to Lewis’s essay I would say that I tend to agree with him that there is a strong amount of evidence for a moral law. I also agree that defined lines of what is good and evil are also necessary for two reasons, first so that there is a consistent standard to know whether the future, current and past actions that were/are taken are right or wrong.  And Secondly a moral law is needed to judge progress in character because without it no choices are right or wrong.