Philosophical Apologetics: Good Stuff

I just finished Handbook of Christian Apologetics by Peter Kreeft and Ronald K. Tacelli, and through reading it I learned several cool things about Christianity and the world as we know it, or think we know it. One chapter of the book is dedicated to arguments for God’s existence, and includes 20 arguments from several different cosmological (external) and psychological (internal) perspectives. Another chapter talks about the Bible, and explains why it is most likely true. being that it is an apologetics book, though, most of the book deals with answering objections to core Christian beliefs, such as belief in One, omniscient, eternal, transcendent, immanent, good (among many other qualities) God; in the truth of the Bible; and in miracles. Both of the authors teach philosophy at Boston College, and as such, the book is heavily philosophical in its approach to Christian beliefs and the objections thereto. And perhaps it’s just me digging their philosophy, but the way in which the authors describe the topics at hand makes more sense to me than any other way I’ve heard them explained. In short, it’s good stuff.

I want to focus here on one particular chapter of the book, the chapter on truth. It is one of the concluding chapters of the book because it is the most heavily philosophical, according to the authors. It deals with objective truth, first by defining both “objective” and “truth,” then by going through several other theories of truth, and finally by discussing and refuting subjectivism and relativism. The book makes no claim to prove the truth of objective truth, but it does a very good job of leaving no real alternatives. Surprisingly, it doesn’t take much effort to refute the other theories because they all contradict themselves by making objective claims about the subjectivity of truth. The next to last part of the chapter is devoted to refuting moral, and then religious, subjectivism. This is where it gets interesting, for me at least.

Allow me to switch gears for a second. As I mentioned in a recent discussion board post (though perhaps not as clearly as I would’ve wished)¸ I’m sick and tired of our society’s permissiveness. As long as you’re not trying to force your beliefs on others, then everyone else could care less about what you’re doing; and it’s politically incorrect (at least, I think it is…I’m not really solid on PC stuff) to try to turn someone from their evil ways (normally I’d insert “so to speak” right here, but that’s another thing that I’m annoyed at society about), because tolerance and acceptance are the inviolable norms of the day. Today’s society looks down on people who’re honestly trying to help others by spreading the Christian faith, morals included; and I suspect that society’s condescendence is more out of fear than disdain, a fear of finding something real, and a fear of learning for sure what’s been lurking at the back of their minds: that they might just be wrong (I do realize that I’m personifying society…I apologize if it’s confusing, just bear with me).

This is where that chapter on truth, and several other books by Kreeft, come in. I haven’t read the other books, but this one deals with the issue sufficiently deeply. It’s really not too complicated either. Moral subjectivism, in general, claims that objective moral truths are invalid, and also dislikes the intolerance (opposition to society’s values) apparently projected by many evangelical fundamentalists, among others. They believe that different people should be free to have their own set of values (important point: values, as defined by subjectivists, are opinions on what is right and wrong, not actual right and wrong themselves). Here subjectivism contradicts itself though: if there are no objective moral standards, then why is freedom so valued for all? All moral standards are subjective; yet the standard of freedom is objective (that is, it applies to all of us); so subjectivism contradicts itself. This argument works for the subjectivist’s belief in tolerance as well. Their demonstration is a lot more airtight than this, but I’m just trying to present the general idea; if you want to know the whole story, just check your local bookstore or library and they’ll probably have the book.

I think I’ve demonstrated that I’m not a big fan of the way our society works; I just think that there is a lot more out there (i.e., God) than the here and now, and that society does NOT have all the answers. For true, lasting happiness, seek the true Way, Truth, and Life. Feel free to comment on this or any other topic discussed on our website at our discussion board, or send us an e-mail.

Take me home!