Your words are Poison: note on subjectivism

"out of this apparently innocent idea comes the disease that will certainly end our species (and, in my view, damn our souls) if it is not crushed; the fatal superstition that men can create values, that a community can choose its ideology as men choose their cloths. Everyone in indignant when he hears the Germans define justice as that which is to the interest of the Third Reich. But it is not always remembered that this indignation is perfectly groundless if we ourselves regard morality as a subjective sentiment to be altered at will." This fine quote, for me, sums up my thought on subjectivism. If any men or group of people were to ever come and say that all moral laws and codes were merely subjective, it would be clear at that point that I could (be their own words) pick up a gun and shoot them, because, if moral laws (or any other law) was just subjective, then, the only ground I have to kill you is simply my desire 'to or not to.'

When looking at the Nazis, Pol pot in Cambodia, sterlin in Russia, and other evil men in history, I think it to be idiotic for any person that 'Thou shall not kill' is merely subjective. Contrary to what any scientist or post-modern thinkers may say, the human race as always survived by following the the "moral rule" which we believe to be even if we don't all think it came from God. It is because of our desire to protect all people, against men who would seek to disobey the moral laws, that we were able to put an end to Hitler and his band of murderers. As Lewis mentioned, if subjectivity in moral laws were the case, then Hitler would be right in killing the jews.

It would seem, though, that some, in their eagerness to remove God from the picture of humanity, would prefer if we just did away with moral law and create new ones. This idea, however, has many problem with it. With the notion of over-hauling all moral laws in other to make way for "better ones," they would be having us that the law they make is could be better than the once that already exist. They would, further, be hope that we would not assume that their laws are not based on selfish needs or the desire to be in power. But, of cause, this would also run into another issue. If their laws where made on the ground that a certain people should make laws for everyone else, then, it would be logical if someone else where to say 'I don't like you laws, lets make new ones. So it is claim that one would run into the issue of who should make any laws for all people within their group.

Anytime a group of people decide to make rules for any other people, trouble is sure to ensue.