Recently, The Stone, the NY Times philosophy column, published a post about a movie, a Christian theologian, and the value of subjectivism. While I have not see “Son of Saul,” I am very familiar with Soren Kierkegaard and the issues around objectivism verse subjectivism. The post brings into the open the dangers of objectivism and how it can dehumanize us. It brings a scientific perspective to the fact that the very act of living can turn humans into monsters.
Yet, the author of the post, Katalan Balog, does not look at the other danger of complete subjectivism. We live in a world where climate is denied on what is subjective grounds. ISIL uses a subjectivistic mystical version of Jihad to recruit and create so many horrors.
Her points remain valid about the dangers of losing our humanity by taking an objective critical perspective. The difference has to be the addition of love. Only when we love can we slip past the dangers of both objectivism and subjectivism. Kierkegaard was right when he said Christianity should make us more human, more compassionate. If we follow Christ, we follow more closely into the incarnation and become fully human. But this is not an inward turning toward subjectivism, rather it is turning toward God and others in love. We are only fully alive and fully human when we love.
Art, says Ernesto Tinajero, comes from the border of what has come before and what is coming next. Tinajero uses his experience studying poetry and theology to write about the intersecting borders of art, poetry and religion.