The Myth of Neutrality

Can a sinful and fallen human being be neutral in his or her reasoning? Secular scientists, politicians, textual critics, theologians, philosophers, psychiatrists, and many others under the sun believe they are able to reason from neutrality. Is this possible? Let's take a look at the words neutral and neutrality:


  • Neutral - Not engaged on either side; not taking an active part with either of contending parties. Indifferent; having no bias in favor of either side or party.
  • Neutrality - The state of being unengaged in disputes or contests between others; the state of taking no part on either side. States often arm to maintain their neutrality.


So to be totally neutral means that one is "indifferent." An indifferent person cares for neither side. So only someone who doesn't believe in or care about Creation or Evolution would be "neutral" in interpreting the facts of both sides. A "neutral" person would consider "all" ideas (Universal, University, etc...). However, the minute he or she makes a decision as to what they believe is the correct view was, they would cease to be "neutral." The problem is, that most on this earth have some idea of the origin of the earth. So I doubt you could find a totally neutral and objective party. You see, "everyone" has presuppositions. Neutrality on any subject is impossible. I would submit that maybe a child would be the "closest" party in this world that could do such a thing, but it doesn't take them long to develop presuppositions. That is one reason progressives in government want them so early. The moment they begin to learn a language and organize their thoughts into words, they have developed conclusions that presuppose some things based on the guidance of their environment and teachers. In my opening statement, I applied one of my presuppositions! The next question one might ask is: "Can an adult human being with presuppositions reason from a neutral station? Personally, I think it is impossible based on the definitions above. One might can set aside some things that he or she is uncertain about, but to purely reason and develop a form of rhetoric from a neutral position? I find that to be incredible. I laugh when I hear politicians talk about bipartisanship. Nobody is bipartisan except on issues that they care nothing about. So when you see a bipartisan effort between progressive republicans and progressive democrats, most likely it is something they don't care that much about, or it may be an election year (because it seems that "most" politicians (not all) make their highest priority re-election. I digress). It is impossible for "anyone" to think and argue from a neutral position. Therefore, if you see someone who is a scientist, doctor, theologian, philosopher, politician, or some other position say that they are totally neutral, beware and be skeptical. They are shrouding their presuppositions with the cloak of neutrality and objectivity. Many have been deceived into thinking their position is neutral. One might say that religion isn't neutral, but their theory is neutral. Beware! Nobody is neutral.  I would like to share some good videos I saw on this subject. I viewed the first one at the "Reformed Baptist Blog." I think these videos will be helpful.


Here is the longer version:


Comments