So, with the baggage of this quandary resting on his back, the modern man sets off endlessly to making the case that his moral whims are the right moral whims and those who disagree with his are not. However, no matter what he says about morality in his brave new world, he contradicts himself as he says it, and sadly his life reflects that contradiction .
The book "Morality For Humans" is a recent example of man's quest to have morality while not having morality. Johnson assures us that moral absolutes are a sin against science, and I would suppose that he is absolutely sure about that, at least sure enough to write a book about it.
Because we are reaping so much fruit from this kind of thinking we might get the idea that it's new. But it is not. We must remember that half truths taught one generation become the whole truths of the next. Generation after generation of this, and, well, eventually a whirlwind of lies and confusion is harvested. C K Chesterton saw the early fruit of humanism among elitist over a hundred years ago, and he lays them out like only he could in "Orthodoxy":
For all denunciation implies a moral doctrine of some kind; and the modern revolutionist doubts not only the institution he denounces, but the doctrine by which he denounces it. Thus he writes one book complaining that imperial oppression insults the purity of women , and then he writes another book (about the sex problem) in which he insults it himself. He curses the Sultan because Christian girls lose their virginity, and then curses Mrs. Grundy because they keep it. As a politician, he will cry out that war is a waste of life, and then, as a philosopher, that all life is waste of time. A Russian pessimist will denounce a policeman for killing a peasant, and then prove by the highest philosophical principles that the peasant ought to have killed himself. A man denounces marriage as a lie, and then denounces aristocratic profligates for treating it as a lie. He calls a flag a bauble, and then blames the oppressors of Poland or Ireland because they take away that bauble. The man of this school goes first to a political meeting, where he complains that savages are treated as if they were beasts; then he takes his hat and umbrella and goes on to a scientific meeting , where he proves that they practically are beasts. In short, the modern revolutionist, being an infinite sceptic, is always engaged in undermining his own mines . In his book on politics he attacks men for trampling on morality; in his book on ethics he attacks morality for trampling on men. Therefore the modern man in revolt has become practically useless for all purposes of revolt. By rebelling against everything he has lost his right to rebel against anything.
As I learned of the last shooting I couldn't help but to wonder what old Dr. Mark Johnson would have to say to those of us who insist that one who kills women because they won't have sex with him, along with the men with whom they would, is absolutely wrong. I can only guess that he would accuse me of sinning against his moral whims. But then again, unless he is morally retarded, which is not beyond question, he would not say as much.
* Chesterton, G. K. (Gilbert Keith) (2012-05-17). Orthodoxy (pp. 33-34). . Kindle Edition.