Objectivity

"Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things."
-Romans 2:1
      In my engineering ethics class we talked about the idea of subjectivity and objectivity. Immediately people in the class talked about how nothing can be objective, since everyone is subject to their own views and beliefs. I've written before about truth and whether it is relative or not. I concluded that it cannot be relative, because truth has to be consistent in order to be truth. The topic I want to talk about today is similar, just more in depth.
      There are many things that are subjective, such as people's opinions. Some people like action movies, other like dramas, and still others prefer horror. These are all subjective views; there is no such thing as an objective preference of movie genre. However, when raised with the question of objectivity versus subjectivity, people often forget that there are things that are objective as well. For example, a movie is a movie, not a book. That is an objective statement, and there is no room for debate on that.
      When talking about objectivity and subjectivity, the previous example was trivial. What people really want to know is whether there can be objectivity in morality. Is it possible that our morals are objective? Is there a definitive "right" and "wrong"? Or is everything relative to the individual? Many people these days would say that morality is subjective to a person. A person's morality is just a result of a person's upbringing. They argue that since everyone has a different set of morals that there cannot be any absolutes. Everyone should be allowed to decide their own moral standards.
      While I agree that everyone has a different set of morals, I don't agree that this means that morality is subjective. As an example, think about the laws we have in our country. Take speeding for example. The law says that if you drive over the speed limit, you will be given a ticket (given that you are caught). That is an objective law- if you speed, you will be penalized. However, people might differ on what they believe regarding speeding. Some may think that you can go ten miles an hour over the limit and you don't deserve a ticket. Others may believe that speeding limits are ridiculous and shouldn't be a law. Regardless of what you believe, if you speed, you will be given a ticket. What am I saying with this example? People do have subjective views on morality, but there is objective morality.
      So what is objective morality? I couldn't go into full detail, but let's start at the core of the issue; where does morality come from? I recently heard Ravi Zacharias pose this question, and his answer was fascinating. His answer was that there is no such thing as morality without purpose. Think about it; if I gave you a baseball bat, you know the purpose of the bat is to hit a baseball. However, if you use it to hit a person, you are violating the purpose of the bat. I think it is the lack of understanding of our purpose that causes people to misunderstand morality. If there is no clear purpose for our lives, then there is no way we can violate or fulfill our purpose. In other words, there is no way we can do anything "right" or "wrong". People can try to justify their morals, but in the end they can't really rationalize them. So what is our purpose? To "glorify God and enjoy Him forever".
-Smart