The Thomistic Institute Are Right and Wrong Just a Matter of Opinion? – Prof. Steven Jensen
55 snips
Mar 11, 2026 Prof. Steven Jensen, a Thomistic philosopher at University of St. Thomas specializing in bioethics and natural law, defends moral realism over relativism. He contrasts objective vs subjective wrongdoing and tackles the argument from disagreement. He explores how human nature, ends, and factual disputes ground moral claims and reframes right and wrong as relations to human goals.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Relativism Versus Moral Realism
- Moral relativism claims right and wrong are mere mental ideas with no reality, like unicorns, while moral realism holds moral facts exist objectively in actions.
- Steven Jensen contrasts objective (reality) and subjective (mind) judgments using the shooter-hallucination example to show both can diverge.
Shooter Hallucination Demonstrates Objective Versus Subjective Wrong
- Jensen uses the shooter who thinks he's shooting a bear to illustrate objective wrongness versus subjective innocence.
- Objectively the shooter killed a human; subjectively he defended himself, showing objective/subjective distinction.
Disagreement Doesn’t Prove No Moral Truth
- The argument from disagreement says societies disagree about morals, so there's no objective moral truth; Jensen rejects that inference as invalid.
- He compares it to disagreements about the Earth's shape to show disagreement alone doesn't negate one reality.