[Part One. Part Two. Part Three. Part Four. Part Five. Part Six.]

We’ve been saying that traditionalism reconnects man with the wisdom of his ancestors, that the most important wisdom is to acknowledge God, and that intuition is the foundation of wisdom. But what about the liberal who refuses to acknowledge the order of being?

Or, more generally, what about the man who denies what intuition suggests? The most basic truths are known through intuition but since intuition sometimes seems irrational, not based on clear-cut data and sharply-defined modes of logical reasoning, the man who wants to deny an intuitive truth can easily fool himself into thinking that since “it isn’t supported by evidence” (or so he thinks), it must not be true.

Consider a simple example that is nevertheless a paradigm for all valid intuitive knowledge: The existence of your consciousness. If someone challenged you by saying “Prove to me that your consciousness exists,” how would you respond?

[And indeed some atheists take atheism to its logical conclusion and teach that your consciousness does not exist. And since your consciousness is pretty much what you are, they are saying that you do not exist.]

The challenge is, of course, fundamentally misguided. Our imaginary interlocutor is asking for proof of the existence of another consciousness, but this cannot be proved in the sense of deducing it from other, more fundamental truths. It is instead a truth that is known immediately by intuition (starting with the case of one’s own consciousness), and it is a necessary prerequisite of all coherent thought about human beings. If anyone seriously doubted the existence of other minds, it would mean that he was quite deranged.

And yet analogous misguided questions are often asked: “Prove to me that marriage cannot be between two men or two women.” “Prove to me that children need both a father and a mother.” “Prove to me that inviting tens of millions of foreigners into America will harm her.” And so on.

Although the questions are absurd, they are often asked in apparent earnest, so we must be able to give answers that go beyond simply saying, as is true, “It’s self-evident.” Although the answers to the above questions can be known intuitively, intuition forms in response to evidence, and therefore the questions are to be answered by pointing to the evidence. And evidence exists aplenty. We do not pretend to be neutral, suspending our judgment until all the evidence has been found, but neither do we ignore the evidence. Instead, evidence supports intuition.

How, then, do we respond to the cynic (or the cynical part of ourself) who denies what intuition should know and says, for example, that we cannot disprove (or that we must accept) same-sex pseudo-marriage? There is no guaranteed method of refuting the cynic, for a man generally believes what he wants to believe.

None are so blind as those who will not see, that is, whose desire is not to see. For such a person, the evidence that supports the truth seems invalid, and the evidence that opposes it seems valid. For such a one, evidence against same-sex pseudo-marriage, or evidence against the joys of multiculturalism, or evidence for Christianity, are all invalid. These people invert reality.

We can show that their thinking is inverted. Consider the atheist who denies the existence of consciousness. Stripped of any pretensions, reduced to its basic elements, this atheist’s argument amounts to this:

Major premise: If materialism is true, then consciousness is not real.

Minor premise: Materialism is true.

Conclusion: Therefore consciousness is not real.

Although one could quibble about exact meanings, the major premise is basically correct. If materialism is true, the non-material—including your consciousness—is not real. If so, and if the minor premise is true, so is the conclusion.

But a single inversion produces a true conclusion:

Major premise: If materialism is true, then consciousness is not real.

Minor premise: Consciousness is real.

Conclusion: Therefore materialism is false.

Intuition knows that consciousness is real, and therefore that materialism is false. All that is required is a reversal. A repentance.

The only hope for the cynic is that he will begin to hear the voice of intuition. In chapter one of the Epistle to the Romans, the Apostle Paul, speaking by the inspiration of God, writes that all men have an intuitive sense of the eternal power and nature of God, that they are therefore without excuse for dishonoring Him, and that the unrighteous suppress their knowledge of God. Likewise, all men have intuitive knowledge of the basic order of being but some men suppress this knowledge. We can only oppose the cynic by reasserting the truth and praying that his intuition will begin to assert itself.

[Part eight is here.]