Journal: Southern Baptist Journal of Theology
Volume: SBJT 26:2 (Summer 2022)
Article: Can Critical Theory, And Critical Race Theory, Ground Human Dignity, Justice, And Equality?
Author: R. Scott Smith

SBJT 26:2 (Summer 2022) p. 70

Can Critical Theory, And Critical Race Theory, Ground Human Dignity, Justice, And Equality?

R. Scott Smith

R. Scott Smith is Professor of Ethics and Christian Apologetics in the MA Christian Apologetics program at Talbot School of Theology at Biola University. He earned his PhD in Religion and Social Ethics from the University of Southern California. He has written several books, including In Search of Moral Knowledge: Overcoming the Fact-Value Dichotomy (IVP, 2014) and Exposing the Roots of Constructivism: Nominalism and the Ontology of Knowledge (Lexington, 2023). He has also contributed to numerous books, including The Inherence of Human Dignity: Foundations of Human Dignity, Vol. 1 (Anthem, 2021). He and his wife, Debbie, have one daughter. His website is www.rscottsmithphd.com. Scott also is the secretary-treasurer for the Evangelical Philosophical Society.

Introduction

Critical theory (CT), along with one of its “progeny,” critical race theory (CRT), advances the belief that we should be free to become our “true selves.” These are our “identities,” or self-conceptualizations, and we form these by exercising our autonomy in order to be free from oppressive ideologies. Both CT and CRT draw upon some key assumptions to support this view, namely, the ethical principle that the oppressed should be liberated from their oppression; the ontological principles of materialism, nominalism, and a rejection of essences; and the epistemic principle that all our knowledge comes from our particular, historical standpoints (historicism, or standpoint epistemology).

CT and CRT seem to appeal to several moral absolutes, such as the treatment of all humans with dignity, respect, equality, and justice, as well as

SBJT 26:2 (Summer 2022) p. 71

the protection of minority groups from oppression and domination by the majority group. Arguably, these positions presuppose that humans are intrinsically valuable. Yet, I will argue that CT and CRT have no basis for that presupposition, nor for its other moral stances, due to their rejection of essences, including that humans are made in God’s image. Indeed, our “common humanity,” which must be merely material ontologically, and our self-conceptualizations (or, senses of our identities) are inadequate bases for rights, leaving our moral value as just a result of hegemonic power, the very position that CT and CRT reject.

To help show this, first I will provide an overview of CT and then CRT, along with a general survey of their core ethical positions. Next, I will begin my assessment with a survey of some of these theories’ strengths. Then I will critically examine these theories’ abilities to preserve their ...