One of the most important books in my seminary education was The Transforming Moment by James E. Loder, formerly a professor at Princeton Theological Seminary. In The Transforming Moment, Loder sets out a theory of transformational logic, based in part on the work of Michael Polanyi and his view of how science progresses. Along the way, Loder draws on theology (he was a professor at Princeton Theological Seminary), psychology (he was a highly accomplished counselor), and philosophy (he was conversant with many philosophers, especially Søren Kierkegaard). Polanyi describes personal transformation as a process involving the whole concrete human person, not merely the human mind. What is at stake in such a transformational event is the full and imaginative participation of the whole being. A true “convictional experience,” as he puts it, is the act of a whole person, not a disembodied spirit.

The Logic of Transformation

The process of true transformation of any kind, religious, moral, scientific or otherwise, involves a process. Loder describes the “logic of transformation,” or the five-fold process behind any transformational event, as follows:

1. Conflict-in-context, or a sense of the need for deeper understanding because of a realized problem in human life or understanding;
2. Interlude for scanning, or investigation of the situation or problem;
3. Insight felt with intuitive force, the “eureka moment” where new understanding is gained;
4. Release and repatterning, or working out the implications of the insight intellectually and otherwise; and
5. Interpretation of the event in a wider context, or the application by a human person of the insight and its development in a broader context.

In this particular blog, I don’t intend not to explicate the fivefold knowing process, which I would like to do in the future, which I’ve touched upon in discussing both Charles S. Peirce Michael Polanyi, but rather to talk about the moral implications to a society when the process goes astray as Loder sets out in his book.

The Problem of Eiconic Eclipse

I’ve written several blogs exploring the issue of “moral inversion.” This occurs when morality gets separated from its roots in a tradition of moral inquiry, making it hard to tell right from wrong or justice from injustice. This separation takes place whenever we seek to reduce moral thinking to something else. For example, in some versions of Marxism and materialism, economic factors are seen as the only considerations, and morality and justice lose their deeper, transcendental foundation in the pursuit of goodness and fairness.

In The Transforming Moment, Loder introduces the concept of the “eiconic eclipse.” The iconic eclipse is the error that arises when reason is severed from a deeper source in personal knowledge and accountability, and from the human capacity for imagination. It involves a kind of rationalistic reduction in which the living knower in all his or her complexity, mind, body, soul, and spirit, is excluded from the process of knowing. [1]

Many people see that a key mistake in Newtonian physics, unlike quantum physics, is leaving out the role of the person doing the investigation. Quantum theory reveals that it’s impossible to exclude the knower from what is being known. Loader takes this insight further, applying it to religious, theological, moral, and psychological issues, offering a powerful critique of modern ideas.

Loder describes his insight as follows:

A new theory of error would be: any assertion of truth that does not recognize and accept its primary dependency on some leap of the imagination, some insight, intuition, or vision is guilty of intellectual dissimulation. Reason thinks it secures an objective, airtight case, when, in fact, its processes are open textured, its sources rooted in “personal knowledge,” and its conclusions are laced with human interest. Knowing as an event, unequivocally depends on the image and its cognates to draw together an integrated picture, to put things in a new perspective, or to construct a new worldview. I have yet to show that all knowing is eventful, but my claim is that a rationalistic eclipse of the image eventually cuts off reason from its substance—indeed from the truth it seeks to order and communicate. For convenience, I will refer to this error as an “eiconic eclipse” and will attempt to show that it is not merely an error of omission, but is an error of commission because eclipsing rationalist thereby lose their perspective on themselves and whatever they know. [2]

Loder emphasizes that claims to truth must acknowledge their roots in human imagination, insight, intuition, or vision to be complete. Although reason may seem objective, it is actually shaped by individual personality, perspective, and life experiences. This means that all human understanding relies on imaginative insight to make new discoveries or develop worldviews. When reason becomes detached from its source in a human person who takes personal responsibility for their actions, it can lead to an intellectual collapse of the knower, distorting and obscuring the truth it aims to uncover.

In the area of science, when the intellectual parameters of science are grounded solely in reductionism and in the absence of the full scope of human, limited imagination (science under “eikonic eclipse”), science loses its grounding in the human person, and the relationship between the knower and the known is distorted. I believe it is fair to call this an iconic collapse, because human knowledge has collapsed into a false objectivity that actually distorts reality.

Although I like Loder’s terminology, I want to suggest the term “noetic collapse.” In my view, things like Justice, Goodness, Truth, and Beauty are real, though ideal, not material realities. When human beings cease believing in these realities and try to reduce them to some material cause (such as love being nothing but hormones), they cut themselves off from the deeper moral and aesthetic aspects of their human personhood, which inevitably leads to distortion, ultimately to unhappiness, and sometimes to violence.

This distortion is found in Marxism, particularly in its reduction of all morality and politics to economic determinism. By reducing the human search for truth and for a humane, life-flourishing social system, those under the influence of materialistic Marxism lose contact with the human reality of seeking a holistic form of truth, goodness, and justice. This, in turn, opens the door to what Michael Polanyi calls “moral inversion,” that is, the twisting of morality by which that which is clearly immoral becomes moral and moral actors are capable of and encouraged to commit acts that are clearly destructive.

Polanyi spent much of his career showing how this phenomenon led to the tremendous injustice of Soviet communism and German National Socialism. He outlines a process he terms “moral inversion,” which he believes is a common characteristic of totalitarian régimes on the right and the left. Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, and Communist China were all powered by an extreme moral energy unconnected with any form of traditional morality. Moral inversion, Polanyi believes, is the demonic power behind dehumanizing and violent social movements and the oppressive governments they create. Despite the destruction they cause, the leaders of these movements understood themselves to have utopian visions of the common good. Moral inversion is not limited to totalitarian regimes. It can exist in capitalist régimes where everything is reduced to the search for economic success. It can exist in bureaucratic régimes where everything is reduced to rules and rule-following. It can exist anywhere where the fullness of the human person is reduced to something less than fully human.

Moral Inversion

Michal Polanyi argued that the strong demand for moral perfection characteristic of Christianity, when combined with the materialist reductionism of modern thought, results in a form of moral nihilism in which reason and morality work destructively. Human beings have an innate desire to act morally and achieve moral ends, but when education or training fails to provide a clear rationale for their moral passions, those passions can become uncontrollable, flowing in whatever direction their society takes them. In the modern world, revolutionary violence is one of the most common ways this displaced moral energy finds expression. It is not possible to understand notions like justice, goodness, truth, or beauty on reductive, materialistic terms. These are “noetic” or mentally created spiritual and moral ideals. When cut off from a holistic community of tradition dedicated to the study and illumination of such ideals, the human mind turns on itself or “inverts,” losing contact with moral foundations.

The problem is not that such people have given up having a moral sense. Instead, that moral sense has become unsupported and irrational—even contemptuous of morality. When that happens, a kind of contempt for moral values, such as truth, beauty, compassion, or justice, can emerge.

Divided against himself, he seeks an identity safe against self-doubt. Having condemned the distinction between good and evil as dishonest, he can still find pride in the honesty of such condemnation. Since ordinary decent behaviour can never be safe against the suspicion of sheer conformity or downright hypocrisy, only an absolutely a-moral, meaningless act can assure nun of his com· plete authenticity. All the moral fervour which scientific scepticism has released from religious control and then rendered homeless by discrediting its ideals, returns then to imbue an a-moral authenticity with intense moral approval. This is how absolute self-assertion, fantasies of gratuitous crime and perversity, self-hatred and despair arc aroused as defences against a nagging suspicion of one’s own honesty.[3]

In today’s materialistic societies, that direction has often taken the form of revolutionary movements aimed at building a new society based solely on materialist ideas. Ideologies such as Communism (currently masquerading as various forms of critical theories) or National Socialism have frequently been chosen as pathways. Unfortunately, many of the tragedies of the 21^st century have stemmed from this shift of moral energy into destructive outlets. When individual moral inversion is translated into social action, the result is totalitarian harshness, whether communist, national socialist, capitalist or bureaucratic.

Conclusion

The issue of human thought collapsing into a materialist framework isn’t merely hypothetical. We can see its effects in our national politics, city riots, and in the way leaders in the media and academia often use revolutionary language. The breakdown of our social order is rooted in a human moral drive that’s disconnected from the imagination, spiritual grounding, and moral traditions that can foster progress without endless nihilistic and political conflicts. As one author put it:

Dostoevsky grasped what is painfully obvious today: as authority collapses, institutions implode, and intellectual and moral anarchy predominates, the liberal elite is apt to combine with revolutionary ideologues to unleash destructive forces that neither group can control.[4]

If the notion of an iconic eclipse or collapse that I’ve been discussing is correct, then the problems we face with institutional corruption, a lack of faith in our democratic and republican ideals, and a failure to uphold the fundamental tradition of our constitutional form of government are deeper than the notion that we simply elected the wrong leaders or have been led by the wrong political party. The corruption of our society and the emergence of deep injustices are rooted in a deeper problem.

Did this problem is in order to recover in order for our society to recover social and institutional health, we must develop a new way of thinking and reintroduce the nonreusable reality of such concepts as goodness, truth, and beauty. In particular, with respect to politics, we must reintegrate into our thinking the notion that justice cannot be reduced to either a kind of procedural adequacy or material equality. Justice is its own thing and cannot be reduced to anything else.

To achieve this, we must reconnect with the ancient traditions that emphasize the organic bond between the knower and the known, the individual and the community, human beings and their environment, as well as leaders and those they guide. It’s also important to move away from the radical notion that we can create a perfect society, and instead focus on making small, thoughtful, and loving improvements that promote human well-being. Whether this can be done without returning to a fundamentally religious view of reality and to some notion of the unattainable yet actual reality of ideals, such as the possibility of an increasingly just society in which human beings can flourish, is an open question.

Copyright 2026, G. Christopher Scruggs, All Rights Reserved

[1] Id, 223.

[2] Id, 26-27. In The Transforming Moment, Loder notes his dependence upon both Jurgen Habermas and his work Knowledge and Human Reason (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1971); and Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1962, 1974). Parenthetically, the problem of “eiconic eclipse” is not the only kind of iconic event one can imagine. One can also imagine a kind of “eiconic inflation” in which human imagination loses contact with reality, as ideals ungrounded in reality dominate. Counting the number of angels on the head of a pin might qualify as an example.

[3] Michael Polanyi, “On the Modern Mind” Encounter Volume 24 https://www.polanyisociety.org/MP-On–the-Modern-Mind-1965-ocr.pdfdownloaded January 23, 2026, 19.

[4] Jacob Howland, “Demons at 150” The New Criterion (March 2021) https://newcriterion.com/article/demons-at-150/ (Downloaded January 20, 206).

A few weeks after the events of 9/11, I found myself at the airport in Springfield, Missouri, on my way home after seeing my mother. The airport in Springfield is pretty small and up to that date I had never had to go through much security on my way home. This trip was different. There was a lot of security. In the waiting room before we boarded, I noticed a Middle Eastern couple. I also noticed that everyone sitting at the gate around me was staring at the couple. I was uncomfortable, and I think everyone in the terminal, including the couple, was uncomfortable. When we boarded, lo and behold, I was seated next to one of them. We had a very nice conversation and by the time we landed, my discomfort was gone.

The second story reflects on the events of the past few years and the troubling rise of antisemitism. A particularly distressing development has been the resurgence of antisemitism on American college campuses following the recent war in Gaza. It’s heartbreaking to see this hatred unfold even at some of the most historic and respected universities in our country. I was discussing this situation with someone, and we both agreed that if someone had told us in 1973 that we would witness antisemitism at major universities in America, we wouldn’t have believed it. That’s exactly what is happening now.

It is part of human nature to notice differences. We automatically notice differences in races, religions, social, standings, and alike. It’s also human nature to be somewhat fearful of the unknown other. That day in Springfield, as I boarded the airplane, I was fearful because I was seated next to an unknown other in a situation where it was quite possible that his former country and mine were engaged in a kind of conflict. Now just occasionally, these kinds of fears are justified. But, good bit of the time they are not.

When people are stereotyped because of their race (and it’s important to remember that there’s even an anti-white bias in our country these days) or religion or any other characteristic and prejudice is allowed to take place, there’s been a kind of moral inversion. That is to say something that really should not be thought to be justified is justified. Antisemitism is an extreme variant of an ancient human problem.

Moral Inversion and Anti-Semitism

These blogs examine moral inversion, a phenomenon in which what is traditionally considered immoral is reinterpreted as moral through distorted reasoning. Michael Polanyi observed that modern people often have intense moral aspirations. However, because they are disconnected from the profound moral goals of the Judeo-Christian tradition, they tend to make moral choices without the full guidance of traditional morality. Additionally, the basic worldview of modern people leads them to deny the reality of moral aspirations. Finally, Marxist-influenced postmodernism, which reduces all moral claims to bids for power over others, allows people to pursue material goals (like power) with the passionate fervor of Western moral traditions, resulting in terrible acts of violence seen in Nazi and Communist regimes.

Those who subscribe to a materialistic, Marxist-inspired worldview hold the view that moral claims are not real or binding, yet they remain motivated by the moral fervor of traditional moral systems. In the end, things that were traditionally known to be immoral (such as killing 6,000,000 Jews or terrorizing them on college campuses) become morally acceptable and even required by their misguided search for a better and more just world. This process is what scholars call moral inversion. It is an upside-down morality made possible by an impoverished moral imagination. Those adopting this mindset frequently come to see raw force as morally acceptable, and some go so far as to support power without hesitation.

Contemporary Anti-Semitism

The ongoing conflict in Gaza has, unfortunately, led to a noticeable rise in antisemitism in Western societies. It also sometimes exposes biases that were quietly present beneath the surface all along. When people compare Israel’s response to the October 7, 2023 attack with Nazi aggression, it can feel like they’re overlooking important differences, creating a kind of moral reversal. For instance, during World War II, Germany was clearly the aggressor, initiating the war through a campaign of conquest. Saying otherwise would distort the moral reality of those events. In the case of Gaza, the conflict was not started by Jewish aggression but by Hamas’s attack. Claiming that Israelis are the “new Nazis” and that Gazans are simply an oppressed group flies in the face of the obvious facts. Engaging in antisemitic activities is a serious moral distortion.

An Article in the Times of Israel interviewing an American commentator, Victor Davis Hansen put it this way:

On elite campuses, opposition to Israel has become a moral credential. Yet, Hanson observes, much of this rhetoric bleeds easily into classic anti-Jewish tropes: charges of global influence, financial manipulation, and dual loyalty. The movement couches itself in humanitarian terms, but the fury it unleashes is rarely matched against any other state—not even regimes engaged in ongoing genocide or mass repression.

For Hanson, who has spent his career studying the moral inversions of late civilizations, this is not surprising. “The Israeli-Gaza thing,” he notes, “gives people a legitimate platform” to express a deeper, latent anti-Semitism. In other words, Israel becomes the proxy through which old prejudices regain social respectability.[1]

The rise of antisemitism in the West is a complex issue that reveals the dangers of moral reversal. Many of those involved in recent demonstrations are young people, energized by youthful idealism. They often learn in institutions where traditional positive views of the Jewish people and the Jewish state have been challenged, especially on American and European college campuses. They’ve been told that Jews are the aggressors. Additionally, these institutions often receive significant funding from Middle Eastern governments, which can influence faculty perspectives to be sympathetic to the causes supported by these countries. Sadly, this has led to terrorists, who attack and kill innocent people, being described as freedom fighters. Moreover, due to Marxist influences in American campuses, groups like Hamas are sometimes seen as heroes simply following the inevitable course of history, and this perspective can extend to Western protesters as well.

I want to be sure to clarify what I am saying. I’ve traveled in Israel and the West Bank. I’ve never been to Gaza, but I know a little about its history. There’s no question that Israel could treat the citizens of the West Bank and Gaza differently. The United Nations’ intent in establishing the State of Israel has not been fully realized. There’s no question that concerned people should be able to speak to the situation and suggest reasonable solutions that would grant the Palestinian people non-violent self-rule and independence. My argument is not against thoughtful critique and dialogue about the best course of action in the West Bank and Gaza. My argument is against the inverted morality of those who foment violence and intolerance of the Jewish people.

The example of the protests against the War on Gaza and the anti-Semitic behavior of some of the protesters gives us a window into a world in which the nuances of situations are ignored in a simplistic reaction, in which media players exacerbate the situation by offering sound-bite analysis, and in which educational institutions, with their own morally inverted prejudices, fail in their duty to ensure that students are able to see the complexities of difficult problems. The result is not better decision-making by governments, better education of the young, or better understanding by citizens at large. The result is moral thinking and behavior turned upside down.

Racism and Moral Inversion

In this article, it was difficult to decide whether to discuss racism generally and then antisemitism, or to discuss antisemitism first and then racism generally. In my view, antisemitism is a particularly virulent form of the broader problem of human beings’ inclination toward prejudice against people who are different, and one obvious category of difference is race. The history of racism in America makes this an even more difficult problem.

It’s unfortunate that a long-standing human challenge has become even more complex due to the influence of Neo-Marxist ideas, especially in the form of critical theory that many American elites engage with. This way of thinking often simplifies the world into two groups: the oppressed and the oppressors. Politicians often see an advantage in this straightforward division. The current climate of negative politics makes officials eager to find reasons why certain groups might not support others, and unfortunately, prejudice often plays a role in this. The result is not greater social cohesion but greater social tension.

In our society, it’s often easy to see how the tendency to assign blame by creating scapegoats persists. Our educational institutions, media, social platforms, and many conversation outlets sometimes unintentionally foster stereotypes. This challenge is compounded by critical theory, which often views issues through the lens that racism, sexism, or similar ‘isms’ are the root causes. Such perspectives can lead to dividing people—men against women, whites against Blacks, Asians against Hispanics, Christians against Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, or others, and heterosexuals against gays—each cycle aiming to build a political base that maintains some group’s power. Sadly, this approach reflects a distorted sense of morality, rooted in hatred and bias, regardless of which side is involved. Ultimately, it erodes social harmony and understanding.

Moral Inversion Feeds on Prejudice and Social Disharmony

Michael Polanyi’s concern with moral inversion came as a result of his experiences, both with respect the Nazi Germany regime, and especially with the antisemitism present there, and with the Soviet communist regime, in which class hatreds and other factors were used to divide people and created a totalitarian state. Marx’s entire program was founded upon creating and exploiting resentment between what he called the bourgeoisie, that is the ownership and professional class of a society, and the proletariat, or the working class.

In the Middle East, we see the tragic consequences of societies which demonize other societies while governments do not serve the best interest or flourishing of their own people. We’ve also seen this in the leadership of various totalitarian regime in the 20^th century. Sadly enough, it even appears that Western culture is beginning to degenerate into this kind of moral decay. As I’ve mentioned previously, critical theory, with its fundamentally mechanical view of human nature and view of human society, based upon a conflict between various groups, feeds this dysfunction.

Fortunately, constructive postmodernism, of which Polanyi is one example, provides a way forward beyond racial, class, education, educational status, professional, or other forms of social conflict. This does not mean that the inevitable conflict between groups can be completely eliminated in any society. As we shall see at the end of this series, Polanyi held no such illusions. From a Christian perspective, if we are all falling creatures, then we are not going to be able to eliminate all forms of oppression or all forms of envy from a society. We simply have to do the best we can to build social cohesion while allowing conflicts to exist.

The problem is not with differences of opinion or differences between people. The problem is when people fail to engage in respectful relationships with those with whom they disagree and even fear. Polanyi believed that social dialogue and the creation of meaningful social interaction was an important part of overcoming moral inversion. It would seem that America today is in precisely this kind of a situation. We need to back away from all forms of negative politics and stereotyping, all forms of scapegoating, and focus on creating that basis of social cohesion and mutual respect upon which a freeze society must rest.

Conclusion

For a free society to thrive over time, what I call a “politics of love’ is essential. [2]This isn’t about romantic or superficial love, but rather a love that understands the importance of a shared commitment to the core values of a free society—truth, goodness, justice, and beauty. The main goal here is to foster social harmony and create an environment where each individual can truly flourish. In such a society, you’ll always encounter what postmodernists often refer to as “the other.” This “other” could be someone of a different gender, race, religion, socioeconomic background, or political belief, and the list goes on. In this kind of society, strategies that divide or dominate—sometimes called “negative politics’—would be mostly out of place, replaced instead by a spirit of unity and mutual respect.

Copyright 2026, G. Christopher Scruggs, All Rights Reserved

[1] Tim Orr, “Anti-Semitism and the Collapse of Moral Clarity in Higher Education” Times of Israel at https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/anti-semitism-and-the-collapse-of-moral-clarity-in-higher-education/ Anti-Semitism and the Collapse of Moral Clarity in Higher Education (Oct 23, 2025), downloaded February 5, 2026/,

[2] G. Christopher Scruggs, Illumined Public Square: Essays on a Sophio-Agapic Constructive Postmodern Political Philosophy (Hunt, TX Quansus Press & College Station, TX, Virtual Bookworm, 2025). The entire work is a long argument for a communal approach to political life characterized by a commitment to wisdom (truth) and deep relationality (love) in which political life is transformed by a deeper understanding of reality than our contemporary power-oriented politics provides.

Across different types of media—Mainline, Print, Network, Television, Internet, and Alt-Media (sometimes called “Alt Right Media’), and various social media sources of information and opinion—it’s clear that the media does not always report stories with the accuracy and detail consumers hope for. As someone who reads widely across all kinds of media, I find it genuinely worrying how often the value of recording the truth seems to be overlooked. For example, I remember a newspaper publishing a story I knew was false. I reached out to the editor with both a complaint and proof that the story was incorrect. To my surprise, I was told that “Truth isn’t our paper’s responsibility.” If this had been an isolated incident, it might not be as concerning—yet a friend of mine living in a major East Coast city also reported experiencing the same issue with balance in news reporting.[1]

To be fair, I believe both editors were fundamentally good people who conducted their journalistic careers according to the standards they were taught in school—standards that treated truth not as the fundamental category for journalists but as a truth they believed would help society reach a more perfect state. In a world in which everything is about gaining power, truthfulness is not a fundamental value. What people don’t seem to understand is that what they were taught was not only false but also a path to a kind of soft totalitarian state.

Although the cause can be questioned, it is without question that the media in the West is in a kind of crisis. Studies show an astounding lack of confidence in the media. Here is how one report puts it:

Americans’ confidence in the mass media has edged down to a new low, with only 28% expressing a “great deal” or “fair amount” of trust in newspapers, television, and radio to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly. This is down from31% last year and forty percent five years ago. Meanwhile, seven in 10 U.S. adults now say they have “not very much” confidence (36%) or “none at all” (34%).[2]

This is not an isolated study. There is no question that people have lost a great deal of confidence in the media in recent years and believe it is neither fair nor responsible in reporting the facts.[3]

Polanyi’s Concern

Michael Polanyi repeatedly warned that propaganda and media lies, amplified by modern technology, threaten to destroy free society by replacing objective truth with enforced ideological “moral inversion.” He argued that truth is defenseless unless intellectuals, scientists, and journalists actively uphold free, independent, and impartial criticism rather than submit to ideological control. He lived through the terrible lies of the Soviet regime and those of Hitler, Mussolini, and others. He believed that no society can remain free if there is a loss of respect for truth and the disciplined search for fair and just solutions to social issues.[4]

What is the Media?

The term “media” comes from a Latin word “medi,” which means “middle.” This word forms the root of many English words. “Mediators” stand in the middle between parties to a dispute, helping them resolve their difficulties. “Intermediaries” negotiate on behalf of parties who cannot meet in person. The “Media” are intermediaries of information. Citizens cannot be everywhere. Therefore, we need the media to mediate news. Because of the volume of events that occur on any day or given period of time, the public relies upon the media to sort through events, prioritize by importance, summarize events in a meaningful and truthful way, and convey the resulting information to those who cannot be present to view and participate in events. When the media fails in this task, becomes prejudiced in the task, ceases to trust in the ability of ordinary people to interpret and act upon the facts, a disaster for our democracy is in the making. [5]

An Outmoded World-View

Behind the decline of American media is a mindset, a way of looking at the world, an orientation in which words do not convey meaning about reality. Instead, words are bids for power. Having given up the notion that the voters should be given the facts whether or not they support the views of the elite, the media is left with using their constitutionally protected position to put into office the candidate/s that support their biases, left, right, or whatever.

This way of looking at the world has two aspects: First, a strictly postmodern (really, “hyper-modern”) view holds that there is no “public truth” out there for citizens to discover over time as we elect candidates and evaluate their performance. There is only an ideology of the left or right that they would like to enact into law, and whoever gets the votes can do as they please. There is no truth, no justice, just ideology. This is a prejudice that practitioners of hyper-modern journalism share with politicians on the left and right—and increasingly with those who control and teach in our universities.

This prejudice contributes to many of our greatest public failures. Just to give one current example, no one seriously denies that Americans cannot permit the unlimited entry of foreigners into our nation. Almost no one believes that foreign nations should be able to empty their jails into the United States or send foreign agents or illegal gang members into the nation to cause social chaos. On the other hand, America was built by immigrants and very few people think that there should be no immigration whatsoever into the United States. Nevertheless, the media often presents exactly these two alternatives, failing to create any real sense of nuance in their reporting.

The media’s failure to fully and accurately cover this story appropriately had led to social unrest, resistance to proper police action, and overreach by some. As in the past, the party the media is trying to “help” will likely pay the price in successive elections. In the meantime, the real concerns of the nation to have a government of a proper size, a budget that is more or less in balance, a politically neutral police, defense and military establishment, goes unaddressed.

In a variety of areas, ideological predispositions of an essentially irrational political and media elite are driving legislation that ensures past problems will repeat. This is dangerous because the problems we face require new solutions, not necessarily available to those trapped in historic ideological positions.

A loss of belief in truth cannot help but be followed by another, perhaps worse, phenomenon. If facts are not important than sensational, overblown, and highly emotional visual and other images are. If all that counts is power, then getting it by playing on voters’ prejudices is what works. The public interest is harmed if media and politicians engage in such behavior.

The problem of loss of faith in truth is complicated by a focus on sensationalism. The politics of negative sensationalism prevents us from having a conversation about serious national problems. It is easy to win office by stating that the candidate you oppose is worse than the candidate you support. It is harder to prove that your candidate had good ideas and is capable of solving a social problem. When you combine a lack of respect for the truth with a focus on the sensational, you have a recipe for democratic disaster.

The Wrong Response

Despite the saying, “All the Truth that is Fit to Print,” [6] contemporary “post-structuralist journalism” has lost its foundation in the search for truth—the media’s duty to mediate facts so people can form sound opinions on social issues. If you don’t believe in truth or that language is a means of reflecting reality, then everything is interpretation. And, in a culture of interpretation, there is no lasting concern for truth.

Of course, people do not always agree on the proper interpretation of the facts, and there is always the possibility of error. This is the fallibilist view that our knowledge is always partial and open to correction. Polanyi repeatedly reaffirmed that every human endeavor carries the potential for error.[7] This would include journalism and the media. Because all humans err, humility and restraint are important intellectual virtues.

The Right and Wrong Approaches

Despite the uncertainties and challenges in accurately reporting and interpreting news, it is the media’s duty to pursue and speak the truth as best they can. It’s important to point out the media’s shortcomings, but change can be difficult when people feel under attack. In a critique of the current use of the term “Fake News,” including the President’s use of it to describe those in the media who treat him unfairly, David Atkinson offers the following advice:

Experience shows that when people are attacked, they tend to dig in their heels — and that’s what we’re seeing now. Instead of responding with personal attacks, anger, or rallies against the media and its people, what really helps is strong, calm leadership from the president. Looking back at President Eisenhower’s experience can give us some insight. Although the media didn’t always report his actions fairly or accurately, portraying him as disconnected and old, the facts told a different story. Ike responded by building good relationships with the media and avoiding pointless conflicts, which earned their respect. Despite facing bias, he managed to accomplish a lot of his goals, proving that patience and calm resolve can lead to success.[8]

While it’s important to critique the media for sometimes losing sight of the truth and for showing ideological bias on all sides, it’s also helpful to approach this with a touch of understanding and sympathy. This does not excuse the deliberate distortion of facts about events or, in some cases, the manufacturing of stories or the repetition of what the journalist knows is false information.

Developing a Media Community of Truth

Like both C. S. Peirce and Josiah Royce, Polanyi holds up science and its practices as a way forward for other endeavors. Science is based on mutual trust among scientists, who constitute a truth-seeking community with shared goals and a shared commitment to seeking the kind of truth science can discern. Science involves committing oneself to a faith that science can lead to knowledge about the world. This commitment is evident in the long years of preparation, training, education, apprenticeship, and the like that science requires. It also involves taking personal responsibility for publishing and reviewing one’s own work and that of others. It involves subjecting oneself to the critique of one’s own mistakes or limitations by the greater scientific community.[9]

For media of all kinds to regain trust, it’s important that it begins to resemble science more closely. It should evolve into a true community of inquiry, with standards upheld not by mere government mandates but by the shared internalized moral values of its members. This dedicated pursuit of truth needs to be open to ongoing criticism, which is best supported by a diverse range of media outlets presenting different perspectives on public matters. Still, having many outlets with diverse viewpoints doesn’t absolve each individual, no matter their perspective, of the duty to actively seek out the truth as much as possible within journalism and the media.

Conclusion

The American press needs to pause for reflection. Voters need more information, less pure opinion, and more neutrality from a press dedicated to the search for truth, not power. The media needs to report the facts surrounding the initiatives as accurately as possible. Everyone needs to be held accountable to the democratic process. For this to work, and for republican democracy to work, there must be something more important and more fundamental than victory for our side.

There must be shared values and a shared belief that the democratic process works, not always immediately but over time. There must be a shared commitment to seeking solutions beyond ideology and prejudice that are the best and most reasonable for our national problems. There must be a shared belief in truth, justice, fairness, and the capacity of our nation to create a fair and just society for all people. Without that shared commitment, the future is dark. With such a commitment, whatever darkness may periodically erupt, there is always hope for a better future for all people.

Moral inversion in the media undermines the values of a free society, the search for justice in public life, and ultimately the rule of law. While it is important that we revisit the values of openness, tolerance, and free speech—principles that truly honor the dignity of all people, it is also important that we recover the notion that those who mediate information to others in a free society must do so conscious of their sacred trust—the trust that they are truly seeking in a non-biased way to give the public valuable information. As one author puts it, ultimately, we face a choice between two different paths:

1. Freedom —> openness —> confidence —> truth-tracking —> dignity;
2. Despotism —> concealment —> diffidence —> bad science —> serfdom and servility.[10]

Copyright 2026, G. Christopher Scruggs, All Rights Reserved

[1] These kinds of statements are made more incredible by the fact that there is a code of ethics to which journalists are supposed to subscribe and follow. See, Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics at https://www.spj.org/spj-code-of-ethics/ (downloaded February 2, 2026). Its preamble reads: “Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough. An ethical journalist acts with integrity. The Society declares these four principles as the foundation of ethical journalism and encourages their use in its practice by all people in all media.”

[2] Gallup, “Trust in Media at New Low of 28% in U.S.” https://news.gallup.com/poll/695762/trust-media-new-low.aspx (downloaded February 2, 2026).

[3] See for example, Kirsten Eddy & Elisa Shearer, “How Americans’ trust in information from news organizations and social media sites has changed over time” Pew Research Center (October 29, 2025), https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/10/29/how-americans-trust-in-information-from-news-organizations-and-social-media-sites-has-changed-over-time/ (downloaded February 2, 2026).

[4] Michael Polanyi, Science, Faith, and Society Chicago, Ill: University of Chicago press, 1946), 19.

[5] This blog is partially a rewrite of a previous blog on the subject of the incipient nihilism of media as it relates to politics. See, “An Independence Day Meditation: Media, “Alt-Media” and News Media Lost in Post-Modernism” (July 4, 2017) at www.gchristopherscruggs.com.

[6] Humorously, “All the News That’s Fit to Print” is the motto of The New York Times, originally developed in 1896 by publisher Adolph S. Ochs to distinguish the paper from sensationalist “yellow journalism”.

[7] This and the succeeding paragraph are inspired by and reflect the views of David Atkinson, “The Quest for Truth and Freedom: Some Polanyian reflections – Introducing Michael Polanyi to a post-truth world” Fulcrum (March 14, 2018) https://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/articles/the-quest-for-truth-and-freedom-some-polanyian-reflections-i-introducing-michael-polanyi-to-a-post-truth-world/(downloaded February 2, 2026).

[8] Id.

[9] Zolt Ziegler, “Michael Polányi’s fiduciary program against fake news and deepfake in the digital age” Open Forum Published: 27 April 2021 Volume 38, pages 1949–1957, (2023) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-021-01217-w#citeas (downloaded February 2, 2026). See also, Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy (Chicago, Ill: University of Chicago Press, 1958), 160-171. I have outlined the views of Peirce, Royce, and Polanyi in detail in G. Christopher Scruggs, Illumined by Wisdom and Love: Essays on a Sophio-Agapic Constructive Postmodern Political Philosophy (College Station, TX: Virtual Bookworm, 2025).

^[10] Daniel B. Klein,  “ Misinformation Is a Word We Use to Shut You Up” 40 Years of Liberty Institute (May 31, 2023) https://www.independent.org/article/2023/05/31/misinformation-is-a-word-we-use-to-shut-you-up/ (downloaded February 2, 2026).

 

Leviathan & the Lambs is the third and final book written under the pen name “Alystair West” (which must be used in any search on Amazon or other website) in the Arthur Stone series, which also includes Marshland and Peace at Battle Mountain. The first two books in the series take Arthur Stone from his days as a young lawyer often unsure of himself to an accomplished trial lawyer. Each novel involves a financial disaster, murders, economic crime, and seen and unseen spiritual realities.

In Leviathan & the Lambs, a complex financial crisis once again impacts Arthur Stone, his family, colleagues, and friends. In this case, greed, excessive lending, risk-taking, and economic manipulation on Wall Street are hurting not just Texas but the entire nation and world. As always, when the stakes are high, some people turn to violence. Finally, Arthur faces his most dangerous enemy yet—one of the most powerful men on earth and his financial empire.

Leviathan & the Lambs covers the period from the start of the Great Financial Crisis of 2007-8 to the end of a lawsuit that followed a few years later. Arthur Stone is now the Attorney General of Texas. His oldest child, Murray, has finished college and is working in New York City. A friend of Murray dies under mysterious circumstances. When Arthur, Gwynn, and their son attend the funeral, he meets the family of the young man who ask him to look into the matter. What he finds is disturbing.

Back in Texas, the state feels the impact of the meltdown in the mortgage-backed securities industry, which is causing the failure of some of the nation’s most important financial institutions. In addition, homeowners and private investors are losing money. Eventually, Arthur becomes involved in prosecuting a securities fraud case involving one of the wealthiest and most politically powerful men in the world, Oliver Wolfe, and his principal company, Leviathan Securities. In Oliver Wolfe, Arthur faces his most dangerous opponent.

At the same time, Arthur must decide whether or not to run for governor of Texas. His family is still coping with the problems of his earlier life. Personally, Arthur faces his own feelings of personal failure and hopelessness. He is burned out and unsure if his life is on the right path. The continuing distance between himself and Gwynn, his ex-wife, is symptomatic of his failure and inability to put her before his restless ambition.

Is this Arthur Stone’s final case? Now, in late middle age and tired of public life, he faces what seems a hopeless situation. He hopes to restore his family, but fate continually intervenes. As the story unfolds, not only is Arthur’s life in jeopardy, but his family and friends are also affected. Fortunately, Gwynn, his closest advisor, along with friends and colleagues from the past, comes to his rescue.

As always, in the background, spiritual forces are at work in the lives of people as far apart as Crete, Israel, Mexico, Scotland, and Vietnam. Spiritual forces of light and darkness are gathering in anticipation of conflict. What is on the surface just another mystery may involve bigger issues.

The book may be found on Amazon and most booksellers in pre-order. I do ask that those who like the book write a review and post on Amazon. It is also available at BookBaby’s Bookstore. The links are: Amazon.com or at Book Baby, the publisher.

I do hope my readers like the book.

In this blog, I want to share some ideas inspired by Polanyi about the cultural challenges we face as many scholars move away from higher ideals like truth, goodness, and beauty. Since the Enlightenment, many thinkers have embraced materialism. One key part of this view is the belief that there’s no higher source for faith or morals, and that neither exists independently. Instead, many see all value judgments as just human preferences. This focus on materialism also influences how modern science tends to analyze things—breaking them down into smaller parts, with the idea that you can keep reducing until you reach the tiniest units, such as fundamental particles in physics.

Interestingly, even though we’ve known for more than 100 years that this vision of reality is profoundly false, intellectuals remain captivated by the power of materialistic, reductionistic thinking. One of my favorite quotes is from the author and physicist Henry Sapp, puts it as follows:

 [We] are faced today with the spectacle of our society being built increasingly upon a conception of reality erected upon a mechanical conception of nature now known to be fundamentally false. … As a consequence of this widely disseminated misinformation, “well-informed” officials, administrators, legislators, judges, educators, and medical professionals who guide the development of our society are encouraged to shape our lives in ways predicated on known-to-be-false premises about “nature and nature’s laws.”[1]

Given the utter disrespect that Marxist ideology and many pragmatic capitalists have for intellectuals, it is surprising, and it surprised Polanyi, that intellectuals, and especially those in academia, actually supported regimes that hold them in utter disregard. This disregard is exemplified by Lenin’s apocryphal description of Western intellectuals as “useful idiots.” [2]

Basis for Disillusionment in Western Culture

We experience the same phenomenon today, where many in academia support Marxist ways of thinking or where certain intellectuals embrace the ideology of radical Islam and its critique of Western culture, even though they would be the first to be oppressed if radical Islam came to power in their nations. Polanyi saw this problem in Western intellectuals’ continued support for Soviet communism long after its economic foolishness and moral bankruptcy were abundantly obvious. Therefore, in Personal Knowledge, he attempted to both understand and illuminate the dynamic that caused this perversion of common sense.[3]

The technological and bureaucratic biases of modernity, along with its trust in human reason to rationally control the world, resonate with the beliefs of many thinkers who view human society’s issues through an idealistic lens. That’s why Marxism has continued to appeal to these individuals, as it offers an approach to problems that seems both morally grounded and practically effective, blending intellectual perspective with tangible solutions. In a bizarre way, the state’s control of all of life was attractive to many intellectuals, even though they would be among the first to be suppressed and co-opted by any such regime. [4]

Since the 19^th Century, the alienation of intellectuals and their institutions from what critics call “bourgeois culture” (i.e., modern industrial and mercantile culture in which business interests are dominant factors in social organization) has bred a kind of hostility among intellectuals toward any cultural organization or institution, including religion, that might be seen as supporting it. For these intellectuals, then and now, the ideals of freedom, democracy, and self-reliance are simply tools of domination that must be unmasked and destroyed in the search for the perfect society.[5]

Once again, this disaffection is exacerbated by the rootless moral aspirations of modern people who have no heaven or nirvana to look forward to. Therefore, whatever hope for a better life there is must be acted out and achieved in the material world as they experience it. The fact that his fundamentally eschatological ideal is unachievable and fantastic when combined with the lack of any firm moral grounding for political and social action, can and does lead to a kind of nihilistic totalitarian fervor that is both frightening and destructive.

This nihilistic moral fervor is vividly illustrated in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s powerful work, often translated as “The Demons” or “The Possessed.”[6] The novel depicts a small group of radicals, led by a charismatic intellectual, who spread chaos and destruction in a 19^th-century Russian town. The unrest we see in our cities today echoes these ideas, the leaders of the movements they spawn, and their tragic consequences, illustrated by the human suffering engendered by the Russian Revolution. This turmoil reflects a distortion of traditional values, in which revolutionary ideas such as nihilism, atheism, and radical socialism are glorified. We notice a loss of the virtues of faith, hope, and love, leaving human beings capable of great evil.

As one author put it, the book illustrates the “suicidal clownishness characteristic of late modernity since the French Revolution, an epoch in which convulsions of ideological insanity have periodically torn apart physical and political bodies across the globe. The United States has long avoided such fits, but it seems our hour has come round at last.”^[7]

Polanyi, though offering a different example, points out that one impact of the Enlightenment was the gradual weakening of the logical basis for many moral judgments found in Christianity and other traditional cultures. As the 19th century unfolded, and even more so in the 20th century, many, if not most, intellectuals and those influenced by them lost faith in the possibility of a traditional foundation for moral beliefs and fundamental human values. In fact, it’s now almost expected that intellectuals will adopt a skeptical attitude toward traditional moral views, seeing it as part of their journey.[8] The result is a kind of moral nihilism that eventually results in social decay and disorder.

The Vulnerability of Intellectuals

The loss of faith in traditional ideas like goodness and justice has made many modern thinkers more receptive to moral inversion. What began as a challenge to strict, possibly hyper-Protestant morals eventually led to a situation in which thinkers find it hard to make any moral judgment beyond personal or group preferences. Still, Polanyi believes that our core moral instincts are intact. Unfortunately, when people lack a clear foundation and a developed system for understanding morality and making decisions, it becomes difficult to tell right from wrong. As a result, there is a temptation to become deeply committed to immoral beliefs and to take immoral actions, all the while considering oneself morally upright.[9]

The result of this in Soviet Russia and in many other places is the emergence of a kind of self-righteous totalitarian violence:

A great surge of moral demands on social life, such as a rose at the end of the 18^th century and has since flooded the whole world, must seek in more forcible expression. When injected into a utilitarian framework, it transmutes itself and this framework. It turns into the fanatical force of a machinery of violence. This is how moral inversion is completed: man masked as a beast turned into a Minotaur.[10]

As modernity developed, and the ideals of a more humane social order became part of the intellectual heritage of not just intellectuals but the majority of society, there came an increasing demand for justice and equality.[11]Once again, as Polanyi eloquently puts it:

We must acknowledge that personal nihilism has served for a century, as an inspiration to literature and philosophy, both by itself, and by provoking a reaction to itself. A loathing of bourgeoisie society, a rebellious immoralism and despair, have been prevailing forms of great fiction, poetry, and philosophy on the continent of Europe since the middle of the 19^th century.[12]

Not surprisingly, intellectuals were most impacted by this phenomenon and the most likely to be disappointed when their moral aspirations were not met with either immediate approval or inevitable achievement. This in turn as resulted in kind of dissatisfaction of many intellectuals with the pace of change in society, which they consider backward, and even a hatred of existing social relations. This, in turn, causes a loss of faith in the fundamental ideals of a free society. In the end, this can and did in some cases result in approval of a form of despotism that promises the social achievements they endorse.[13]

This process involves connecting the unlimited moral demands of today’s thinkers with the potential to gain the power needed to pursue their seemingly impossible goals. According to Polanyi, when the false idea of objectivism is combined with human moral urges, it creates a kind of “dynamo-objective coupling.”[14] This means that so-called “scientific assertions” are often accepted because they falsely promise to satisfy people’s intense moral passions. In simple terms, the strong moral impulses can be misused when traditional morals are dismissed, and an objectivist justification is used to channel moral energy toward a specific cause. Unfortunately, the result is not the satisfaction of human beings’ moral impulses (which have been effectively neutralized by being cut off from their society’s moral tradition) but tyranny.

Spurious Moral Inversion

One indication of an inversion is when otherwise moral people begin to speak immorally. One example given by Polanyi is that a Sigmund Freud, who just before praising and honoring Romain Rolland for avoiding the false standards of those who seek power, success, and wealth, and who are motivated by the admiration of achievement by others, proceeds to state that all seemingly moral acts are mere actions of self-interest. Nothing could more clearly indicate what happens when intellectuals buy into a reductionist view of morality that they implicitly reject in their actions.[15]

In one of his most perceptive comments, Polanyi goes on to say:

A utilitarian interpretation of morality accuses all more sentiments of hypocrisy, while, the moral indignation which the writer thus expresses is safely disguised as a scientific statement. On other occasions, these concealed moral passions reassert themselves, affirming ethical ideals either backhandedly as a tightlipped praise of social dissenters, or else disguised in utilitarian terms.[16]

In the end, Polanyi believes this in many other examples illustrate the fundamental problem with contemporary moral discourse. Having reduced morality and ethical concerns either to utilitarian or emotional bases, the writers nevertheless must speak in more terms because morality actually does exist. Moral inversion, discloses, the fundamental moral character of people even where that reality has been twisted and is unrecognizable.

Overcoming Materialistic Reductionism

One reason I’ve spent so much time talking about Michael Polanyi and his work has to do with its importance for the maintenance and renewal of our free society. A free society cannot exist on the basis of radical individualism or radical social reorganization. Instead, a free society recognizes the independent reality of truth, beauty, goodness, justice, and other values. In addition, such as society recognizes that, motivated by the reality of their subject, a free society relies upon specialists or committed practitioners, who perpetuate traditions of the search for truth, beauty, justice, and other moral values. [17]Religious communities have an important role in such a society as they provide the transcendent ground for the independent operation of other groups.

The propensity for radical and dramatic action that we see on both the right and the left in contemporary society, Polanyi urges, careful, graded, intelligent, and thoughtful actions designed to create a more just society while at the same time, maintaining those freedoms upon which the society must rest. If a society refuses this tactic, it will experience constant conflict. That conflict, and the role of power in a free society, is the subject of the next blog.

Now, for anyone who has read this far, I want to announce that, in the next few weeks, the final novel in the Arthur Stone series, Leviathan and the Lambs, will be available on Amazon, at Barnes and Noble, and at the bookstore at Bookbaby, among other venues.

Copyright 2025, G. Christopher Scruggs, All Rights Reserved

[1] Henry F. Sapp, “Whitehead, James, and the Ontology of Quantum Theory” 5(1) Mind and Matter (2007) downloaded at https://wwwphysics.lbl.gov/~stapp/WJQO.pdf (June 16, 2020), 85. In this quote, Sapp is not speaking of the exact phenomena that I am concerned with here—the tendency to view all reality as a machine—but his quote is equally applicable to what I am saying in this essay. Sapp is concerned with the assumption of materialistic theory that our experience of human freedom and the efficacy of human thought is an illusion.

[2] The term “useful idiots,” usually attributed to Lenin, has entered the lexicon as a term for people who simply do not get it and are willing to be duped by totalitarians, tyrants, and various other characters. According to Lenin these “simpletons” were nominally socialists, but they were really accomplices to his enemies. In this context the term “simpletons” may be viewed as the ideological mirror-image of “useful idiots. See 1947, The Essentials of Lenin In Two Volumes by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, Volume 2 of 2, Chapter: The Tax in Kind, Free Trade and Concessions, Quote Page 722, Lawrence & Wishart, London.

[3] Michael Polanyi, Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1962, 1974), 235-239,

[4] Id, at 235.

[5] Id.

[6] Fyodor Dostoevsky, Demons, trans. Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (New York, NY: Vintage Books, 1994). There are many fine translations available. The book is published under various names. I prefer the translation “The Possessed” because it suggests the fundamental humanity of those led astray by nihilistic thinking.

[7] Jacob Howland, “Demons at 150” The New Criterion (March 2021) https://newcriterion.com/article/demons-at-150/ (Downloaded January 20, 206).

[8] Personal Knowledge, 234.

[9] Id.

[10] Id, 234-235.

[11] Id, 235.

[12] Id, 236.

[13] Id.

[14] Id, 233-5, 237.

[15] Id, 233.

[16] Id.

[17] Id, 244.