I believe the idea of a subjective worldview and its demands for absolute tolerance are fallacious and inoperable. You can’t build a subjective worldview on an objective principle that firmly asserts that there are no self-evident truths because you would fundamentally undermine your own position. And it is inoperable because it lacks the conviction, certainty, and courage to effect change in the face of conflict, cost, and consensual community opposition.
The subjective worldview creates the illusion of unrestrained liberty for every individual to conduct themselves according to their own impulses, and asserts that there is no objective standard to confront them in their position. Actionable community efforts require community consensus and will end in gridlock if a common community consensus cannot be reached. The promise of “tolerance” and “acceptance” becomes a burden on society as it struggles to reconcile irreconcilable worldview’s. The subjective worldview lacks a common and cohesive standard to provide clarity and direction to society and requires inconsistency and self-contradiction to function in real-world objective scenarios.
The objective worldview provides certain inalienable liberties to every individual according to an impartial common standard; it affords the conviction, certainty, and courage necessary to accomplish overwhelming feats of triumph in the face of opposition by the common consensus like those the early abolitionists accomplished because it affords a higher standard by which reality and life’s toughest questions can be measured. Tolerance and acceptance can flourish without becoming a burden on society where two worldview’s share enough common ground to exercise objective values of “respect” and “peaceful expression”, but without becoming the burden of “total tolerance” and “total acceptance” that strangle society as they do in a subjective worldview when two diametrically opposed worldviews meet
An objective worldview can make room for subjectivity within certain limits by supporting heuristic liberty and acknowledging the reality of mystery, whereas a subjective worldview can get lost in that same mystery and is plagued by its own virtue of unaccountability.
Both these worldview’s attempt to deal with how mankind responds to our need for moral standards. But at the heart of the subjective worldview is mankind’s desire NOT to be accountable to any higher authority for our actions- it is our desire to be our own sovereign standard and escape the higher judgments of God. Built into this worldview is a desire to circumvent the conflict and personal cost that comes with standing up for what is absolutely right so that we can live lives selfishly focused on our own pleasures.
But there is a terrible cost to a subjective worldview: it requires turning a blind eye to the “monsters” of our society and “making peace with Baal”. The result will be an overwhelming flood of depravity that no government could ever possibly restrain, no matter how oppressive, tyrannical, and invasive that government becomes. Every solution becomes its own burden in a subjective worldview because there are no absolute standards to restrain anything- even self-contradiction, the most extensively relied upon solution to the problems of subjective worldviews, eats away at itself as self-contradictions eventually plague the ideals that subjective worldviews set out to uphold!