Meaning: The quote by Phillip Johnson addresses the concept of modernist naturalism and its implications on the understanding of truth, morality, and power. Modernist naturalism refers to the philosophical perspective that emphasizes the primacy of scientific knowledge and the natural world. According to this worldview, the only valid form of truth is that which can be empirically verified through scientific methods. This stance leads to the rejection of any transcendent or metaphysical truths and a focus solely on the observable and measurable aspects of reality.

Johnson's statement raises a significant concern about the consequences of embracing modernist naturalism as the sole arbiter of truth. He posits that if modernist naturalism were indeed true, it would imply the absence of any objective truth outside of the realm of science. This assertion challenges the idea that there could be truths that transcend empirical observation and scientific experimentation. In essence, it suggests that the only truths that would hold sway would be those that can be quantified and validated through scientific inquiry.

Moreover, Johnson highlights the potential ethical and societal ramifications of such a worldview. He suggests that in a world governed solely by modernist naturalism, moral values such as right and wrong would be reduced to matters of cultural preference or political power. This implies that ethical principles and moral standards would be contingent upon subjective human constructs rather than being grounded in any absolute or universal truths. Consequently, the moral landscape would be subject to the whims of different cultures or the dominance of particular political ideologies.

Furthermore, Johnson underscores the concern that modernist naturalism, if unchallenged, could lead to an overwhelming concentration of power in the hands of those who subscribe to such ideologies. By dismissing any form of truth that transcends scientific observation, modernist naturalism could potentially grant unchecked authority to those who hold the reins of scientific knowledge and technological advancement. This concentration of power could have far-reaching implications for society, governance, and the distribution of resources and opportunities.

In essence, Johnson's quote serves as a thought-provoking critique of the potential consequences of embracing modernist naturalism as the ultimate framework for understanding truth and morality. It calls into question the implications of reducing truth to purely scientific terms and the impact such a reduction would have on ethical discourse and the distribution of power in society.

In conclusion, Phillip Johnson's quote encapsulates a critical examination of the implications of modernist naturalism on truth, morality, and power. By challenging the potential consequences of a worldview that privileges scientific knowledge above all else, Johnson's statement prompts reflection on the broader societal and ethical implications of embracing such a perspective. It serves as a reminder of the complexities inherent in the pursuit of truth and the importance of considering diverse philosophical perspectives in shaping our understanding of reality and our moral responsibilities.