Now let us suppose that the same thief takes $100 from a very wealthy man, and takes $1.00 from a very poor man.

It will also be quite natural in this case to take the position that the theft of $1.00 from the very poor man is a far more serious and harmful act than the taking of $100 from the wealthy man.  After all, the wealthy man has far more money than he needs, and will likely not even miss the $100!

Here again however, there can be no doubt that EACH act of trespassing a property boundary in definance of the will of the owner was IN FACT an immoral act, regardless of how we may choose or decide to rate it on our own personal value scales.

In the study of liberty, we are thus confronted with a double necessity.

It is critically important that we recognize the existence of a moral law or principle, where the human reaction to its violation is consistent and predictable.

It is also necessary and important that we develop a scale of values that recognizes such a moral law, so that we voluntarily take on the obligation to never, under any circumstances, willfully or knowingly subtract from the sum total of human well-being.

At such a point, we will have put objective reality and our subjective value judgement into harmony.  We will then be dealing with knowledge.

Remember, denying an objective truth is nothing more than a distortion of realty.  Thinking or believing something does not of itself make anything true.