You are not impartial. It is not the daylight of men.

Though he doesn’t spend an entire chapter on the illusion of objectivity (like N.T. Wright does), Chesterton certainly brings it up right off the bat:

…it is a stark hypocrisy to pretend that nine-tenths of the higher critics and scientific evolutionists and professors of comparative religion are in the least impartial. Why should they be impartial, what is being impartial, when the whole world is at war about whether one thing is a devouring superstition or a divine hope?

How come this always has to be bought up? Because Man (that’s us) is SO quick to take the high ground and imagine himself as being the first to see things clearly from a stepped-back position of objectivity and clarity. Over and over again we do this and often even have the gall to advertise how good a job we’re doing at it, touting the purity of our scientific method or journalism. It is us wanting to be gods. It spits in the face of humility. It’s such a temptation, it wouldn’t hurt to have it mentioned in the preface of EVERY book.

They are not impartial; they never by any chance hold the historical scales even; and above all they are never impartial upon this point of evolution and transition. They suggest everywhere the grey gradations of twilight, because they believe it is the twilight of the gods. I propose to maintain that whether or no it is the twilight of gods, it is not the daylight of men.

-G.K. Chesterton, The Everlasting Man, p.8