About NAMB Contact NAMB
By Paul Copan
In one of his dialogues, Plato cited the thinker Protagoras as saying that
any given thing "is to me such as it appears to me, and is to you such as it
appears to you."1 This sounds rather contemporary. We hear slogans
declaring "that's true for you but not for me" or "that's just your
perspective." These statements reflect the postmodern mood that continues to
affect and shape Western culture.
How did postmodernism descend upon our civilization? What is postmodernism?
What are its defining characteristics? We will look very briefly at these
1. How did postmodernism emerge? Obviously, the term
postmodernism presupposes an era that preceded it—modernism. But we
must also understand what modernism was reacting to—namely,
Premodernism: Before the 1600s, people in the West generally
believed that God (or the transcendent/supernatural realm) furnished the basis
for moral absolutes, rationality, human dignity, and truth. This is expressed
by the noted Christian theologian Anselm (b. AD 1033), who said, "I believe
that I may understand" (credo ut intelligam) he spoke of a "faith
seeking understanding" (fides quaerens intellectum). That is, the
starting point for knowledge and wisdom was God, who provided the lens
through which one could properly interpret reality and human experience. By
having faith in God, the world could be rightly understood.
Modernism: Then came philosopher René Descartes (1596-1650). As a
Roman Catholic, he was troubled by the philosophical skepticism and (due to the
Protestant Reformation) the theological uncertainty of his day. So he embarked
on a "skeptical voyage" in the pursuit of absolutely certain knowledge. As part
of his project, he determined to doubt everything: Maybe an evil genius was
tinkering with his mind - or maybe everything is an illusion. But he concluded
that at least he knew he was doubting, which is a form of thinking. He
concluded: I think; therefore I am (or, in Latin, cogito,
ergo sum). So without realizing it, Descartes' project removed God
from center stage, replacing it with the human knower as the starting point.
The effect would be momentous. The rationalism of the European Enlightenment
(c. 1650-1800) reflected this shift. This period was both optimistic about
human potential and reason, but was also skeptical about church authority/state
churches and Christian doctrine ("dogma").
This was just one of many modernist projects that assumed that human
dignity, truth, and reason could be preserved without God. Besides
rationalism (with its emphasis on reason), there were Romanticism (with the
emphasis on feeling), Marxism, Nazism, and other utopian schemes that sought to
displace God as the starting point for understanding and living. The
Jewish-Christian worldview that had deeply influenced the West was now being
Postmodernism: Then, in the wake of two World Wars, a postmodern
climate started to permeate the West. Confidence in human progress and autonomy
was shattered on the rocks of Auschwitz and the Soviet gulags. The systems or
"grand stories" ("metanarratives") of Nazism, Marxism, scientism, or
rationalism ended up oppressing "the other"—that is, those marginalized by
these systems such as Jews, capitalists, etc. These systems proved to be total
failures. So with postmodernism, not only was God excluded as a
foundation for making sense of reality and human experience; we cannot speak of
any universal truth, reason, or morality. We just have fragmented
If the French Revolution and the storming of the Bastille in Paris (1789)
stands as a picture of the shift to modernism, the fall of the Berlin Wall
exactly 200 years later (1989) symbolizes the failure of modernism and rise of
Premodernism (up to
Postmodernism (1960s -
Fall of the Berlin Wall
2. What is postmodernism? French postmodernist
Jean-François Lyotard famously claimed modernism's end symbolized by Auschwitz,
asking, "Where, after the metanarratives, can legitimacy reside?" What is
postmodernism then? "Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as
incredulity toward metanarratives."2 That is, postmodernism is
deeply skeptical about (or suspicious of) big explanatory systems or stories.
It is also critical of any view that claims to be neutral, unbiased, or
rational. Christian philosopher Merold Westphal observes that modernism was
characterized by the quest for (a) absolute certainty (think of Descartes) and
(b) totalism - that all-embracing system
("metanarrative").3 Modernists attempted to create
"grand stories"-without reference to God-to ground human dignity, freedom,
morality, and progress.
While modernism sought totalizing systems and absolute certainty,
postmodernism now calls them into question in a two-fold manner. To counter
totalism, postmodernism asserts that our interests and desires often use
"reason" to promote their fulfillment; "truth" is simply whatever promotes my
(or my group's) will or interests. There is a "political agenda" in
whatever we claim to be true. Knowledge is not neutral. (This observation
utilizes the "hermeneutics of suspicion.") In response to the unbiased
certainty, postmodernism emphasizes that our ideas and judgments are embedded
within a historical-cultural context; so we can never fully remove ourselves
from it by pure reflection. (This has been called the "hermeneutic of
3. What are some characteristics of postmodernism? We can
only take a glance at some of the chief characteristics of postmodern
Anti-dualistic: Postmoderns assert that Western philosophy created dualisms
(true/false, right/wrong) and thus excluded certain perspectives from
consideration. On the other hand, postmodernism values and promotes pluralism
and diversity (rather than black vs. white, West vs. East, male vs. female). It
claims to seek the interests of "the other" - those marginalized and oppressed
by modernist ideologies and the political/social structures that support
Questioning texts: Postmoderns also maintain that texts—historical,
literary, or otherwise—have no inherent authority or objectivity in revealing
the author's intent, nor can they tell us "what really happened." Rather, these
texts reflect the peculiarities of the writer's particular bias, culture, and
era. Australian historian Keith Windschuttle has noted that for the past 2400
years, critics assumed that truth was still within the historian's grasp, but
"the newly dominant theorists within the humanities and social sciences assert
that it is impossible to tell the truth about the past or to use history to
produce knowledge in any objective sense at all."5
The linguistic turn: Postmodernism argues that language shapes our
thinking and that there can be no thought without language. So language
literally creates truth. As Richard Rorty argues, "Where there are no sentences
there is no truth."6 So truth is created rather than discovered.
Thus, as Friedrich Nietzsche argued, "There are no eternal facts, just as there
are no absolute truths."7
Truth as perspectival: Furthermore, truth is a matter of
perspective or context rather than being something universal. We do not
have access to reality —to the way things are—but only to what appears to us.
Since we cannot remove ourselves from our context to have a "God's-eye view" of
things, we must acknowledge that our thinking is shaped by forces beyond our
control. We are like Truman Burbank in The Truman Show. He is the unknowing
star of a production in a sheltered environment ("Seahaven"), where 5,000
cameras monitor his every move; everyone but Truman is acting. Likewise, we
simply find ourselves thrown into a context with no way of getting outside
Of course, we can be grateful for the postmodern critique of modernism in
many ways. Much within postmodernism raises important questions regarding
genuine human limitations or bias and the problematic position that one should
only believe what is absolutely certain. But much within postmodernism raises
many troubling questions and deep contradictions: How can someone deny
universal truth without affirming it in some way ("It's universally
true that there is no truth")? Would it not be a universal fact that
there are not any universal facts? Is it not the claim that "it's all a matter
of perspective" asserting more than someone's perspective? Do not
those who question whether we can know an author's intentions write to express
their own particular intentions? And is it not the rejection of
metanarratives/grand stories a kind of metanarrative itself?
In another essay, we will look at some of these issues-pro and con. There we
will assess "What's Wrong (and Right) With Postmodernism?"
1 Plato, Theaetetus, p. 152a.
2 Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, trans. Geoff
Bennington and Brian Massumi (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,
1984), pp. xxv, xxiv.
3 Merold Westphal, "Postmodernism and Religious Reflection,"
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 38 (1995), p.
4 Merold Westphal, Interview with Gary J. Percesepe,
"Appropriating the Atheists," Books & Culture (May/June 1997), p. 24.
5 Keith Windshuttle, The Killing of History (New York:
Free Press, 1996), pp. 1, 2.
6 Richard Rorty, Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 5.
7 Friedrich, Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1986), p. 13.
Paul Copan is on faculty at Palm Beach Atlantic University, West Palm Beach,
A Southern Baptist Convention entity supported by the Cooperative Program and AnnieArmstrong Easter Offering® ©Copyright 2015 North American Mission Board, SBC