T

Chapter 3
Our New Challenge:
Postmodernism

Discussion Guide

Be sure group members have read the chapter.

In this chapter we consider how postmodernism offers a response to modernist assumptions. Review the chart on page 21 focusing on the middle column, labeled "postmodernism."

Perhaps its best to think of postmodernism as the death of truth. Consider the statements below, taken at random from a series of recent interviews at a major university. The interviewer asked, "Is there such a thing as absolute truth?" Students answered:

"Truth is whatever you believe."

"No, there is no absolute truth, and if there was, how would we know what it is?"

"People who believe in absolute truth are dangerous."

• Have you encountered comments like this from your non-Christian friends?
• What barriers might such views create to evangelism?

To understand why people think this way, we need to understand the postmodern shift in thought. A key underlying assumption of postmodernism is how they conceive human nature. While modernists viewed people as autonomous (and capable of independent rational thought), postmodernists see human identity and thinking as the product of culture. Leffel states, "postmodernists deny we have a "self" that exists independent of our social reality. Culture and society create individuals as well as all their thoughts and attitudes." The following quote is by Peter Berger, whose analysis is often cited by postmodernists:

"A thought of any kind is grounded in society . . . The individual, then, derives his world view socially in very much the same way that he derives his roles and his identity. In other words, his emotions and his self-interpretation like his actions are predefined for him by society, and so is his cognitive approach to the universe that surrounds him."

• If "a thought of any kind is grounded in society," certain important implications follow. These implications are widely accepted in today's postmodern influenced social sciences and in popular cultural. What are these implications?
• Leffel says, "one of the main ways society shapes individuals is through language." This is probably the most abstract and difficult parts of the postmodern argument. Postmodernists point out that individuals always interact with reality through the medium of language. All mental activities, they say, are based in language. We think in words. We communicate with words. People are connected to reality through the labels they assign to their perceptions and ideas. These labels, or words, are arbitrary, and evolve in society. The more abstract (and often more important) our ideas are, the more dependent we are on words alone to provide meaning. But if language is the way people relate to reality, then we must understand the nature of language.

Let's think about the components of language that postmodernists say makes objectivity impossible:

• Semantics--the meaning of words and phrases. Postmodernists say that, since societies define words, and our thinking is rooted in language, we can't go beyond a culturally relative way of knowing. Knowledge claims themselves are just a matter of cultural conditioning. Can you think of any evidence that knowledge is not necessarily limited to a given culture?
• Syntax--the structure or logic of language. Postmodernists say that every language has a structure, or logic. Words are related to each other by connective words such as "if/ then," "and," "either/or" and so on. Postmodernists say that the linguistic constructions for the West promote a hierarchical, "either/or" way of thinking. The language of science, logic, and progress shape the way we think. That's why we don't think holistically and inclusively. Have you heard this kind of idea before? Where?
• Do you think there is a link between the postmodern view of language and the demands of "political correctness"?
• Do you think there are broader implications to the postmodern view that language shapes thought?
• Do you think language controls what you think?

Problems with postmodern analysis:

Postmodernists rightly critique the modernists' overconfidence in autonomous human reason. However, Leffel argues that they've thrown out the baby with the bath water.

• They critique the correspondence view of truth. Postmodernists hold that all knowledge claims are arbitrary, and that none are ultimately more objective than another because we lack certainty. On a practical level, what's wrong with this critique?
• Imagine this discussion:
  "There is no such thing as truth"
  "Really, is that true?"
  "Yes it is"
  "Well if that's true than there's at least one true thing--your statement! So that means it's not true that there's no such thing as truth."
  "But my statement is that there is no such thing as truth."
  "Okay, but then your statement isn't true, is it?"
  
  This conversation sounds absurd, and it is. Is the dialog between Christians and postmodernists the same or different than this discussion
• Postmodernists say all thought and reason is shaped by language. But as Leffel points out, this is inconsistent with some things we know about psychological development and the development of language. Leffel cites authorities who show that the mind is active and makes clear rational distinctions prior to the acquisition of language. How do these findings impact that postmodern view of linguistic cultural determinism?

Facilitator's Guide to Our New Challenge: Postmodernism

Be sure group members have read the chapter. This is the hardest chapter in the book, so be prepared for some confusion from members.

In this chapter we consider how postmodernism offers a response to modernist assumptions. Review the chart on page 21 focusing on the middle column, labeled "postmodernism."

Perhaps its best to think of postmodernism as the death of truth. Consider the statements below, taken at random from a series of recent interviews at a major university.

"Truth is whatever you believe." "No, there is no absolute truth, and if there was, how would we know what it is? . . . People who believe in absolute truth are dangerous."

• Have you encountered comments like this from your non-Christian friends?
• What barriers might such views create to evangelism?

To understand why people think this way, we need to understand the postmodern shift in thought. A key underlying assumption of postmodernism is how they conceive human nature. While modernists viewed people as autonomous (and capable of independent rational thought), postmodernists see human identity and thinking as the product of culture. Leffel states, "postmodernists deny we have a "self" that exists independent of our social reality. Culture and society create individuals as well as all their thoughts and attitudes." The following quote is by Peter Berger, whose analysis is often cited by postmodernists:

"A thought of any kind is grounded in society . . . The individual, then, derives his world view socially in very much the same way that he derives his roles and his identity. In other words, his emotions and his self-interpretation like his actions are predefined for him by society, and so is his cognitive approach to the universe that surrounds him."

• If "a thought of any kind is grounded in society," certain important implications follow. These implications are widely accepted in today's postmodern influenced social sciences and in popular cultural. What are these implications?

- Possible answers:

- Cultural relativism--the view that each culture has it's own truths that are relevant to them, but not relevant to other cultures. Consequently, it's inappropriate to judge the actions of other cultures.

- Postmodern rejection of personal autonomy leads to a view of people reminiscent of the modernist who contended that humans are impersonal biological machines. What kind of impact might this have on areas like medical ethics?

- Culture provides and interpretative grid on perceptions that makes the modernist idea of rational objectivity impossible. When people think they are being rational, they are really just living out their western cultural bias.

• Leffel says, "one of the main ways society shapes individuals is through language." This is probably the most abstract and difficult parts of the postmodern argument. Postmodernists point out that individuals always interact with reality through the medium of language. All mental activities, they say, are based in language. We think in words. We communicate with words. People are connected to reality through the labels they assign to their perceptions and ideas. These labels, or words, are arbitrary, and evolve in society. The more abstract (and often more important) our ideas are, the more dependent we are on words alone to provide meaning. But if language is the way people relate to reality, then we must understand the nature of language.

Let's think about the components of language that postmodernists say makes objectivity impossible:

• Semantics--the meaning of words and phrases. Postmodernists say that, since societies define words, and our thinking is rooted in language, we can't go beyond a culturally relative way of knowing. Knowledge claims themselves are just a matter of cultural conditioning. Can you think of any evidence that knowledge is not necessarily limited to a given culture?
  

- How do some members of a given culture come up with new ideas not found in their culture?

- How do foreign missions ever succeed?

• Syntax--the structure or logic of language. Postmodernists say that every language has a structure, or logic. Words are related to each other by connective words such as "if/ then," "and," "either/or" and so on. Postmodernists say that the linguistic constructions for the West promote a hierarchical, "either/or" way of thinking. The language of science, logic, and progress shape the way we think. That's why we don't think holistically and inclusively. Have you heard this kind of idea before? Where?
  
• Do you think there is a link between the postmodern view of language and the demands of "political correctness"?

- Possible answers:

- The movement to make language "gender neutral" is one example of the linkage between postmodern views of language and postmodern political activism.

- By attempting to restructure language, people will loose their "patriarchal" prejudices. What do you think of this? What implications do you see?

• Do you think there are broader implications to the postmodern view that language shapes thought?

- Some implications are: All "truths" are merely linguistic constructs. We are trapped in the "prison house of language." What we believe doesn't have any real connection to reality--we simply think in the framework of our language. We can't check the map against the territory.

• Do you think language controls what you think?

Problems with postmodern analysis:

Postmodernists rightly critique the modernists' overconfidence in autonomous human reason. However, Leffel argues that they've thrown out the baby with the bath water.

• They critique the correspondence view of truth. Postmodernists hold that all knowledge claims are arbitrary, and that none are ultimately more objective than another because we lack certainty. On a practical level, what's wrong with this critique?

- Possible answers:

- Remember the point that all cultures use scientific modes of reasoning, even the so-called primitive cultures. How does this respond to the postmodern view that "scientific reasoning" is a Western cultural paradigm?

- Isn't the postmodern view based on reason, or at least put itself forth as an objectively true theory? Since this is so, it seems that the denial of reason and truth is self defeating:

• Imagine this discussion:
  "There is no such thing as truth"
  "Really, is that true?"
  "Yes it is"
  "Well if that's true than there's at least one true thing--your statement! So that means it's not true that there's no such thing as truth."
  "But my statement is that there is no such thing as truth."
  "Okay, but then your statement isn't true, is it?"
• This conversation sounds absurd, and it is. Is the dialog between Christians and postmodernists the same or different than this discussion
• Postmodernists say all thought and reason is shaped by language. But as Leffel points out, this is inconsistent with some things we know about psychological development and the development of language. Leffel cites authorities who show that the mind is active and makes clear rational distinctions prior to the acquisition of language. How do these findings impact that postmodern view of linguistic cultural determinism?

- These findings directly refute the postmodern notion that all thought is based on language. While language may have an influence on how we think, we have evidence that the relationship of reason to language is different than how postmodernists say it is. In McIntyre's words, "words are a sort of a handle on concepts" that we have already come to know independent of language.

Read on to the next section of the Study Guide

Return to the Table of Contents page

Send a comment to Dennis

Return to the Download Options page

Return to the Death of Truth page

Return to the Crossroads Project

Return to the Xenos home page