 |
|
|
"Yet the apostle John describes a reality that has only recently come into focus: global banking, laser scanning, and the universal bar code. . .Again, what better descriptive term could John have found in the ancient world than "the mark," which would enable every citizen to buy or sell who had it?"
-- Tal Brooke
|
|
| |
News: The Origins of Postmodernism
Posted on Tuesday, April 03 @ 08:52:45 PDT by John Evans |
|
By James Arlandson
Does postmodernism spring out of the head of Zeus unconceived or misconceived? Or does it carry a heavy debt on its back to earlier movements and trends? This article, Part Two in the series on Postmodernism and the Bible, explores the roots of postmodernism, even though the large movement plays with origins.
This article supports my claim that postmodernism is a transmogrification of the hyper-skepticism begun in the Enlightenment and given a huge impetus by such influential thinkers as Nietzsche and Freud, to name only two. (Part One explains in the section "Prefixation" why I attach the prefix "hyper.") The nineteenth and the twentieth centuries, going past WWII and into the 1960s, can be characterized as undergoing shaking and instability of the old ways of thinking and developing politics and the economy and expressing the arts. Considering the limitations of one article, we can only look at this broad and deep topic superficially. But at least we will have a general idea.
By way of review of Part One, recall that "transmogrification" means a "great" change or alteration, "often with grotesque or humorous effect." I would take out "great" in that definition and put in "small," in most cases. Anyone who has studied modernism in the fine arts and architecture and literature knows how deeply postmodernism is indebted to modernism-hence the prefix "post" or "after."
The Enlightenment (c. 1600-1800+) shook Western civilization down to its foundation. Taking their cue from ancient Greek skeptics, philosophers like Descartes (1596-1650), Hume (1711-1776), and Kant (1724-1804), advanced skepticism beyond all historical bounds, hence the prefix "hyper."
Click here to read the entire article
|
| |
|
^^Go to Top -  E-mail to Friend -  Print -  View PDF -  Subscribe -  Comments RSS
Re: The Origins of Postmodernism (Score: 1)
 by MichaelB on Tuesday, April 03 @ 12:49:19 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | "Hume also challenges our ability to know with certainty"
Is Hume certain of his conclusions. If he is then case closed. If he is not then why listen to him?
BAHNSEN / HUME / KANT
The late Dr. Greg Bahnsen was the scholar in residence at the Southern California Center for Christians studies where he taught Apologetics from a distinctly Reformed perspective. Dr. Bahnsen following the lead of his mentor Cornelius Van Til and reasoned that apart from the Christian faith the unbeliever can really know nothing at all. The apologetic used by Dr. Bahnsen sought to force the anti-theist to acknowledge the fact that he must consistently borrow capital from the Christian worldview in order to make sense of his life. Dr. Bahnsen cites David Hume's skepticism of traditional arguments for God's existence as the springboard by which the Transcendental Argument for God was born. Hume denied that inferences from induction could be rationally justified which in turn spurred another philosopher, Immanuel Kant to rebut Hume's skepticism. While not a Kantian, Dr. Bahnsen argues that the anti-theist must presuppose the Christian God in order to make sense of the principal of induction.
Many times the atheist will attempt to disprove Christianity by appealing to the laws of logic, which most philosophers agree to be universal (this means that these laws apply to all people, regardless of socioeconomic or cultural considerations). Therefore, Dr. Bahnsen argued, the atheist has to presuppose the Christian worldview in order to make sense of his/her life, claiming that appealing to universal laws only makes sense within this worldview, because the Christian begins with belief in a universal, immaterial spirit: i.e. God.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Tuesday, April 03 @ 13:10:14 PDT
- by MichaelB on Tuesday, April 03 @ 13:33:29 PDT
- by MichaelB on Tuesday, April 03 @ 13:35:49 PDT
- by Virgil on Tuesday, April 03 @ 13:36:41 PDT
- by MichaelB on Tuesday, April 03 @ 14:00:52 PDT
- by Sam on Wednesday, April 04 @ 11:01:44 PDT
- by tom-g on Friday, April 06 @ 10:41:57 PDT
- by tom-g on Friday, April 06 @ 10:47:49 PDT
Re: The Origins of Postmodernism (Score: 1)
by Islamaphobe on Wednesday, April 04 @ 07:46:28 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | It is easy to denounce postmodernism as a great evil because it has undermined traditional Christian belief. Unfortunately, because of errors in biblical interpretation that have distorted our understanding of the Bible, traditional Christian belief MUST be challenged if Christianity is to gain its proper place in today's world. Arlandson is obviously very worried about the influence of postmodernism upon our understanding of the Bible, and he is right to be concerned. Those of us in the preterist movement (broadly speaking) have a heavy obligation, I believe, to do our utmost to win the battle of the Bible. IMO, postmodernism has brought with it much that is evil, but it also opens the way for a sounder understanding of what the Bible actually tells us.
Arlandson worries that "the heavy and excessive skepticism that masquerades as postmodernism makes the one Book that has influenced Western culture (and other cultures) . . . unstable and unsecured, cut loose from the anchor of plain meaning," and he asks, "Do we want to lose this fountain of wisdom called the Bible?" Unfortunately, the Bible has been "cut loose from the anchor of plain meaning" by people who have mistakenly believed they had a corner on that "plain meaning" and have mixed that "plain meaning" with their own flights of fancy. We now have the opportunity to get back to earth.
|
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by Virgil on Wednesday, April 04 @ 08:18:17 PDT
- by Islamaphobe on Wednesday, April 04 @ 09:53:26 PDT
Re: The Origins of Postmodernism (Score: 1)
 by Mick on Wednesday, April 04 @ 12:24:35 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I think in general this is a great review article of how we got to where we are. (As someone who was a "gear-head" and now a physician I have made no serious study of the history of philosophy.)
One of the problems I have is these views seem to suggest we have nothing to learn form the past. In the past humanity had some "truth" even if it was not all "truth." We need to embrace those things which were "truth" from previous knowledge. Each "truth does not need to be re-discovered for every generation. It is appropriate for "truths" to be questioned but it is not appropriate for us to assume that just because it was a "truth" in generations in the past that it must be false. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
Re: The Origins of Postmodernism (Score: 1)
by Missina on Thursday, April 05 @ 02:14:01 PDT
(User Info | Send a Message) | I highly enjoyed this article. Thanks for posting it.
I'm so curious to see how far we as humans are going to take this. With every blow we've historically received to making more and more skeptics of truth, fact, and existence, we continue to lose meaning and purpose in who we are and in this life. Quite frankly, we aren't designed to fair very well under that regime, and eventually, I think we're going to see this world come to a complete turn around when we start to realize the utter chaos this line of thinking is going to end up creating politically, socially, economically, personally, etc. There's going to come a point where this system doesn't work either, just as the ones of the past have continued to fail us.
Unfortunately, the concern is how long that is going to take us to get there, and at what cost. This article was brief and general, but look at the list of people who died because of our incorrect understanding of how to relate to this world and to others around us. I would imagine that when the "nothing is true; nothing is real" philosophy "destroys" us, we're going to be craving something solid, reliable, and true to turn to. And where do we need to be as a Church when that happens? Where should we be cautious about exploring postmodernism while living right in the midst of it, not really knowing anything different? And as preterists, where do we need to stand up and meet people with the message of the Kingdom in the here and now, this spiritual reality so much greater than our earthly systems and mindsets that have seemingly done nothing for us only to be overthrown centuries later? Even this rejection of truth is still an earnest search for it.
I understand the concern of this article for how the Bible is taking a hit because of postmodernism, and I understand the dichotomy of both the negative and positive effects this has within Christianity itself. But if we believe in truth and that the Spirit will lead fully lead us into it, then we need to be confident and looking toward the future of where this is going to place us in response when postmodernism fails. Where has the Church been when other viewpoints have failed? Can we learn from that, both good and bad?
Just a few thoughts.. |
[ To reply to this, please login or register ]
- by tom-g on Friday, April 06 @ 11:25:54 PDT
- by Virgil on Friday, April 06 @ 13:06:59 PDT
- by tom-g on Saturday, April 07 @ 14:20:45 PDT
- by tom-g on Sunday, April 08 @ 08:05:06 PDT
| 
|
