Postmodernism UGH
Before even getting to page one, philosophy professor, Stephen Hicks, Ph.D. let his reader know his thesis: The failure of epistemology made postmodernism possible, and the failure of socialism made postmodernism necessary[1].
Knowing that, I anticipated the reading of this book to be a clear and flowing experience. It was anything but that. Philosophy has not been a subject of choice for me. It seems like people sharing their musings and human struggles then pronouncing them as truth or claiming there is no truth available. To help me make sense of this, I went to a couple of podcasts, a youtube video, the Webster Dictionary, and a few other sources. Somehow I thought if I could define everything it would make sense. Yet even though it did not satisfy my struggles, there were some pieces that seemed to help make sense of things.
There were three things that caused me to pause this week. The first was a connection I sensed with this book and The Hero With A Thousand Faces[2]. Like Joseph Campbell posited in the hero’s journey that was present in many of the religions of the world, philosophical thinkers found ways to explain away reason and theology. In a review of Hicks’ work, “Book Review: Explaining Postmodernism”, Anoop Verma, wrote that Hicks regarded Immanuel Kant as the main “culprit” regarding the anti-realist and anti-reason aspect of postmodernism[3].
I read in Hicks’ thesis that epistemology has failed to say that knowledge and reason have failed. To this I want to lean into what I find is prevalent in scripture regarding the importance of knowledge. The first that comes to mind are from two of the gospels. In the first four verses, Luke 1:1-4, explained that he, Luke, investigated details about Jesus’s life with those who were eyewitnesses so that those reading would KNOW the certainty of the gospel. Likewise, throughout the gospel of John, one of Jesus’ disciples, John’s gospel included miraculous things that Jesus did, demonstrating his divinity. Poignantly, though, Jesus says to the Jews who were listening to Him in John 8:31-32 “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free”. He was talking about them being slaves to satan’s deception, which they denied. But they did not know and follow Jesus.
All of this is to say that Christianity supports knowledge, especially when it is grounded in the truth of Jesus’ life, ministry, death, and resurrection. Psalm 46:1-3, 7, 10, that starts with all the turmoil going on , claims the Lord Almighty is with us and in verse 10 says, “Be Still and KNOW that I am God”. In stillness we come before the Lord God and deeply sense the truth of God’s presence. Philosophers might claim that I am naïve but if that what it means to believe in Jesus, then so be it.
I want to move to another section with this post by focusing on the essay at the conclusion of the book, “Free Speech and Postmodernism”. Hicks explained that postmodernists see speech as a weapon between two groups that are unequal in a conflict, with white men holding the power. The liberal view of speech is that it is a tool for learning and communication for individuals who are free[4]. While I believe there is historical truth that white men have enjoyed more access and power throughout history, I do not think the conclusion should be some form of censorship. Since the war between Israel and Hamas started, university campuses have been rife with people speaking out. This has resulted in faculty and presidents being terminated at a number of universities[5]. In a Harvard Magazine article titled, “Academic Freedom and Free Speech, Dr. Robert C. Post clarified the differences between academic freedom and freedom of speech. In a university setting the purpose of words are to gain understanding and to pursue knowledge. While in the pubic forum, ideas and words are shared to express opinions which is protected by freedom of speech[6]. This aligns with Hicks who then recognized that speech has also been used as a weapon in conflicts between groups[7]. So where am I in this mixed-up mess? I believe that freedom of speech is important, especially in universities where there is need to ponder and try out learning through words to gain knowledge and wisdom. However, I do think that there should be commonly accepted limits surrounding it. Speech that promotes hatred toward others based on their race, religion, or nationality breeds hatred and unrest. Freedom of speech regarding opinions, politics, and other general discussion or important topics should be unlimited unless they promote unlawful acts. Circling back to John 8, I believe Jesus was talking about this hatred when he talked to the Pharisees in the temple when he told them their father was the devil in Luke 8:44.
In conclusion, I believe that ultimately faith is about believing what is unseen. I lean on the truth of the scriptures and the knowledge through Jesus that faith in the triune God; Creator, Redeemer, and Sustainer is where ultimate freedom lies. I guess that means I am not embracing postmodernism, and I am fine with that.
[1] Stephen R.C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism, Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault (Orlando, FL: Ockham’s Razor Publishing, 2014), Contents page
[2] Joseph Campbell, The Hero With A Thousand Faces 3rd ed. (Novato: New World Library, 2008)
[3] Anoop Verma, “Book Review: Explaining Postmodernism, by Stephen Hicks”, The Savvy Street, June 11, 2016. https://www.thesavvystreet.com/book-review-explaining-postmodernism-by-stephen-hicks/
[4] Kicks, 237.
[5] Lincoln Caplan, “Academic Freedom and Free Speech”, Havard Magazine, September-October 2024. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2024/09/harvard-academic-freedom-free-speech.
[6] Caplan, 1.
[7] Hicks, 237.
About the Author
Diane Tuttle
12 responses to “Postmodernism UGH”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Diane,
Given Hicks’ critique and reliance on Enlightenment rationalism, what alternative approach would you propose for resisting postmodern relativism while staying faithful to biblical principles?
Hi Shela, You have a good question but I know my answer would not be acceptable to a postmodernist. The struggle is that if science was thrown out with knowledge, then how do you explain the advances that were reached through science. It reminds me of Year Zero in The War Against The Past. It can’t really be done unless those who are saying science, knowledge and much more are meaningless, are willing to live in an age that reverts to pre-elctricity, pre-phone, pre-television and all technology. The very fact that we enjoy things developed by science would be one of the aspects that I think shows that not all knowledge has failed. In this I don’t think it is in conflict with faith in God. Thanks for asking.
Hi Diane, I loved the final sentence of your post: ‘I guess that means I am not embracing postmodernism, and I am fine with that.’ I didn’t say it directly in my post, but I feel the exact same way.
Seeing what postmodernism produces—especially its use of language as a weapon—was deeply unsettling to me. There was a phrase in the book that stood out: persuasion in the absence of cognition. It made me wonder—has postmodernism impacted fundraising for you, particularly in terms of donors expecting certain affirmations of postmodern ideas?
No worries if this isn’t the space to answer that question; I was just thinking about how challenging that must be to navigate, especially given the many people the organization is responsible for.
Hi Elysse, Your question isn’t really difficult to answer privately or publicly. When we are raising money all our discussions are based on the needs of the people we are serving and the impact it has for them and their families. We intentionally stay clear of other topics. With that, over the years we have had people serving on our board who are far right or far left at the same time. Yet they all agree that when we come together it is for a common purpose to care for the needs of the people who need a lot of extra help just to complete the basic functions of living. It really has enhanced my faith in good people. Thanks for asking.
Diane, you state, “Christianity supports knowledge, especially when it is grounded in the truth of Jesus’ life, ministry, death, and resurrection. ” Given your emphasis on the biblical affirmation of knowable truth, how do you think Christians today can navigate conversations in academic or cultural spaces heavily influenced by postmodern skepticism—especially when balancing the pursuit of knowledge with the call to faith in the unseen?
Hi Chad, I think questioning things has value. My struggle with postmodernism isn’t the questioning, it was that there is no truth. In my reply to Chad I addressed a simple example the upshot of it was that sometimes there are physical realities of being human that take over regardless if we believe it or not. Ultimately, faith is a gift and a choice. Someone can choose to believe that the knowledge that the Bible speaks to is real or not.
Regardless of how someone’s beliefs may differ from mine, I think the best way to navigate conversations is to be respectful and listen to what someone thinks/says and be willing to politely share a different perspective. I think demeanor and approach make a big difference between dialogue and a rant. Thanks for the question.
Diane,
I also struggled to get through this book. Philosophy is really interesting to me and I think that it is actually fairly important but I still can’t grasp it well and so many of the terms still do not come natural to me. I love your last sentence. You grew up in a different generation and I wonder if you have seen some positive aspects of post-modernism?
Hi Adam, that’s a good question and yes, I did grow up in a different generation, but I was surprised to read that Hicks puts the start of postmodernism in the early 1960 which is definitely before my adulting was even imagined. It wasn’t until a few years ago that I first heard of postmodernity. To answer your question – I questioning things and assessing if something is true or right for a particular setting is valuable. I struggle with the concept that there is no truth except in what people want it to be. I can say I don’t think it is true that I need to drink water so I won’t. Well it’s true, I don’t need to drink water if I am okay with dying because that’s what will happen. This example my be too simplistic, but what I say I believe doesn’t really matter sometimes. There is a physical reality that ultimately comes forth.
Hey Diane! Philosophers can question but you have the answer in Jesus. I love it! I also had a question about the failure of epistemology because of knowledge and reason. From your perspective, how do you argue against that position?
Hi Daren, I think my response to Shela could also be pertinent to your question. I went to scientific knowledge where because of it we are able to enjoy a lot of technology, health and understanding of our world that couldn’t have happened if knowledge failed completely. Sure – some knowledge fails. We aren’t God. Thanks for the question.
Hi, Diane, thank you for your post. I was struggling with this reading, so I decided to see what others say about postmodernism. Thank you for all that you have shared, especially the last part of your conclusion, may I also borrow your lines, “I guess that means I am not embracing postmodernism, and I am fine with that.”
Thank you again, Diane.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and observations on this challenging text Diane.
You don’t have to answer because I’m delinquent, but in considering your final points about faith and the unseen, I’m wondering in what ways faith can coexist with a critical examination of knowledge and reality.