Decoding Postmodernism: A Beginner’s Dive into Hicks’ Exploration
The concepts outlined in Stephen R. C. Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault[1], are new to me. In my formal studies and independent reading I hadn’t explored ideas our postmodernism, modernism, the enlightenment era and the like. In fact, the closest I had ever gotten to it was through playing the Civilization turn-based strategy game that allows you to “research” civics. Researching specific civics take you into the modern and enlightenment era, for example.
So you, like me, are new to this, then this blog post might serve useful to you as we learn together.
First published in 2004, Hicks examines the origins and development of postmodernism, tracing its roots from the Enlightenment period through to its influence on contemporary thought. He discusses the philosophical skepticism that began with Rousseau and Kant, leading up to the postmodernism associated with figures like Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida.
Hicks argues that postmodernism is deeply skeptical of the Enlightenment’s[2] emphasis on reason, science, and the pursuit of objective truth. Instead, postmodernists assert that knowledge and truth are socially constructed, contingent on historical and cultural contexts. Hicks connects this philosophical skepticism to political implications, particularly the critique of liberalism and capitalism, and the defense of socialism and collectivist ideologies.
One of my colleagues at work is a philosophy graduate and I asked him to explain this to me like I was five. Here’s what he said:
“Imagine you and your friends are playing with a big box of colorful building blocks. The rules of how to build with these blocks were made up a long time ago by some older kids, who discovered that certain ways of stacking them make the strongest and best-looking structures. They called this the “Best Way” to build.
Now, imagine some of your friends start saying, “Hey, who says that’s the Best Way? Let’s try stacking them in new ways, based on what we like and where we are playing right now.” They think that because every group of kids plays in different places and has different colored blocks, the way you build should fit your own game, not just follow the old rules.
Stephen Hicks talks about a big idea sort of like this. He says there was a time when many smart people (let’s call them the “older kids”) believed in finding the “Best Way” to understand the world, like using reason and science (the building blocks) to make things better for everyone. This time is called the Enlightenment.
But then, some newer thinkers (your friends who want to try new ways of stacking blocks) started questioning if there really is just one “Best Way” to understand the world. They suggested that what people think is true or right might depend on where they are and what they’ve experienced—kind of like deciding on the best way to stack blocks based on your own game.
Hicks points out that these newer thinkers (let’s call them postmodernists) don’t just think differently about how we understand the world; they also think this should change how we all play together—like suggesting new ways to share and decide on what to build, moving away from the “everyone for themselves” game towards a “let’s decide together” game.
So, in a very simple way, Hicks is talking about how some people started questioning the “Best Way” rules for understanding the world and suggested that the way we decide to play together (like how we share things and make decisions) might need to change based on these new ideas.”[3]
In my world of marketing, I see these concepts particularly in social media. Social media has transformed the way we access and evaluate information. It’s like everyone has been given a megaphone; no matter who you are, you can share your thoughts with the world. This democratization of information is double-edged. On one hand, it gives a voice to those who were previously unheard. On the other, it blurs the lines between reliable information and mere opinion. This situation perfectly captures the postmodern critique of traditional knowledge—suggesting that what we consider true or factual is often influenced by our personal experiences, social networks, and the algorithms that decide what we see online.
The issue here is not just about having different opinions. It’s about how these platforms have made it difficult to agree on a shared set of facts. In a way, social media reflects the postmodern idea that there’s no single objective truth, but rather multiple truths shaped by diverse perspectives. This has significant implications, especially when it comes to making decisions as a society. Whether it’s politics, health, or the environment, the challenge we face is finding common ground in a landscape where facts are often overshadowed by narratives.
In essence, what we’re dealing with is a world where knowledge is not just contested but deeply influenced by the power dynamics of who gets to speak and be heard. It’s a real-time case study of the postmodern perspective, demonstrating how our understanding of truth and reality is shaped by the complex interplay of social forces.
[1] Hicks, Stephen R. C. Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault. Ballan: Connor Court Publishing Pty Ltd, 2019
[2] Hicks, Stephen R. C. Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault. Ballan: Connor Court Publishing Pty Ltd, 2019, 59.
[3] Mathieu Yuill in conversation with a group of friends who are philosophy graduates.
About the Author
Mathieu Yuill
While raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens may be a few of Julia Andrews' favourite things, here are a few of mine: Talking to strangers, Learning about what you do for fun, Conversation over coffee. I own a marketing and communications company in Toronto, Canada called Leading With Nice. There are a lot of names I could have given the company but a trusted friend encouraged me to name it that because I really value the humanness in us all. Bah - this is starting to sound like a horrible LinkedIn post. So whatever, let's have coffee. I'd love to hear about what you do for fun!3 responses to “Decoding Postmodernism: A Beginner’s Dive into Hicks’ Exploration”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi, Mathieu,
Thanks for passing on the building blocks analogy which is helpful for such a complicated subject. You ended with two powerful statements:
In essence, what we’re dealing with is a world where knowledge is not just contested but deeply influenced by the power dynamics of who gets to speak and be heard. It’s a real-time case study of the postmodern perspective, demonstrating how our understanding of truth and reality is shaped by the complex interplay of social forces.
My question is should truth shape our perceived reality, or should our perceived reality shape our truth?
“In essence, what we’re dealing with is a world where knowledge is not just contested but deeply influenced by the power dynamics of who gets to speak and be heard”
I think this is the essence of the whole darn thing isn’t it. Who has power who doesnt, who wants it, who wants to keep it, who is affected by those in power. We are definitely no longer playing with the same rules. Thanks for this way of understanding Hicks book. It helped.
Mathieu: You Wrote:
“In my world of marketing, I see these concepts particularly in social media. Social media has transformed the way we access and evaluate information. It’s like everyone has been given a megaphone; no matter who you are, you can share your thoughts with the world. This democratization of information is double-edged. On one hand, it gives a voice to those who were previously unheard. ”
What do you see as the greatest problem for our future thinkers because of social media?