Let’s learn from Postmodernism how to root what follows
In reading, Stephen Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism: Scepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault, one gets a clear sense of the amount of time it takes to root ideas into the very fabric of a society. What started in the 1950s and 1960s among French philosophers [1], became the University texts in the 1990s and early 2000s when those students came to leadership across humanities and social science fields, and by the 2010s, becomes a more broad-based movement. Those ideas are the framework of postmodernism.
Postmodernism is a denial of previous Modernist philosophical, epistemological and spiritual views on the world, and therefore not easy to explain in one post. Here is a quick adapted summary of ideas from Britannica, outlining some leading ways Postmodern thinkers react to and dismiss Modernist ideas. These include:
- objective reality (calling it naive realism),
- objective empiricism and truth (for subjective reality),
- logic and reason, seeing these as destructive and oppressive forces, because, for instance the scientific advancement developed innovative ways to kill on a massive scale in World War II.
- They further move from human psychology to social determinism/construct,
- abandonment of meta narratives for personal meaning making of the universe, and
- from any conformity to moral values and norms to ethical relativism (adapted from Britannica) [2].
Comparative chart, p25
Hicks paints where Postmodernism came from, what problems it was seeking to solve, and what problems it has left in its own wake. Chart 1.3 is a helpful summary of the implications of postmodernism on various disciplines and frameworks for the foundation of society [3].
For each of these, one can follow the way it works out in society, and how in seeking to solve problems, it creates new ones. Matthew Petrusek expands on postmodern ethics in a chapter titled, The God of My Tribe: Progressivism (a.k.a. “Wokism”). He argues that there is a ‘sleight of hand’ at play, because postmodernism “denies the existence of objective truth altogether, and on the other hand, it asserts that mere disagreement with that position is a severe moral defect” [4]. It’s still a zero-sum game of either agreement with the progressivist ideology, or being demonized for disagreement, showing yourself complicit. Rather than having created a society when all can flourish, what postmodernism has reaped is a people who are divided. Some are committed, but others are tired of obliging progressivism’s collectivist pressure to conform. On the issue of human identity, and the current move to shift to self-prescribed gender pronouns, some face backlash for questioning it. This was how Canadian Psychology Professor, Jordan Peterson, rose to fame, for pushing back [5].
So what value then is all this philosophy? Stephen Hicks, on his own website, shares a metaphor to help.
There is an old saying that philosophy bakes no bread. It is perhaps equally true that no bread would ever have been baked without philosophy. For the act of baking implies a decision on the philosophical issue of whether life is worthwhile at all. Bakers may not have asked themselves the question in so many words. But philosophy traditionally has been nothing less than the attempt to ask and answer, in a formal and disciplined way, the great questions of life that ordinary men put to themselves in reflective moments.” (Time, January 7, 1966) [6]
And while the way forward is not found by simply doubling back on modernist understandings of the world, neither can we see that postmodernism has created a better foundation for society. In each era, there is evidence that humanity is flawed in our efforts. As King Solomon’s wisdom declares, “This only have I found: God created mankind upright, but they have gone in search of many schemes’” (Ecclesiastes 7:29 NIVUK).
What I would like to focus on are Hick’s postmodern cultural themes, which frame current cultural debates.
- Whether the Western canon of books is great or too narrow and intolerant.
- Whether Christopher Columbus was a hero for bringing worlds together, or evil for bringing harm to Indigenous cultures.
- Whether the USA is progressive on equity and inclusion, or subversively sexist and racist in keeping women, minorities and the proletariat in their place.
- Whether affirmative action policies reflect desire for fairness or virtue signalling until there’s an underlying reaction.
- Whether social conflicts are resolved by individual merits, or by sensitivity training to affirm identity markers such as race or sex.
- Whether the longevity of life and increase of wealth is raising all boats, or simply keeping the underclass placated with consumerism.
- Whether Western global power is good for the world, or is exporting a system of eternal inferiority and subservience.
- [I’m not going to paraphrase this one] Whether science and technology are good for all, extending our knowledge of the universe and making the world healthier, cleaner, and more productive—or whether science betrays its elitism, sexism, and destructiveness by making the speed of light the fastest phenomenon, thereby unfairly privileging it over other speeds—by having chosen the phallic symbol i to represent the square root of negative one—by asserting its desire to “conquer” nature and “penetrate” her secrets—and, having done so, by having its technology consummate the rape by building bigger and longer missiles to blow things up.
- Whether liberalism and free-market capitalism can be enjoyed everywhere, or is harmful to other cultures and to the planet [7].
I see critique and counter-critique, as well as the battle for competing ideologies in this listing. And just as the battle for postmodernism ideals were built on the philosophies of modernist critics at the height of the Enlightenment, we are now entering an era of the critique of postmodernism, and will again have to assess whether we can work out solutions to the problems we now face [8]. German Philosopher Heidegger pointed out “that when we get to the core of Being we will find conflict and contradiction at the heart of things” [9]. How true. Hicks endorsed Bertrand Russell’s foreshadowing of this circling back.
In the final chapter of [Russell’s] often-read introductory book, The Problems of Philosophy (1912), Russell summarized the history of philosophy as a repeating series of failures to answer its questions. Can we prove that there is an external world? No. Can we prove that there is cause and effect? No. Can we validate the objectivity of our inductive generalizations? No. Can we find an objective basis for morality? Definitely not. Russell concluded that philosophy cannot answer its questions and so came to believe that any value philosophy might have cannot lie in being able to offer truth or wisdom 94 [10].
______________
[1] Hicks calls these “the postmodern vanguard”: Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Jean-François Lyotard, and Richard Rorty. Stephen Ronald Craig Hicks, Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault, (Expanded Edition, Ockham’s Razor, 2013. Kindle edition), 11.
[2] “Postmodernism | Definition, Doctrines, & Facts | Britannica.” 2025. February 10, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/topic/postmodernism-philosophy.
[3] Explaining Postmodernism, 25.
[4] Matthew Petrusek, Evangelisation and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture, (Word on Fire, 2023), 333.
[5] BBC News. 2016. “Toronto Professor Jordan Peterson Takes on Gender-Neutral Pronouns,” November 4, 2016, sec. US & Canada. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37875695.
[6] “Quotations – Stephen Hicks, Ph.D.” n.d. Accessed March 19, 2025. https://www.stephenhicks.org/quotations/.
[7] Explaining Postmodernism, 28-30.
[8] Explaining Postmodernism, 32.
[9] Explaining Postmodernism, 78.
[10] Explaining Postmodernism, 86.
About the Author
Joel Zantingh
Joel Zantingh is a catalyst for peacemaking and intercultural teams, speaker, theologian and consultant. He is the Canadian Coordinator of the World Evangelical Alliance's Peace and Reconciliation Network, and the Director of Engagement with Lausanne Movement Canada. He has served in local and national roles within the Evangelical Missionary Church of Canada, and led their global mission arm. He has experience teaching in formal and informal settings with Bible college students and leaders from various cultures and generations. Joel and Christie are parents to adult children, as well as grandparents. They reside in Guelph, Ont., situated on the treaty lands and territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit, and home to many past, present and future First Nations peoples, including the Anishinnabe and Hodinöhsö:ni'.6 responses to “Let’s learn from Postmodernism how to root what follows”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Joel,
As we seek to critique and tear down post modernism, is there anything from what you know and understand, that should or will survive the process?
Thanks Jeff. Yes, I think the sense of belonging that people are seeking to address with new tribalism needs to get affirmed.
Coleman Hughes has a kind of “yes, and” argument to get beyond neoracism, for instance.
He calls for us to recognize that “Benign disparities will abound, and we should pay more attention to the fairness of processes than to the equality of results” (The End of Race Politics, 161).
In order to move to fairness, we still have to acknowledge differences, and for starters, multiple tribes. What access to education, training, and inherent value in individuals and groups can be affirmed.
We can’t eradicate all the tribalism, but affirming people in their subgrouping lifts up this tribalistic value in postmodernism.
This also has very good carry-over in terms of the Gospel. God is forming “One New Humanity” regardless of race, religion, gender, colour, language, orientation, social status, age, or education through the reconciling work of Christ.
Hi Joel,I appreciate how you outlined how postmodern thinkers react to and dismiss modernist ideas, as well as how you connected Hicks’ postmodern cultural themes to today’s debates. You’re absolutely right—there’s far too much to cover in a single blog post.
I especially resonate with your statement: ‘And while the way forward is not found by simply doubling back on modernist understandings of the world, neither can we see that postmodernism has created a better foundation for society.’
As we navigate this complex landscape, what has helped you stay anchored—what has been your North Star?
Joel,
Yes, there are so many issues that are at the heart of the culture wars. These cultural themes lead to so many disagreements and challenges. How do you as a leader lead through some of these culture wars?
Hi Joel, I agree with your comment, “And while the way forward is not found by simply doubling back on modernist understandings of the world, neither can we see that postmodernism has created a better foundation for society.” In your opinion, what is healthy, constructive way forward?
Joel, the list of cultural debates framed by postmodern themes demonstrates how deeply entrenched these discussions are in society today, and invites further more reflection on their implications.
I am delinquent so no pressure to answer, but I wonder what you think might be the potential dangers of ethical relativism as a consequence of postmodern thought, especially in education, government, and the church.