Postmodernism:
An Opportunity to Get Real
by Dave Burkett

From the February 2009 Philogian

I am a middle-aged white suburbanite businessman who left his “real world” experiences to enter the “ivory tower” of ideas.  I am not intending to draw a distinction between the two, just to tell you a little about myself so that you will know that I understand how difficult it is to grasp why postmodernism is such an important topic in this time of cultural transition.  Whether we are sitting in an office or sitting in a classroom, we are seeking to be real about our faith as we follow Jesus Christ.  The process of acquiring a divinity degree involved a large quantity of words (written and spoken).  While at seminary I was surprised by how often the word “postmodern” was used to describe what is wrong with the church.  The word reminds me of my junk drawer at home where I go to find stuff, a combination of treasure hunting and careful organization.  My goal is to show you how postmodernism might be hidden treasure by placing it in an historical context with a conversation about the meaning of truth and to show you why it is an opportunity for us to get real.

What we think about truth, what we believe it is and how we believe it works is very important to each of us even if we don’t think about it very much, like the foundation of our home.  We live in rooms and don’t care much about the cement bricks holding up our home until cracks start showing up on the foundation; then it’s time to deal with what’s going on with the foundation.  When we agree about the nature of truth it is easy to talk about what is real like kitchens and foundations.  But when things don’t square-up we experience a disconnect between our basic assumptions and the world as we experience it.  That will draw our attention to those real things that are there underneath the floorboards.  Suddenly we have become skeptical (1) about how solid the foundation is.  And of course we can also experience this together as a community in culture.

Esther Meeks Lightcap, in her book Longing to Know, describes the history of the conversation the West has been having since Plato and Aristotle about how we know that what we believe is really true.  It goes something like this:  Socrates was not all that sure that what we describe as truth (2) is anything more than mere opinion.  That would make him a skeptic about belief and the history of our attempt to overcome skepticism has developed over time into this argument: “For knowledge to be knowledge at all, it must be infallible or certain.  Otherwise it is opinion.” (3)   The moments in time of this historical debate can be pictured as two large circles on either side of this skepticism about our ability to say that the truth we hold is anything more than mere opinion.  The circle on the left is the classical cycle beginning with Plato and Aristotle.  They both agreed that there is such a thing as objective truth in the world, but they disagreed about where it is located.  This circle turns counterclockwise depicting time and the idea began to be seriously questioned in the Middle Ages. 

 (4)

Confidence in the possibility of making infallible and certain claims about truth gave way in the late 1400’s and early 1500’s to the modern cycle.  The modern cycle, running clockwise now away from skepticism, rejected placing the foundation for truth on the objective ideals of the classical viewpoint and instead turned inwardly toward the subjective experience of individual rational thought.  The foundation on which true judgments can stand the test of the skeptic would be the ability of our own minds to determine what is certain and what is not.  When Descartes (1596-1650) famously states “I think therefore I am” he is staking a claim for modernism to confidently use reason to go “where no man had gone before (5) to achieve certain and infallible knowledge apart from the ideals of objective truth. 

For the Christian living in the West during the classical period this argument for universal truth probably sounded like trying to talk about God.  The shift toward the modern cycle must have been unsettling.  But if you were a “cultural Christian” at that time the pursuit of infallible and certain truth also meant finding yourself under God’s watchful eye which would be unsettling in a different way.   The dominant Christian culture redefined Plato’s source for universal ideas in the mind of God.  Contemplating God in this way is reasonable for a Christian.  The Christian’s attitude toward God as the source or object of truth should be “speak your servant is listening” (1Sa. 3:9), but for those who prefer not to listen this is unsettling (Heb. 4:13).  The shift from God as the One speaks, who asks us the questions, has been reversed.  The tables have been turned and now humanity asks God the questions.  This is an important insight into understanding the modern cycle.  The modern circle began with great confidence in human reason to build a foundation on which to prove that we can justify having certain and infallible truth.  Here is the result:  The problem of the argument was not solved but only became worse.  In time it became very obvious that when anyone states “I think therefore I am” their ability to speak infallibly or with certainty has to come to terms with the reality that they are doing so from their own point of view.  When Descartes is looking out at the world he is doing so from a culturally conditioned (white, male, French), historically situated (Enlightenment), and individually unique experiences and circumstances. 

The fact is that it is difficult for us to separate what “it” means from what we want “it” to mean.  There has been a growing cultural awareness that knowledge can be used in the service of power.  So now the second cycle has run its course and, as a culture in the West, we find ourselves again looking directly at skepticism.  This is what postmodernism sees:  There is no absolute truth (relativism), no single grand story to make sense of reality (such as the canon of Scripture), no single way things are done (we are on our own).  Here is where we are: If it is your opinion that in order for knowledge to be knowledge at all that it must pass the test of being infallible and certain you will not be able to stand on a center of objective truth according to the classical view or on a center of subjective experience according to the modern view.  We know that it is true that if someone states that she is certain that nothing can be known we know that she is contradicting herself.  This is really no different from hearing someone say with great boldness and confidence that it is true that there is no such thing as truth.  Common sense tells us that we can speak truthfully to one another.  So where does this leave us and why the subtitle “An Opportunity to Get Real”?

Two paths are now open for us to consider thanks to the inability of modernism to answer the argument.  Modernism has gone full circle with this argument which is why a better description of our cultural situation would be to describe it as late modernism rather than postmodernism.  Even so, whatever word we use, modernism has been unable to answer the argument and is looking right at skepticism.  Picturing the end of the modern cycle as late modernism gives us a good insight into understanding postmodernism.  Postmodernism has inherited all the baggage of the subjective turn to self, seeking to perceive reality from its own finite, historically situated, and self oriented perspective.  Postmodernism, in keeping with modernism, does not want to ground truth on ideals but rather through the subjective experience of self.  Postmodernism is an intensification of the self’s orientation toward itself.  This is what needs to be said to the postmodern: Let’s just set down this old argument and get real.  The argument misses the point about how knowledge really works.  For Christianity this is nothing new; we call it orthodoxy. 

Path number one is to come to terms with the reality that every act of human knowing involves faith.  The scientist forms her own hypothesis and tests it according to her scientific beliefs.  These beliefs inform her practice of science and she puts them to work in her research. (6)   The idea that discussions of facts are what science is all about and discussions of faith are to be personal and private matters has been debunked.  All knowing involves faith.  This is also evident through the experiences of everyday life.  Whether we are swinging a golf club or riding a bike it is necessary for us to extend ourselves into what we are beginning to know as an act of faith as we learn how to do these things.  How ridiculous it would be to learn every mathematical and gravitational variable having to do with balancing ourselves before trying to ride a bicycle?  We don’t have to do know everything involved with pedaling and turning the bike before we get on it.  How did you learn to ride a bike?  I learned how to ride a bike that was as tall as I was and I stood on a rock to get going. 

Here is our invitation to get real along this first path.  The postmodernist will tell us that we can’t know for certain that what we believe is true, and we can tell them, yes I understand why you would say that, but we can’t know that for certain either can we!  Here, just take a look at my life.  I am staking a claim on the truth that I am a golfer by extending myself imperfectly through the driver to hit the golf ball (into the woods!) so that you can see the truth (7) of it as we golf together.  Truth is an activity, not a passivity.  I show how real riding a bike is by getting on it and opening up that world to you by my example.  Real truth is lived truth (Jas. 1:22).   “We make contact with [reality] just as a blind person makes contact with and explores the world through her white stick.  The stick acts not as a barrier preventing access to the world, but as a gateway through which to enter it.  We do not focus upon, and are not aware of, the medium, but rather the reality to which it grants us access.” (8) Because real truth is lived truth the postmodern attitude will find the experience of truth very compelling.  Now is the time not only to know the truth but to also do the truth.             

Path number two is to come to terms with the subjective reality that all of us have bent hearts.  Spiritually we are blind.  St. Augustine (354-430), in his spiritual autobiography, The Confessions of St. Augustine, struggles with the awareness of his own sin (Ro. 7:19) and doubt over his own ability to overcome it.  Having deeply immersed himself in Scripture and experiencing the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit he concludes that access to truth cannot be overcome because of his own sinful heart other than through faith (1Co. 1:18).  And it is on the basis of faith one can move on to understanding truth.  The orthodox view of our ability to see truth as Augustine puts it is “faith seeking understanding.”   

Our opportunity to get real is to come to grips with the fact that we are a sinner by becoming an actor.  An actor who is willing to learn his part (the Bible is our script) and to get on stage to perform truth.  We will not be abandoned because we are surrounded by a community of fellow actors called the local church and the Holy Spirit is present to assist our understanding of the real as the director of our performance.  There is a better circle to follow than the above two and Christ is the center (Col. 1:17).  Real truth is lived truth, truth that we embody by extending ourselves through faith into the truths of Scripture so that we might perform those words before others as we trust the promised presence of the One who told us: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn. 14:6).  We are following Jesus.  It is an exciting yet difficult journey as new insights lead us into new challenges with even greater opportunities of growth and understanding.  Truth is an ever growing circle by which we grasp the real: “I believe in order to understand; I understand in order to put into practice: I put into practice in order to grow in knowledge and belief.” (9)

Return to the Philogian Archive