If you're a regular reader of HA, you've probably heard/read me blabbing on about postmodern-this and postmodern-that. Trying to define postmodernism is a lot like trying to nail Jell-O to a raging waterfall -- only more difficult.
Below is the first paragraph of an excellent article by Fr. Joseph R. Laracy from the Homiletic and Pastoral Review.
Give it a read. . .it sorta proves that I'm not just making all this postmodernism stuff up.
The salient characteristics of postmodern philosophy can be seen in many
aspects of contemporary culture. In particular, the “flight from being
(or truth)” is particularly evident in the areas of politics, ethics,
and religion and is not constrained by the principle of
non-contradiction. The rejection of grand narratives, fragmentation of
knowledge, loss of the human subject, and so-called “death of man,” have
had particularly devastating consequences on both the academic study of
theology, and the practice of religion. Philosophers, theologians, and
indeed entire ecclesial communities have attempted to adapt the
Christian faith to this new perspective.
_______________________Follow HancAquam or Subscribe ----->
Here is a peculiarity that I have noted.
ReplyDeletePost-modernists are said to prefer that which is weak over that which is strong.
The "emerging church" is said to be a post-modernist movement that has evolved out of Christianity.
But the "emerging church" is said to be leftist in political orientation, Democrat in party affiliation, and supportive of having the federal government advance societal reforms.
So what becomes of the "preference for the weak" in the midst of this enthusiasm for greater federal activism?
How much of post-modernism is a philosophical movement and how much is it a social/cultural phenomenon indifferent to philosophical underpinnings?
Thanks,
-- Mike Turner