sign in sign up
<<
Home , Postmodern philosophy

An Introduction to : Where Are We, How Did We Get Here, and Can We Get Home? Ted Cabal

Ted Cabal is professor of Introduction ology, now sitting in judgement over at The Southern Baptist Theological As a student in seminary I had a friend Scripture rather than under it, became the Seminary. Dr. Cabal has served as the with severe amnesia as the result of a standard fare for seminarians preparing Dean of Boyce College, and has also serious bicycle accident. In spite of previ- to feed God’s flock.4 But at least we knew taught at Southwestern Baptist Theo- ous diligent work, he had forgotten large our enemies well, and with the intellec- logical Seminary and Dallas Baptist amounts of his seminary studies. And not tual reinvigoration of evangelicalism in University. He has written articles on recognizing his wife, he had to get to the twentieth century, it appeared that the philosophy and apologetics, and is cur- know her all over again. His disorienta- Lord had raised up a David to meet mod- rently working on a book on apologetics. tion could have been even worse, but ernity’s Goliath.5 his happy testimony was that he was anchored in still knowing Jesus! Where Are We? Many of us were also disoriented upon But after waking surprised that morn- waking one day to find that we no longer ing, we now discover the arrival of recognized the intellectual world around postmodernity. How different everything us. Someone informed us that we were looks! Instead of clashing only with a now living in postmodern times and had worldview giant () wielding been for some time, but it all seemed so the sword of a strong competing new and unfamiliar. Gratefully, we still claim, much of the world is now charac- knew Jesus, that He is the same forever; terized by “liquidity.”6 Permanence and but, living as a Christian in the strange solidity in social structures are now new world of postmodernity1 would bygone commodities, not to mention abid- demand adjustments in our thinking. ing values and the concept of truth. The Two decades ago we thought we knew new colossus is characterized by opposi- what it meant to live as thoughtful Chris- tion to , realism, essen- tians in modernity. It entailed active tialism, all forms of , resistance to the manifestations of unbe- transcendental arguments and stand- lief that had arisen since the Enlighten- points, truth as correspondence, canoni- ment. , no longer the cal descriptions, final vocabularies, and handmaid of theology, reveled in its newly meta-narratives.7 The new cognitive found autonomy to reason apart from atmosphere is charged with pessimism God’s revelation.2 Modern science, no regarding the possibility of modernity’s longer seeking to think God’s thoughts Holy Grail, scientia and veritas. Is this new after him, boasted that God was unneces- arrival on the intellectual scene a friend sary to understand either the universe or or foe? Is providentially life’s deepest questions.3 Most insidious given to the Church as an ally against of all, modern biblical criticism and the- naturalism, or is it just one more philo- 4 sophical cycle of unbelief? the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative It is true that postmodernists and mod- of Quantum Gravity” to a ernists have no love lost between them postmodern journal, Social Text.9 The edi- because they disagree on so much. The tors, including postmodern luminaries modernist strives for in knowl- such as Frederic Jameson and Andrew edge that the postmodernist does not Ross, published the article, thinking that believe possible. The postmodernist a physicist was presenting corroboration understands any of to from science for postmodernism. In the be thoroughly interpretative, whereas the article Sokal wrote: modernist cherishes . The mod- It has thus become increasingly ernist takes his standpoint as a knowing apparent that physical “reality,” no individual, but socially constructed reali- less than social “reality,” is at bot- ties are all the postmodernist concede. tom a social and linguistic construct; that scientific “,” far from Western intellectual power centers, objective, reflects and encodes long dominated by modernists, now the dominant ideologies and power acknowledge the growing influence of relations of the that pro- duced it; that the truth claims of sci- postmodernists. For example, Public ence are inherently theory-laden and Broadcasting Service television aired a self-referential; and consequently, brief series several years ago entitled “The that the of the scientific community, for all its undeniable Nobel Legacy.” Nobel laureates in phys- value, cannot assert a privileged ics, chemistry, and medicine were featured epistemological status with respect to counter-hegemonic narratives describing the fascinating details of the emanating from dissident or mar- advances in knowledge of their disciplines ginalized communities.10 and the resultant benefits for humanity. This kind of programming is nothing new After the article was published, Sokal for PBS. But what is of special interest was published an exposé of the whole affair. the equal time provided a postmodernist As a self-confessed leftist and feminist, he (obviously not from the sciences, but from noted that he shared postmodernists’ lib- the humanities) to attack the sciences. She eral values. Nevertheless, Sokal felt their sought to emasculate modernist concepts emphasis on surrendered the like “fact” and “progress,” and she did so intellectual high ground to the right wing. creatively (e.g., by walking through a He said he was angry desert while she spoke). The laureate in chemistry, on the hand, prefaced his because most (though not all) of this silliness is emanating from the self- remarks with: “We didn’t invent chemis- proclaimed Left. We’re witnessing try, nature did.”8 Just a few years earlier, here a profound historical volte-face. it would have been unthinkable for PBS For most of the past two centuries, the Left has been identified with sci- to allow the citadel of modernity to be ence and against ; we taunted so rudely. believed that rational thought and Perhaps the classic skirmish between the fearless analysis of objective reality (both natural and social) are modernity and postmodernity is what is incisive tools for combating the mys- now referred to as the Sokal affair. Alan tifications promoted by the power- ful—not to mention being desirable Sokal, a physicist at New York University, human ends in their own right. The submitted a piece entitled “Transgressing recent turn of many “progressive” 5 or “leftist” academic humanists from well-established ways. To tra- and social scientists toward one or ditional eyes, a/theology doubtless another form of epistemic relativism appears to be irregular, eccentric, betrays this worthy heritage and and vagrant. At best it seems aim- undermines the already fragile less, at worst devious. Within this prospects for progressive social framework, a/theology is, in fact, critique. 11 heretical. For the a/theologian, how- ever, herresy [sic] and aimlessness are unavoidable. Ideas are never Even closer to home, postmodernism fixed but are always in transition; has made a significant impact upon phi- thus they are irrepressibly transi- 15 losophy and theology. Twentieth century tory. philosophical approaches have commonly has flourished in been classified either as continental or the Anglophone world. Unlike nineteenth analytic. Until recent decades, some century , it has degree of disdain was the between been characterized by rejection of (inten- these broad schools and their correlative tional) system building. Viewing itself as relationships to theology.12 But now, an extension of science, it has historically postmodernism has not only made focused on and careful reasoning, inroads but also caused divisions within and the way language is used. The post- each school. that has grown in this soil has In earlier decades, continental philoso- generally been less radical than postmod- phy was closely associated with the likes ernism in continental philosophy, and of phenomenology, , struc- thus has had a less dramatic influence on turalism, and post-. The con- Anglo-American theology.16 Philosopher tinental tradition has produced what is Nancey Murphy is sympathetic to W. V. perhaps the most radical of all post- O. Quine’s view of the structure of knowl- modern , . Its edge as a web where individual beliefs are father, , is now well held in relation to other beliefs and not in known for his skepticism about ground- relation to the world. She contends that ing the meaning of written texts because this rejection of modernity’s foundation- they are always marked by mediation, alism avoids the Scylla of continental rela- endless word play, the absence of signi- tivism and the Charybdis of modernist fier, or in short, différance.13 Derrida’s epistemological arrogance. She argues influence on theology is exemplified in the that this approach may enable the rap- work of Mark Taylor. Taylor’s work will prochement needed between liberal and seem strange to ordinary Christians both conservative Christianity.17 The most in liberal as well as conservative circles. prominent evangelical theologian to He elides the concept of truth altogether adopt a somewhat similar appropriation in favor of language sport.14 For example, of Anglo-postmodernity is Stan Grenz.18 after cavorting for almost a page through Nowhere are the effects of the Zeitgeist, a (dubious) etymology of “err,” Taylor however, more in evidence than in the says that as an “erring a/theologian” he popular religion of postmodernity, the asks errant questions and suggests Movement (NAM). Postmodern responses that often seem erratic or relativism in general and the New Age even erroneous. Since his reflection Movement in particular are essentially wanders, roams, and strays from the “proper” course, it tends to deviate revolts from within Enlightenment secu- 6 larism.19 Indeed, the NAM can be to its unraveling. Kant considered himself classified as the esoteric version of a philosopher of the Enlightenment. In his postmodernity. Common postmodern essay “An Answer to the Question: What themes are featured in the NAM: opposi- is Enlightenment?” Kant sums up his tion to Cartesian/Newtonian thinking response with the Horatian motto: Sapere and support for constructivist epistemolo- aude (“Think for yourself”).23 His inten- gies; truth as and science as tion was to undergird the Enlightenment oppressor; nonchalance about logical or by combating the skepticism inherent in ethical inconsistencies and concern for ’s . the new tolerance. Especially common But his Copernican revolution, though among New Agers is a frustration with attempting to bridge the and the exclusivity of orthodox Christianity’s empiricism of his day, has led to the truth claims. very assault on his beloved Aufklarung (“Enlightenment”). Kant’s transformation How Did We Get Here? stressed the conditioning that the mind The pervasive influence of postmod- places upon the deliverances of the senses. ernism in the is obvious, Beginning philosophy students are now but it did not begin there.20 The history of familiar with concepts such as Ding an Sich ideas demonstrates that critical and influ- (“the thing-in-itself”) and how one ought ential concepts begin with seminal think- to distinguish the phenomena from the ers. Their ideas are disseminated by their noumena. This epistemology, however, students and ultimately work their way contains the seeds of an that down to street level in simplified and would take root and bloom over the next digestible form.21 For example, few non- two centuries—from mind as major con- academic communists could explain in stituent of the experience of the world detail the dialectical of Karl (), to Mind as constitutive of Marx, and neither could the average lay- the world (), to the worlds of person in a mainline church explain the minds constituting (post- impact of Rudolph Bultmann on New Tes- modernism). Of course, a detailed gene- tament studies. Yet the ideas of Marx and alogy of postmodernism would be more Bultmann have controlled the political complex.24 But Kant began this trek by and theological lives of millions.22 So to arguing that knowers contribute some- understand the roots of postmodernism, thing to that which is called knowledge, we must its ideational genealogy that the world is a place where each per- through the work of important thinkers. son has a worldview, not the view of the Emphases similar to postmodernism world. Indeed, Kant himself coined the are not new (cf. Cratylus, Protagoras, term Weltanschauung (“worldview”).25 Pyrrho, etc.). What is most interesting German idealists and romantics such about postmodern uncertainty is that it as Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, and Novalis follows on the heels of modernity’s epis- developed the concept of worldview fur- temological confidence. Especially ironic ther. Their work brought about the rise of is that , the most impor- historical consciousness, with the stress tant philosopher of modernity, may be shifting from the universal to the histori- fairly said to have sown the seeds leading cally singular, and from the abstract to the 7 particular. Historical development (Ges- Thomas Kuhn.32 Christian thinkers work- chichtlichkeit) becomes more important ing early in the twentieth century also than thinking in terms of essence (ousia). sought to formulate a response to the Static no longer undergirds growing awareness of worldview compe- epistemology; social and communal con- tition, including Abraham Kuyper,33 tributions to knowledge now come to the Herman Dooyeweerd,34 James Orr,35 and fore. Early nineteenth century German Cornelius Van Til.36 So, postmodern philosophy sounded remarkably “post- fatigue in adjudicating competing meta- modern.” For these thinkers a worldview physical views is not simply the stepchild is “the result of unending understandings of mid-twentieth century French language and our inner plurality.”26 And again, philosophers. Recent modern history in “Curious as it may appear to many explor- the world of ideas, stemming from Kant, ers of nature, it will nevertheless show provides a genealogy explaining the cur- itself to be the strict truth, that they them- rent failure of nerve with regard to epis- selves first put the laws into nature which temology, realism, essentialism, truth, and they believe to have learned from her.”27 meta-narratives. A century later set the stage for the secular or naturalistic empha- Can We Get Home? sis in so much postmodern thought. At Some Christian thinkers believe least the idealists anchored historical rea- postmodernity is a suitable philosophical son in a transcendental ego, but Dilthey home for the faith. Admittedly, frustration understood competing worldviews and with modernity’s conceit does make even values themselves to be grounded postmodernism’s apparent openness to all in experience alone, or to be more specific, worldview comers seem welcome. Other in evolutionary naturalism.28 Dilthey’s Christians will be more cautious in affirm- application of evolutionary theory to his ing postmodern prospects for the faith, Weltanschauunglehre is transparent when but will rightly appreciate the current em- he says: “Just as the earth is populated by phasis on epistemological humility.37 countless species of animals among which Moreover, all Christian philosophers there is carried on an unceasing struggle should agree with postmoderns that for and for space to expand, so human knowledge is not gained in a static the world of man knows a growth of immutable environment, that various structures of world views and a struggle cognitive grids underlie opposing under- between them for power over the minds standings of reality. It is beyond doubt that of men.”29 many variables affect human cognition: As the twentieth century unfolded, psychological, economic, political, histori- thinkers from a variety of disciplines cal, educational, and religious, to name began to develop their work around this just a few. new version of . Those who None of this, however, entails the sought either to escape or to celebrate the entrenched postmodern idea that all plurality of worldviews, include the psy- worldviews share the same truth value, chologist/philosopher ,30 the that all are true or all are false or all are sociologist Clifford Geertz,31 and physi- indeterminate. Postmodern conceptual cist/historian/philosopher of science relativism commits the existential fallacy 8 by construing the fact of differing views other than cultural imperialism, for we of reality as necessitating that this is the have been captured by the grandest of way the world should be or has to be. But meta-narratives, and have been commis- all worldviews are simply not created sioned to bring others into its liberating equal—especially the radical postmodern captivity. Christian scholarship cannot be one. For it should be obvious that it is self- regarded as creative fiction or propa- defeating to preach that no worldview can ganda. Historical study, though imperfect, claim to be the truth, when this sermon is, nevertheless, a discernible vita of God itself—if it is to be taken seriously—must and humanity. The pursuit of philosophi- inherently claim to be the truth. cal or theological understanding is more Other postmodern theoretical main- than just employing the history of ideas stays are equally wrong: for example, that as a tool of oppression. diverse learning environments (say, dif- and truth theories (and ferent ethnic backgrounds) inevitably the impossible postmodern attempts to create incommensurable worldviews. ditch them) are inextricably bound up Knowledge, according to this view, is with underlying metaphysical views and inevitably determined. But ironically, their concomitant anthropologies. For awareness of such epistemological vari- example, a modernist anthropology, if ables does not hinder our reading of the consistent with its evolutionary natural- world or lock us into a worldview, but ist assumptions, implies that knowledge instead significantly aids the processes of is only epiphenomenal: nature and nur- understanding, interpretation, and com- ture alone produce in us our beliefs. If our munication.38 Another self-referentially beliefs happen to have salutary survival absurd idea is that dissimilar worldview value, then those beliefs are more likely communities cannot adequately under- to be passed on via natural selection. A stand each other. The idea of incompre- postmodernist anthropology rejects the hensible notional worlds is incoherent: To view that people have an essential nature. recognize that one’s own worldview is Instead, humans are self- or societally- radically different from another requires constructed. Knowledge and beliefs are to that the other conceptual grid be under- be manipulated pragmatically to fit a per- stood at least sufficiently to render any sonally or communally created world. But judgment.39 in contradistinction to these two views, So I do not believe we can make our biblical Christianity holds to the reality bed in postmodernism: for the Christian of a divinely-imaged but dramatically it is just not home sweet home. A number sin-damaged humanity placed in a of postmodern ideas simply do not seem revelatory-created world, which has far- to me commensurable with biblical faith. reaching epistemological implications. The meaning of the text of Scripture can- Therefore, in light of this reality and in lieu not be regarded as indeterminate and end- of the postmodern project, what follows lessly open to word play. Preaching the is my sketch of a biblically faithful episte- exclusivity of salvation in Jesus, though mology and theory of truth. offensive to postmoderns, is a non-nego- The pluralism evident in the human tiable for His followers. Missions and family can be accounted for by the evangelism can and should be something epistemic damage wreaked by sin on our 9 creational finitude.40 No biblical text dent ideas. That is, humans can acquire indicates that Adam was afflicted with an true beliefs, but truth is not forced upon incorrect worldview until after the Fall, them. Only with willingness and with but neither did he ever enjoy divine om- properly functioning noetic faculties can niscience. In his innocence the reliability persons hold right beliefs about what God of Adam’s structure was completely has revealed in creation and His word.44 dependent upon the Creator’s general and And these right beliefs are true even if special revelation. But the entrance of sin every person that they are false. changed everything. Banishment from the Truth anchored in the real world stands Garden not only barred Adam from life, as a transcendent witness to and against but also initiated a separation between individuals and their . Creator and the human race, with the On the basis, then, of biblical anthro- attendant exponential growth of epistemic pology, the imago Dei seems to imply the confusion.41 Adam’s progeny inherited notion of a divinely intentioned mecha- not only a sin nature, but also in time a nism of knowing for all humans. The gift significant worldview disparity between of self-transcendence is related to know- them.42 The Christian, therefore, under- ing, especially knowing the Creator. stands sin as an extrinsic abnormality And though generating epistemological incurred by the human race at its begin- pathology, not even sin can stave off ning, with insidious and devastating humans “getting things essentially right” implications for humans in general, and regarding the world around them. Peter knowledge and truth in particular. Loptson, though not himself sympathetic Because of this ultimate of tragedies, to a Christian worldview, captures the believers should cherish humility, as well importance of the Christian understand- as intellectual and religious freedom. We ing of human nature for epistemology: do see through a glass darkly. The Christian analysis makes a claim But it is vital to note that the biblical about our seriousness, one that worldview has more to say about the is, curiously, a kind of cousin of the human condition. The image of God in aspiration to science. The very idea that we might get it right, might suf- human is an intrinsic normality that ficiently transcend the causal forces implies an anthropological essentialism that produced and condition us, to (typically rejected by postmodernists). stand in even partially accurate cog- nitive relation to reality; this funda- This biblical essentialism is also packed mental, motivational assumption of with profound epistemological implica- the scientific enterprise parallels the tions that are enduring, pervasive, and Christian notion that we occupy a moral location that transcends the necessary for human life under common specifics of our biochemistry or grace. The image of God is more than just positions in time or space, that elevates us to inter-identifiability the postmodernist’s social construct. The with any other possible variety of deep structures of language and the uni- consciousness in the universe.45 versality of logic lend support to the idea of a discrete yet perduring commonality In light, then, of a robust Christian of the human race.43 Moreover, the Chris- anthropological essentialism, I would con- tian understanding of human creational tend that Thomas Reid (1710-96) pre- freedom entails the reality of mind-depen- sented a better philosophical model for human knowing than Kant’s mind-con- 10 ditioned view. Both philosophers were as a man may be who believes that he is responding to Humean skepticism, but made of glass; yet surely he hath a soft Reid’s ideas in the main are more helpful place in his understanding, and hath been for explaining the puzzling human hurt by much thinking.”49 phenomena of a pluralism of worldviews Rather than any of the current post- ensconced in a shared reality.46 By modern offerings (either continental or realism Reid referred to an objective Anglo-American), Reid’s model not only external world that is known by taking accounts better for human commonalities seriously the practice of daily living. and divergences, but is also more hos- Participation in this daily world presumes pitable to the classical conceptions of a shared universe (something obviously truth as correspondence and coherence. 50 not necessary for philosophical and Coherence and especially correspondence theological theorizing). Reid accounts for are out of vogue in postmodernism. Its this assumption of daily beliefs by argu- obsession with pragmatism undercuts the ing that God graces humanity with com- common sense notion of a knowable real- mon sense: self-evident principles that ity independent of subjective construc- include, in addition to belief in an exter- tion, as is assumed in classical theory. nal world, belief in other minds and in Thus because what “works” for one per- others’ testimony, belief in empirical evi- son may not for another, the pragmatic dence, and memory beliefs.47 Common theory lends itself to cognitive relativism. sense has to do with the most basic level It is here that runs into the of reason necessary for human existence. problem of being relatively useful without Reid also argued that beyond common a necessary correlation with true external sense there is a second branch or degree states of affairs: of reason learned by education and prac- tice that permits philosophical theorizing, For example, if my belief that a life vest will keep me from drowning and it is this branch that accounts for con- proves useful, this is probably ceptual pluralism.48 Reid ridiculed the because it is a fact that life vests practice of setting this advanced degree prevent drowning. But note that the correlation is not perfect. A man may of reason or philosophy against common find it useful to believe that his sense. Though common sense is not par- spouse is faithful, because the belief ticularly suited for developing and con- forestalls emotional disruption in his life. But it may not be a fact that his firming particular intellectual theories, it spouse is faithful, and thus, on a is able to refute those contrary to common Realist theory of truth, it may not be true. Ironically and again self- sense. For example, when philosophers defeatingly, when postmodernists “pretend to demonstrate, a priori,” the reject correspondence and coherence non-existence of the material world except and trumpet pragmatic truth theory, they must implicitly employ corre- as sensations in the mind, common sense spondence to do so.51 then conceives of such philosophy as “a kind of metaphysical lunacy, and con- In relation to the issues I have raised, I cludes that too much learning is apt to find it useful to think in terms of three make men mad; and that the man who broad views of truth and reality. Uncriti- seriously entertains this belief, though in cal certainty is the view of the thinker who other respects he may be a very good man, thinks he has obtained an objective and 11 unbiased understanding of reality. The Stanley Fish or . thinker is uncritical in not recognizing the The third pattern of epistemological presupposed basis for this “certainty.” worldviews I call critical certainty. The cer- Logical with its early verifiabil- tainty that characterizes much of human ity criterion is a well-known example of experience is recognized, but the position this position. Historical finitude is con- is critical in that it acknowledges the genu- sidered an epistemological problem only ine limitations that historical conditioning because the knower does not know every- has placed on the knower. I take this thing, but what is known is veridically position to be that which best suits a Chris- known. Trust in unfettered reason or an tian model of knowledge. The Christian eidetic reduction or something else is does not deny the indubitable claims that considered efficacious for the realization a shared reality and, more importantly, of a meta-worldviewish place of privilege. that God in Christ makes upon human- But, of course, no thinker has ever been ity. To deny the claims of the latter is to able to demonstrate compellingly that any disallow the light that illumines our philo- particular human thought system has sophical darkness—indeed that heals the escaped the cognitive limitations that all blindness at our core and allows us to find other systems must bear. Though it is our way “home.” To deny the claims of the fashion to read the obituary of this the former is to live in a dream world of Enlightenment view of , it is still our own making (for which none of us the regnant position in the of wants to die), effectively disabling us from the Hawkings, Dawkins, and Dennetts of carrying out our mission in sensitivity to this world. the and need of “the otherness” con- Uncritical uncertainty is the position that fronting us in a world needing deliverance little or no objective knowledge can be from the lie. gained by historically and culturally lim- ited thinkers. The holder of this view does Conclusion not think that significantly genuine So perhaps the times changed while we knowledge of the world is possible, and were unaware, but now we recognize the thus it is characterized by “uncertainty.” I signs of the times and how we got here. consider this stance to be uncritical in its We also know that some things never lack of reflection on the certitude upon change: (1) unbelief is still unbelief— which daily life must be experienced. modernity argued that Christianity is not “Uncritical uncertainty” thinkers will true and postmodernity says that we can- regard worldviews as epistemological not know if Christianity is true; and (2) prison-houses, but are willing (at least Jesus is still Lord and the Church will theoretically) to include themselves make it home. among the prisoners. This view, feigning epistemic humility, presumes a place of ENDNOTES certainty to make its skeptical pronounce- 1Though I will use postmodernity and ment. Despite their protestations to the postmodernism synonymously, many contrary, I consider this epistemological distinguish the two with postmodernity worldview to represent generally the epis- often equated with a certain period and temology of postmodernists such as postmodernism representing a philoso- 12 phy. of scripture: “What, then, has been be accessed at www.physics.nyu. 2Kant, the most important modern revealed? Nothing at all, so far as edu/faculty/sokal/. The debate philosopher, famously despised the question concerning revelation over the article has not died down, heteronomy, the imposition of will asks for doctrines—doctrines, say, and the piece is now being included (even God’s) for morals; he charac- that no man could have discovered in anthologies as a contemporary terized it as: “lust for glory and for himself—or for mysteries that classic on the science/postmod- domination and bound up with become known once and for all as ernism clash. Apparently it is not frightful ideas of power and ven- soon as they are communicated” that hard to “sound” postmodern. gefulness” (Immanuel Kant, Ground- (“The Concept of Revelation in the For example, a Postmodern Genera- work of the Metaphysic of Morals, trans. New Testament, “ in Existence and tor is available online. It is a system H. J. Paton [New York: Harper Torch- Faith: Shorter Writings of Rudolf designed to generate random (and books, 1948 (1785)] 111). I shall dis- Bultmann, ed. Schubert M. Ogden meaningless) text from recursive cuss the impact of Kant in more [Cleveland: World, 1960 (1929)] 85). grammars. Interestingly, the detail later in this article. 5Notable champions would include detailed technical information 3This attitude is exemplified in the theologian Carl F. H. Henry con- about the Postmodern Generator is famous response of Pierre Simon de tending with liberalism and neo- contained in a document produced Laplace to Napoleon. When the orthodoxy, and philosopher Alvin by the Monash Department of Com- emperor questioned why there is no Plantinga taking on academic athe- puter Science entitled “On the reference to God in his important ism. Simulation of Postmodernism and Celestial Mechanics, the astronomer 6Zygmunt Bauman, Liquid Modernity Mental Debility Using Recursive replied: “Sir, I have no need of that (Cambridge: Polity, 2000). See also Transition Networks.” Here is a hypothesis.” More recently, Stephen Bauman’s earlier work, Postmod- recent example (and the original has W. Hawking has now made himself ernity and Its Discontents (New York: fake footnotes!): “Bataille suggests a household name probably due to New York University Press, 1997). the use of the postcultural paradigm the famous conclusion of his book: 7Bernd Magnus, “Postmodern” in of context to challenge sexual iden- “if we do discover a complete Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, tity. But Baudrillard uses the term theory, it should in time be under- ed. Robert Audi (Cambridge: Cam- ‘Sontagist camp’ to denote a concep- standable in broad principle by bridge University Press, 1995). tualist totality. If the postcultural everyone, not just a few scientists. 8“The Nobel Legacy” was aired in paradigm of context holds, we have Then we shall all, philosophers, sci- three one hour segments in 1995. to choose between modernism and entists, and just ordinary people, be The Nobel Prize winners were the neotextual paradigm of context. able to take part in the discussion Leon Lederman (physics), Dudley Thus, the subject is interpolated into of the question of why it is that we Herschbach (chemistry), and J. a Sontagist camp that includes art and the universe exist. If we find the Michael Bishop (medicine). Repre- as a whole.” For more examples see answer to that, it would be the ulti- senting postmodernism was the http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi- mate triumph of human reason— popular Canadian poet, Anne bin/postmodern. for then we would know the mind Carson. 11Alan Sokal, “A Physicist Experi- of God” (A Brief History of Time: From 9Alan Sokal, “Transgressing the ments with ,” Lin- the Big Bang to Black Holes [New Boundaries: Towards a Transforma- gua Franca (May/June 1996) 62-64. York: Bantam, 1988] 175). tive Hermeneutics of Quantum This piece may also be found at 4The most influential biblical theolo- Gravity,” Social Text 46/47 (Spring/ www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/ gian of the twentieth century, Summer 1996) 217-252. sokal/. Rudolf Bultmann, had this to say 10The article in its entirety, along with 12See God, Philosophy and Academic about the divine revelatory content the growing related literature, can Culture: A Discussion between Schol- 13 ars in the AAR and the APA, ed. cussion with Jacques Derrida,” ter given me by the postmaster of a William J. Wainwright (Atlanta: Villanova University, October 3, little town where I once was pastor. Scholars Press, 1996), and especially 1994; available from www.lake. The letter from Offenburg, Ger- the excellent article by Nicholas de/sonst/homepages/s2442/ many was simply addressed “to the Wolterstorff, “Between the Pincers vill2.html. At any rate, Christians community.” A few excerpts follow: of Increased Diversity and Sup- cannot base their understanding of “Maria translated means the Resist- posed Irrationality,” in ibid., 13-20. such things as epistemology and ing One. As my mother died in 1966 Wolterstorff notes that the American truth, especially the Spirit-illumined and I only became aware at the end Philosophical Association (analyti- inscriptu-rated truth of Christ, upon of 1977 that I am Jesus Christ, she cally oriented) has tended to take Derrida’s explicit intention to could not have resisted me. The traditional theism more seriously move us away from a Bible says, ‘He is a sign that is con- than the American Academy of Re- of presence. tradicted.’ And because there was ligion (continentally inclined). He 15Taylor, Erring, 13. Taylor’s decon- no one else there, the Gospel writ- refers to the rejection of foundation- struction, even if it is by his own ers in their petty-mindedness gave alism in the AAR as tending toward admission heretical, is entertaining. Jesus’ mother the name Maria. “interpretation-universalism” (18) He gambols with the death of God, Maria therefore is not an honor- blended with metaphysical anti- the erasure of self, and the end of ouble name. Maria and the Anti- realism, whereas the APA typically history—and arrives with what he christ are the same. But not every has been less interested in the calls “mazing” grace. Here is an Antichrist is a ‘demonic’ opponent nature of understanding. Post- example: “Within the inverted to Christ as encyclopedias state. foundationalists in the AAR tend to world of erring, Dionysus, the Therefore the New Testament (and be of a Kantian sort, while post- Antichrist, and the Crucified, the not only the New Testament) has foundationalists in the APA are gen- Christ, appear to be the same. fulfilled its purpose with me. Most erally post-Kantian (20). Carnivalesque comedy brings the of the prophecies in the Old Testa- 13Derrida’s works are notoriously dif- unending realization of the incarna- ment are encoded. Most of the Truth ficult to understand, with his most tion of the word through a process in the New Testament is distorted.” “systematic” being Of Gramma- of ceaseless dissemination. The car- One of the pages is signed: “Ger- tology, trans. Gayatri Chakravorty nality of Dionysus is the word made many, December 1, 1987, Your Spivak (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins flesh. ‘Carnival’ appears to derive Rabbi, Jesus Christ Superstar.” Per- University Press, 1974 [1967]). from Latin caro, carnis, flesh and haps this explains why computer 14“Profitless play,” says Taylor, “can levare, to lift up, elevate, or raise up. generated recursive grammars are overcome the unhappy conscious- Carnival might be understood as programmed similarly to simulate ness of the historical agent.” See his the elevation of the body, the resur- both and Erring: A Postmodern A/theology rection of the flesh. As the god of mental debility (see n. 10). (Chicago: University of Chicago ‘the whole wet element in nature,’ 16Traditionally, some theologians Press, 1984) 15. Admittedly Derrida Dionysus embodies the moisture have felt that continental philoso- has those who defend him as hav- and fluidity of humor and the semi- phy has been less detrimental to ing been misread by radicals like nal sexuality of comedy. Wine is theology. For example, an earlier Taylor (see e.g., John Caputo, review Dionysus’ element—wine, which is generation felt that the influence of of Erring: A Postmodern A/theology, never contained but always flows Hegel was salutary for theology, by Mark Taylor, Man and World freely. ‘Take, drink, this is my whereas that of 21 [1988] 107-126). Derrida him- blood.’ The carnal play of the word was not. A full blown philosophical self complained that he is often unleashes a delirium . . . ” (167). modernist mindset in “theology” misunderstood in “Roundtable Dis- Reading Erring reminds me of a let- leads to the found in works 14 like Charley D. Hardwick, Events of of Secular Thought (Leiden: Brill, nomenology, the revival of various Grace: Naturalism, Existentialism, and 1996), and Paul Heelas, The New Age empiricisms, pragmatism, etc. Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge Movement: The Celebration of the Self 25Immanuel Kant, Kritik der Urteils- University Press, 1996). In the and the Sacralization of Modernity kraft (The Critique of Aesthetic postmodern context, it could be (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996). Judgment [1790]) 1. Teil, 2. Buch, § argued that ultimately the influence 20E.g., the misconception can be seen 26, 9. Abs. See Werner Betz, “Zur of someone from the analytic tradi- in the following: “In the past, phi- Geschichte des Wortes «Weltan- tion like Richard Rorty is no less losophers played the major role in schauung»,” in Kursbuch der Weltan- relativistic than that of say, Michel defining a culture’s worldview, but schauung, ed. Armin Mohler (Frank- Foucault from the continental. as the postmodern world develops, furt: Ullstein, 1980) 18. 17Nancey C. Murphy, Beyond Liberal- philosophers tend to describe what 26From a Novalis fragment found in ism and : How Mod- is happening more than they define Betz, 27. My translation. ern and Postmodern Philosophy Set the what will happen. The forces driv- 27Johann Gottlieb Fichte, “Introduc- Theological Agenda (Valley Forge, PA: ing postmodernity have their roots tion to the Science of Knowledge,” Trinity Press International, 1996). more in popular culture than in the [1794-95], trans. A. E. Kroeger, in See also her Anglo-American academic institutions, though these Philosophy of Recent Times, vol. I, Postmodernity: Philosophical Perspec- forces have begun to alter the aca- Readings in Nineteenth Century Phi- tive on Science, Religion, and demic institutions” (Harry L. Poe losophy (New York: McGraw-Hill, (Boulder: Westview, 1997), and and Jimmy H. Davis, Science and 1966) 24. Note how the remark Stanley Hauerwas, Nancey Mur- Faith: An Evangelical Dialogue [Nash- sounds not only post-Kantian, but phy, and Mark Nation, eds., Theol- ville: Broadman & Holman, 2000] also post-Kuhnian. ogy Without Foundations: Religious 17). 28Ilse N. Bulhof, Wilhelm Dilthey: A Practice and the Future of Theological 21Arguably, this is the way Satan con- Hermeneutic Approach to the Study of Truth (Nashville, Abingdon, 1994). trols a culture: the disseminated History and Culture (Boston: 18Stanley J. Grenz and John R. Franke, idea of a seminal thinker controls Martinus Nijhoff, 1980) 94-95; Tho- Beyond Foundationalism: Shaping The- the Zeitgeist. mas J. Young, “The Hermeneutical ology in a Postmodern Context (Lou- 22Key examples of those who have Significance of Dilthey’s Theory of isville: Westminster/John Knox, exerted enormous influence, both World Views,” International Philo- 2000). In his Renewing the Center: for good or ill might include Plato, sophical Quarterly 90 (June 1983) 126. Evangelical Theology in a Post-Theo- Copernicus, Darwin, and Freud. 29Wilhelm Dilthey, Dilthey’s Philoso- logical Era (Grand Rapids: Baker, 23“The motto of enlightenment is phy of Existence: Introduction to 2000), Grenz speaks not only of the therefore: Sapere aude! Have courage Weltanschauungslehre, translation demise of foundationalism, but also to use your own understanding!” and introduction by William Klu- of realism. An earlier example of the Immanuel Kant, “An Answer to the back and Martin Weinbaum (New way Grenz appropriates postmod- Question: What is Enlightenment?” York: Bookman Associates, 1957) 28. ernity is in his Theology for the Com- in Kant’s Political Writings, trans. H. 30 Jaspers agreed with Dilthey that munity of God (Grand Rapids: B. Nisbet, ed. Hans Reiss (Cam- there is a universe of competing Eerdmans, 1994), wherein he under- bridge: Cambridge University worldviews, but his “psychology of stands the believing community as Press, 1970 [1784]) 54. Sapere aude! worldviews” did not stress relativ- theology’s integrative principle. more literally means “Dare to be ism. Instead he defended the circu- 19Two very important books that wise.” lar nature of all worldviews. Karl make this contention are Wouter 24One would have to include the Jaspers, Psychologie der Weltanschau- Hanegraaff, New Religion and West- epistemological revolts against ungen, 5th ed. (Berlin: Springer, ern Culture: Esotericism In the Mirror Kantianism and idealism as in phe- 1960). 15 31Geertz relativized knowledge by whereby a new light was shed on “It would seem to follow from this focusing on the communal aspect of the failure of all attempts, including that Christians ought not to be competing worldviews in his The my own, to bring about an inner behind in stressing the fact that in Interpretation of Cultures (New York: synthesis between the Christian their thinking all depends upon Basic, 1973). See also his “Anti Anti- faith and a philosophy which is making God the final reference Relativism,” in Relativism: Interpre- rooted in faith in the self-sufficiency point in human predication. . . . tation and Confrontation, edited with of human reason” (Herman Dooye- There is no question of agreeing on an introduction by Michael Krausz weerd, A New Critique of Theoretical an area or dimension of reality. Rea- (Notre Dame: University of Notre Thought, trans. David H. Freeman son employed by a Christian always Dame Press, 1989) 112-134. and William S. Young [Ontario: comes to other conclusions than rea- 32Thomas S. Kuhn, The Structure of Padeia, 1984] I:v). son employed by a non-Christian” Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. (Chi- 35James Orr, The Christian View of God (25). It is of more than passing cago: University of Chicago Press, and the World as Centering in the interest that Van Til was asked to 1970) 111-135. See especially chap- Incarnation (New York: Scribner, write this Introduction to a book ter ten,“[Scientific] Revolutions as 1887). Orr, unlike Kuyper or Dooye- authored by a man who took strong Changes of Worldview,” wherein he weerd, believed that the Christian issue with the Kuyperian tradition. compared the differences in per- worldview does correlate with 37For a range of evangelical spectives from various worldviews rationally grounded science. Carl responses to postmodernity see to the differing results of gestalt Henry has often noted the impact Millard J. Erickson, Postmodernizing demonstrations. of this book on his thought. the Faith: Evangelical Responses to the 33Kuyper appeared to argue for two 36Van Til developed presupposi- Challenge of Postmodernism (Grand very different epistemological reali- tional apologetics in response to the Rapids: Baker, 1998). ties because the Christian doctrine post-Kantian situation: “It has not 38Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, s.v. of regeneration “breaks humanity in been brought out clearly in the his- “Relativism,” by Gordon Lewis. two, and repeals the unity of the tory of non- till 39A. C. Grayling, An Introduction to human consciousness.” Abraham recent times that, from its point of Philosophical Logic (Sussex: Har- Kuyper, Principles of Sacred Theology, view, all predication that is to be vester, 1982) 272. trans. J. Hendrik de Vries (Grand meaningful must have its reference 40It goes beyond the purview of this Rapids: Eerdmans, 1954) 152. There- point in man as ultimate. But that article to discuss the issues sur- fore, Kuyper did not believe there this is actually the case is now more rounding the noetic effects of sin, could be a consensus in science, plain than ever. This is the signifi- such as whether unbiblical world- only dissensus (154). cance of Kant’s ‘Copernican Revo- views are the result of a rebellious 34Similarly to Kuyper, Dooyeweerd lution.’ It is only in our day that will, epistemological blindness, or contended that one worldview there can therefore be anything like both. What is beyond debate is that stems from saving faith and another a fully consistent presentation of God is necessarily good and omni- from apostate “ground motives.” one system of interpretation over scient, and that Satan and humans Concerning his own pilgrimage, he against the other” (Cornelius Van are not. It is an interesting question confessed that: “[o]riginally I was Til, “Introduction” to The Inspiration whether the devil labors under only strongly under the influence first of and Authority of the Bible, by Ben- a malevolent will, or since his fall Neo-Kantian philosophy, later on jamin Breckinridge Warfield, ed. does he also suffer from, not only Husserl’s phenomenology. The Samuel G. Craig [Phillipsburg, NJ: an incomplete, but also a distorted great turning point in my thought Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948] understanding of reality. was marked by the discovery of the 23-24). So, since all of life must be 41By the time of Noah, the devolution religious root of thought itself, interpreted, Van Til went on to say: of the human race into wickedness 16 led to their incredibly corrupt physical grid underlying the Hopi because it was utilized more than a worldview(s). See Gen 6:5-6. language cannot be “calibrated” century ago in the defense of Chris- 42Genesis 11 indicates that the Lord’s with the worldview grounding the tian faith is specious. Typically, scattering of the people at Babel by English language. Yet, self-defeat- American students of intellectual confusing their language was to ingly Whorf goes on to convey the history place Scottish Common shatter their rebellious unity. That propositional content of Hopi sen- Sense in the context of Protestant unity is restored as a prolepsis of the tences into English. See David such as that at the old redeemed eschatological commu- Clark, Dialogical Apologetics (Grand Princeton Seminary. But the phi- nity (Rev 5:9) by the divinely given Rapids: Baker, 1993) 81-82. All this losophy was highly influential at glossolalia at Pentecost (Acts 2). The is contra postmodernist Richard liberal schools such as Harvard, as church is to demonstrate this unity Rorty who claims that language well as at moderate institutions such by being of one mind in Christ (Phil does not spell out some “deep sense as Brown and Union. Unitarians 1:27). of how things are”; rather people and early New England Transcen- 43Noam Chomsky notes that children simply have “a disposition to use dentalists employed the Scottish master the deep structure of their the language of our ancestors, to system as the philosophical sub- native tongue in their early years. worship the corpses of their meta- stantiation for their religious views, In many instances the languages phors” (Contingency, Irony, and though it was not always the pri- modeled for children are fragmen- Solidarity [New York: Cambridge mary element in their thought. See tary and even degenerate, thus the University Press 1989] 21). Richard J. Petersen, “Scottish Com- deep structure of language must be 44See Alvin Plantinga, Warranted mon Sense In America, 1768-1850: innate and not learned from expe- Christian Belief (New York: Oxford An Evaluation of Its Influence” rience. Because infants can be University Press, 2000). (Ph.D. diss., American University, placed in any linguistic community 45Peter Loptson, Theories of Human Washington, D.C., 1963) 7, 12, 195. and learn the language, Chomsky Nature (Orchard Park, NY: Broad- 47Thomas Reid, “What is Common concludes that there must be a stock view, 1995) 63. Sense?” in Philosophy and Common of a priori universals in human 46It has been common for evan- sense, ed. J. David Newell (Wash- capability. See Grayling, Philosophi- gelicals in recent decades to shy ington, D.C.: University Press of cal Logic, 174. Alasdair MacIntyre away from engaging and procuring America, 1980) 43. Nicholas Wol- further argues that when a bilingual the insights of Common Sense terstorff calls what Reid terms com- determines that something is not Realism. This appears, at least in mon sense “belief dispositions” translatable from one culture to part, to be the result of the general (“Can Belief in God Be Rational If It another, he or she is in fact demon- tendency in intellectual circles to Has No Foundations? In Faith and strating that untranslatability does regard the philosophy as an anti- Rationality: Reason and Belief in God, not entail lack of understanding quated prop for conservative and eds. Alvin Plantinga and Nicholas (“Relativism, Power, and Philoso- orthodox thought in nineteenth cen- Wolterstorff [Notre Dame: Univer- phy,” in Relativism: Interpretation and tury America. But Scottish Common sity of Notre Dame Press, 1983] 150). Confrontation, edited with an intro- Sense philosophy, the progeny pri- They are concerned with immedi- duction by Michael Krausz [Notre marily of Thomas Reid is making a ate beliefs. William P. Alston refers Dame: University of Notre Dame rather stunning comeback as it is to these belief dispositions as “ten- Press, 1989] 182-204). Exaggeration being investigated again today by a dencies, or habits to form beliefs of of the differences between cultures number of Christian philosophers certain kinds in certain circum- ignores the many clear commonali- as a potential explanatory model stances.” He notes that a “more ties they share. For example, Ben- of biblical epistemology. Ironically, currently fashionable term is ‘belief jamin Whorf argues that the meta- this unease about the philosophy forming mechanism.’” (Epistemic Jus- 17 tification: Essays in the Theory of Knowledge [Ithaca, NY: Cornell Uni- versity Press, 1989] 319). For more on Reid see Nicholas Wolterstorff, Thomas Reid and the Story of Episte- mology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001). 48Perhaps this aspect of reason had neither opportunity nor grounds for speculation while Adam was in his innocence. 49Thomas Reid, The Works of Thomas Reid, ed. Sir William Hamilton, 3rd ed. (Edinburgh: Maclachlan and Stewart, 1852) 127. 50For what has become a classic introductory article dealing with such things as the controversy over the alleged Greek and Hebrew dif- ferences regarding truth; correspon- dence, coherence, existential and pragmatic conceptions of truth as they relate to scripture as well as classical and modern philosophy, literature, and theology, see Anthony Thiselton, “Truth” in The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978) 3:874-902. 51Richard L. Kirkham, Theories of Truth: A Critical Introduction (Cam- bridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992) 215. In other words, if a postmodernist claims that correspondence is not true or cannot be known to be true, either his claim is vacuous or else he is surreptitiously claiming that his belief is true by of its cor- respondence with reality.

18