Log in

Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth
31st-Jan-2008 08:38 pm
I am a girl of the future
Do you think modernist thought and Christianity are incompatible or compatible?

Do you think postmodernistic thought and Christianity are incompatible or compatible?

Wikipedia has a good summary of Modernism. It's basically a way of looking at the world that rejects appeal to authority (Scholasticism) as a way of legitimation (that is, making sure that things are true), and embraces empirical knowledge, human reason, and an objective, universal set of values. Modernism is how we get science.

Postmodernism rejects the idea of an objective set of values, and puts more emphasis on personal preferences, needs, experiences, and values. Wikipedia has a fragmented but fairly decent overview.
1st-Feb-2008 03:12 am (UTC)
I think Christianity is compatible with many things. Modernism and postmodernism certainly have things to contribute to a deeper understanding of Christianity, but when a person is more committed to one than Christ, they cease to be compatible.
1st-Feb-2008 03:14 am (UTC)
On a personal level, I like Modernism some--I mean, Protestantism is full of repealing tradition, right? but postmodernism drives me BATTY because of all the emo-ness of it. And when I was at Harvard Div, evvvvvvvverybody was postmodern. I guess I was post-post-modern? I kept wanting to say, "You have deconstructed everything to death, we get it! Now let's BUILD something!"
1st-Feb-2008 03:19 am (UTC)
LOL. You're right. The seeds of post-post modernism done already been sown. And much of the sowing is being done by the church.
1st-Feb-2008 03:31 am (UTC)
Thanks for the brief summary ----

Modernism is I suppose pretty much what I describe as being a perfectly valid way to meet God. After you meet God, you don't care a bit for human reason, because you find it appears shallow when you can get your advice from the creator of the universe.

Postmodernism is a concept that directly underpins the sociological attitudes of the last 40 years, if I read you right, and as far as I'm concerned it needs casting into the fiery pit, being directly responsible for every ill of the modern age, having been fully in control of government services for a generation.

It has done no good for anyone as a set of values for running countries, and is a complete and shambolic failure in that regard, defending itself only by saying that no better can be done by any other means (an entirely unproven and very unlikely statement). Instead, it is itself the direct and potent cause of the failures of our societies in the west today.

In regard of God, it leads people of good will into unwittingly making themselves into their own God, deciding for him what he would say, the most absurd and ridiculous approach to Christianity ever devised, and just as much a failure in the church as it has been at running society.

It's a fad without proof, without merit, and without any evidence to cause anyone to suppose that it has ever done anyone any good anywhere. It's a requirement to be stated as a faith or treated as such on most Sociology courses, and through the requirement that students adopt it of get thrown off such courses, it has become the means by which a clique of university professors have perpetuated their worthless views into a religion, forced the next generation of their kind to think the same way, and become the dead hand that controls all government services at the point of delivery.

Thus it is also anti democratic, for when a government selects its senior employees on the basis that they must have certain kinds of degrees, and those are all obtained with the requirement of adopting a pseudo religion else be thrown off the course, that means in my view that a systematic enforcement of the values of a false religion has been enacted on the people of the United States in the name of secularism.

Yes, I do know someone who was required to state articles of PC faith or be thrown off his course, clearly and explicitly being told he must state articles of PC principle in public or get failed for not doing so. He was a left winger and a reasonable man; he just wanted to be able to think, but accepted that he could either lose his work to date and change degrees, or publicly state a nonsense that went against his conscience. He did so. He's probably working in sociology today, doing just the same right now.

When that happens, people either don't go on such courses at all if they disagree, leave them when then feel their views are not only unacceptable but will be remorselessly ridiculed, or if they have a backbone and state their case, they will be thrown off.

Postmodernism, now that you give me a name to hang on it, is a prejudice enacted as a religion, empowering university departments to create a class of priests that enforce its dictates on the unwitting public by deception. That is nothing less than a coup d'etat, delivered at the ground level, for all government policy is enacted through those who serve a fixed interest, and only ever work in accordance with that interest, despite government policy and the votes of electors whenever they oppose that interest. It is fascism from the ground up. The only way to get rid of it and establish the democratic government of a western country will be to declare every sociology degree in existence invalid for securing government service.

And that should be done tomorrow. If it can't be done sooner.
This page was loaded Mar 27th 2017, 12:34 am GMT.