Week of 11/10: The Problem that Postmodernism Can't Answer
From time to time in this class, the issue of postmodernism has come up, and many tend to view it in a positive light. On the surface, it seems like the ideal worldview. Just today, we discussed the fact that race and gender are considered to be fluid. This would imply that a person can pick his/her race and gender, and can actually pick a different race and gender at a different time. The emphasis is on freedom for the individual. In short, there are no absolutes with postmodernism. Society can function this way for a while...until one person's "truth" and moral standards come at the expense of someone else's basic human rights.
This is exactly the problem that Latin American slaves faced. Their owners exploited them, abused them, and neglected them, all in the name of their own personal gain. And postmodernism offered no options to slaves. If abusing other people is part of the slave owner's moral code, then that's just his version of morality; according to postmodernism, there is nothing wrong with that, because everybody's beliefs are equally valid. This means that someone in power (like Latin American slave owners) can use any means necessary to stay in power. Ironically, many postmodernists call for gender and racial equity, when postmodernism itself is powerless to stop a group or individual in power. Postmodernism exists on the idea that "anything goes", but when we really stop and think about it, I wonder how many of us want to live that out.
At this point, some people might argue for some sort of quasi-postmodernism. Their motto might be something like "Anything goes that works for society". Again, this sounds good at first, but if we give this more careful thought, it should stand to reason that postmodernism is either always true or never true. Otherwise, it's left up to the individual to decide when postmodernism "works" and when it doesn't, and that idea itself sounds like postmodernism. So the idea of "quasi-postmodernism" falls short because its foundation is the very premise it's trying to validate.
In conclusion, postmodernism presents too many logical fallacies for it to hold true as a viable worldview. This is why I would argue for an absolute moral standard, through every age, no matter what a person's race, gender, and religion may be.
I know I am presenting an idea that might sound farfetched, but I think it's important that we consider it. People appreciate things much more in their absence than in their presence, and moral absolutes are no exception. This is why I do not think our society should embrace postmodernism like it is doing.
Thank you, Seth, for the blog. I like the discussion of postmodernism and if we should embrace it in today's world. If everyone's beliefs are equally valid then such things as slavery were not bad and what owners did to their slaves was justifiable. Instead, the idea of absolute moral standards is interesting and worth consideration.
ReplyDelete