Prompt: postmodernity, painting, a landscape, HDR, UHD, 64K

Source

In continuing the second chapter of Paul G. Hiebert's book, I am thinking to skip his discussion on the characteristics of idealism since his explanation on the subject is very brief. However, since idealism is one of the alternatives provided in a post-modernist and post-positivist world, I think idealism deserves the short attention given by Hiebert.

Characteristics of Idealism

In my previous post, I focused on the characteristics of instrumentalism, which tells us about Hiebert's focus in the second chapter. Nevertheless, before we will resume the discussion on instrumentalism, this time we will give way to a general overview of the characteristics of idealism.

Idealism is the second response in the collapse of the underlying epistemology of modernism. Similar to instrumentalism, idealism views knowledge as subjective. As such, there is no space for a privileged stance provided by a claim to objective truth. Quoting Jean-Francois Lyotard, the duty "of science then is not to discover reality but to create it" (p. 47).

In idealism, language is the only reality we know but its "meaning lies in the mind of the reader" (p. 48). This kind of epistemology provides justification for a reader-centered orientation in the interpretation of the text. From this perspective, human discourse is a "a power game" (ibid.).

Dealing with disagreements in idealism cannot be resolved by appealing to empirical findings. Since similar words can be used with different meanings, I wonder if genuine communication is really possible using idealism as an epistemological basis.

Instrumentalism and Anthropology

Resuming the discussion on instrumentalism, Hiebert identifies two branches of anthropological theory that has been affected by the shift from positivism to instrumentalism. The first school is "The British Structural Functionalists," (p. 49) where the focus of studies is on social systems. In this school, human action is explained not by religious ideas but by social power structures. Here, the "etic" and the "emic" interpretation are crucial in understanding these power structures where the latter, the insider's perspective is considered more credible than the former.

The second school is "The American Historicists" (p. 50) where the focus of the studies is on culture and cultural systems. The word "culture" has been used not only to democratize differences among people but also to replace the word "civilization" for the use of the latter is considered arrogant and colonial. Similar to the first school, emic perspective has been received more favorably than the etic view.

Instrumentalism, Idealism, and Postmodernism

As far as epistemological foundations are concerned for postmodernity, in the mind of Hiebert, there are only two current alternatives, instrumentalism and idealism. However, interpreting postmodernity itself is not easy. Some philosophers would see a complete discontinuity while others see it as an extension of modernity. In theological studies, you will encounter theologians like Diogenes Allen who argues for a differentiation between cultural postmodernism and theological on the one hand, and scientific postmodernism on the other hand.

In theological studies, the term "postmodern" refers to four broad streams in theology that includes the following:

• First is confessional theology, whose primary debt is to Karl Barth’s attacks after the First World War on the liberal theology of the nineteenth century.

• Second is the existentialist-hermeneutical stream, which is primarily indebted to Heidegger, but whose roots go back to Schleiermacher’s reflections on hermeneutics.

• Third, there is a very recent, small, theological deconstructionist stream, which is indebted to Heidegger and to an extent to Jacques Derrida, and

• Fourth, process theology, as derived from A. N. Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne.

In science, according to Allen, the main division is between classical and modern science. ‘Classical science’ (sometimes called ‘Newtonian science’) refers to all science prior to the twentieth century. On the other hand, modern science is usually said to have begun with Max Planck’s discovery that energy is not emitted continuously but in discrete units or quanta. It is the development of modern science that has helped to undermine the modern mentality and to create the postmodern age” (Allen, 1989, Christian Belief in a Postmodern World, p. 6).

To make the study of postmodernity even more complicated, Pauline Rosenau made another type of classification between the affirmative and the skeptical type of postmodernism. I think it is the latter that advocates total discontinuity. Skeptical postmodernists see the positivist epistemology of modernity as the root cause of all the contemporary crises we are facing now. As such, both positivism and modernity must be rejected as a whole.

I think I will stop here our discussion of Instrumentalism, Idealism, and Postmodernity. In my next post, I will share Hiebert's reflection about the impact of these two postmodernist epistemologies on Christianity.

Grace and peace!

Reference:

Hiebert, Paul G. 1999. Missiological Implications of Epistemological Shifts: Affirming Truth in a Modern/Postmodern World. PA: Trinity Press International.