Some key concepts of Postmodernism

Postmodernism can be defined in many ways. The most obvious way is to look at postmodernism as the philosophical school of thought that became popular (and in some circles in western society: prevailing) after "modernism". Just like people (at least in large parts of the western world) lived in "modern times" in the 19th and early 20th century, many now live in "postmodern times".Postmodernism is a reaction to modernism.
This definition does not tell us anything about postmodernism though. A simplistic way of looking at postmodernism is to say that it calls into question and critizises the tenets of modernism. What were those?
Wikipedia offers a pretty good definition: "It is a trend of thought that affirms the power of human beings to create, improve, and reshape their environment, with the aid of scientific knowledge, technology or practical experimentation. Modernism encouraged the re-examination of every aspect of existence, from commerce to philosophy, with the goal of finding that which was 'holding back' progress, and replacing it with new, progressive and therefore better, ways of reaching the same end."
Modernism was not limited to philosophical circles - it shaped or influenced many parts of society, especially the arts, but also the economy. In fact it was a paradigm of the industrial age, and was supplanted by postmodernism in the post-industrial age.
Both capitalism and communism are fundamentally modernist ideologies. Both are concerned with improving the lives of the many - albeit in very different ways. This is a deeply modernist thought: First of all to believe that the lives of people CAN be improved nad secondly that this is a goal worth striving for. Both goals are never questioned - they are axioms of modernist thought.
Postmodernism as the antithesis of modernism was triggered by the "negative side effects" of modernism. "Side-effect" is an understatement: Modernism did not reach its goals, thereby calling itself into question:
Communism did not exactly work out as envisioned by Marx and Engels. Instead of creating the ideal communist world, a paradise on earth where everyone was to be free, equal and fairly shared the sufficient material resources, it became a totalitarian oligarchy/dictatorship, suppressing large parts of the world and killing millions.
Even Marx' assumption that socialism and subsequently communism are inevitable developments to an increasingly decadent and imperialistic capitalism did not come true.
Both deeply held beliefs - that of an inevitable direction towards communism that history has to take, as well as that of a worker's paradise on earth did not come true. Quite the opposite. The only inevitable consequence of modernism was post-modernism (isn't that ironic?)
On the other political extreme, right wing "fascist" theories did not fulfill their promise either. Hitler and Nazi Germany are the most striking example: Instead of leading to a 1000 year glorious German "empire", Hitler led Germany into a terrible world war that killed more than 55 million people. The idea that some races are "superior" to others lacked any scientific foundation whatsoever from the start and was further discredited by the fact that the "superior" arian race committed the worst atrocities in world history - what is now known as the "holocaust" or the "shoa".
Postmodernism was shaped by the experience that all those wonderful ideologies that promised heaven on earth led to the exact opposite: They produced hell on earth.
Postmodernism started to systematically break down modernist beliefs, questioning everything and anything.
Is there such a thing as absolute "truth"?
Is "morality" a value in itself?
Are our thoughts and actions really governed by reason?
Can we really rely on rational thought ("logos") to increase our knowledge of the world and help us find out what we are supposed to do in it?
If you call into question the very foundations of thought, where will that lead? Is everything questionable, leaving "nihilism" as the only answer? What a frightening thought! Or is there a foundation that cannot be shaken?
Postmodernism gives the answer: There is no single answer. There are no more "one size fits all" answers. Postmodern thinking will never "agree" on any single answer. You find your answer, I'll find mine. For some this may be nihilism, for others it may be the thought that even though the all-encompassing ideologies have failed, individual attempts to do good and live a just life are goals worth striving for. But just because you believe this, it does not mean anyone else has to...
While modernist thought is imbued with the wish to do better - improve yourself, improve the world you live in (until ultimately the world becomes a paradise for everyone). Postmodernism refuses to believe in that. There is no "pilgrim's progress" leading us all to a "promised land".
It is a deeply postmodern thought that there is no single answer for anything and no single truth in this world. There is no single concept or train of thought that offers absolute truth or redemption. Postmodernists will say looking back at modernism's aim to create a better world: "been there - done that". Now see what it got us: Auschwitz, the Gulag, China's cultural revolution and countless other tyrannies, wars and genocides.
Instead, postmodern thought stresses the contradictions in the world:
- We strive for good, yet there is so much evil in the world
- We want peace, yet there are wars everywhere
- We want economic prosperity, yet millions are starving
- We strive for happiness, but we cannot find it
- We want to believe in a benevolent God, yet there is no proof he even exists.
- We want to be reasonable, yet are mostly driven by powers beyond our control.
- We want safety, yet safety is an illsion.
Postmodernism holds that these contradictions are inherent to life. There is no way to find a "solution" or an "answer" to solve them. Living with them, finding your own answers and be prepared to question them again.
This is scary stuff. People want absolute truths, people want to guidance and direction, people want safety and happiness. So none of those are attainable? Well - you probably guessed it - there is no single answer to that question.
In one of my next blog entries I'll talk about this some more.