Thought for Today

Philosophical postmodernism. There is no meaning; there is no knowledge; there is no truth. What is left? All that remains are like-minded splinter groups.

Since there is no truth, no meaning, and no knowledge, everything is more or less futile. All one can hope for is to find, and become part of, a like-minded group. In postmodernism’s heyday,  the nature of the group didn’t much matter. Since everything is fragmentary, even finding and being part of a group was something to be celebrated; recognizing those with whom you could walk with along the journey as it were.

The journey also became the focal point. Since there was no truth to ultimately discover or find, the journey had no endpoint. Indeed, the worst “sin” one could commit was to suggest an actual endpoint, some sort of absolute anything. That was seen as the ultimate disruption, a type of massive insensitivity, the conversation killer.

In contrast, one thinks of 1 Timothy 3:7 (NAU), of those who are “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” The context mentions both women and Pharaoh’s magicians who opposed Moses and Aaron. The verse certainly fits within the milieu of the postmodern “conversation.”

There is also no true individual identity, one’s identity is subsumed into the group one is part of. With the rise of the woke ideology and DEI, it started to matter which group one was part of. Certain groups have been proclaimed 100% innocent, while certain other groups are responsible for every negative ill that exists in society. Individual responsibility for one’s own actions? Nope. Regarding people as individuals? Nope, their assigned group is their identity.

Should we be surprised by the direction society has gone? Not really. If there is no truth, why would there be any truth regarding gender, sexuality, or even human identity? Why couldn’t one create whatever gender type or identity one wishes? Why stop at LGBTQIA+?

Some individuals now identify as therians: those who feel that they have a non-human internal or spiritual identity. Still others describe themselves as otherkin: those who identify as any form of non-human being, whether that of an animal, a fantasy creature, or even an inanimate object. What would have once been take to be forms of clinical neuroses, are now considered normal and perfectly acceptable. As for the possibility of demonic possession, in the West, that has been intellectually out-of-bounds for centuries.

Everyone can have their own truth. These new “identity truths” must be accepted. By definition, any adopted idea excludes other competing ideas. Also not mentioned: in our world of open ideas and tolerance, anything that contradicts that view of tolerance, or even worse dares to speak of absolutes, is strictly forbidden, not to be tolerated. Open discussion about the absurdity of much of what is accepted as "truth"? Not allowed.

What is going on? How did we reach this point? We will examine that question in the next post.