Draft:Postmodernism and Philosophy

Postmodernism and philosophy are two worldviews in near-constant opposition. Both were proposed in Dennis Ford's 2007 book The Search for Meaning, and he builds off of ideas advanced by prominent philosophers, thinkers, and artists--among them, Plato, Socrates, Kant, and Nietzsche.

A key distinction in postmodernism and philosophy is in their approaches to truth and meaning. They have commonalities, but what they share is largely confined to their process; both laud skepticism and discontent, but do so to varying degrees. They also both reject the "mythic mind" and its uncritical acceptance of the world as it is.

Postmodernism
Postmodernism is generally pluralistic, unordered, and even described as "fragmenta[ry] and incoheren[t]." When truth is found, it is small, local, and contextualized--Ford says that "knowledge claims (that is, statements about what is or might be true) are debatable only within their respective contexts." There is no grand truth that fits everybody, but there may be a truth that works for you. It will depend on your experiences, your thoughts, and your circumstances; it is highly subjective, and can change as those circumstances change.

Paradigms
Postmodernism's emphasis on subjectivity becomes clearer when discussing the paradigm. Ford's earlier quote about respective contexts is best exemplified in the paradigm; he states that truth can exist within paradigms, but definitely not across them. His favored example here is between athletes and architects--under postmodernism, we can establish "criteria for determining what makes . . . a good architect or a good athlete, but we do not have a way of determining . . . whether an architect is better than an athlete." Within narrow and specific contexts, we can establish our own criteria and rules, and find some answer. To do this between contexts is to fall victim to the "grand narrative"--to believe that there is some unifying story or code or truth across paradigms and regardless of context.

The Grand Narrative
The grand narrative--that is, the belief in some explanation for how things are that is both unifying and objective--is never explicitly named in Ford's discussion of postmodernism. However, we see the concept alluded to several times; the idea of an "objective world," some sort of "inherent structure," the notion that something just is, something that we can discover that is permanent and explanatory. Grand narratives are espoused by those who "presume to speak of or for humankind," or who declare certain values to be "universal or timeless." Despite Ford avoiding the term, it remains the best descriptor for the phenomenon.

Postmodernism is notably skeptical or outright dismissive of the grand narrative, because such an idea would establish a truth across paradigms and regardless of context. This skepticism, though, serves another purpose: not only does it counter the exclusionary rhetoric grand narratives use, but it also is how we find truths.

Radical Skepticism
Importantly, skepticism is not the only way of finding truths. Ford admits that there are a "plurality of approaches or ways of knowing;" however, radical skepticism remains the "core approach." This skepticism is applied most heavily to those who claim to know "the meaning" (Ford seems to imply that skepticism is still levied at those who claim to know a meaning, although to a lesser degree, since postmodernism deliberately makes room for multiple interpretations). Postmodernists ask "For whom is this true? For what purpose is this true? In what context is this true?"

Questioning grand narratives is valuable, because those grand narratives can limit or silence dissenting ideas. However, skepticism in its pure form is applied everywhere--any claim, large or small, is "suspect." Because every claim to truth is untrustworthy, the views we adopt are chosen because of "power, politics, and aesthetics." There is no objective reason to believe the things we believe, and to act the way we act; as Ford puts it, when finding truth, "no single method is or could be adequate."

Meaning
Meaning is, in postmodernism, a decision, a possibility, and an afterthought. This should reflect how many things are in the postmodern worldview--decisions are a consequence of "power, politics, or aesthetics;" knowing is actually a possibility, met with questions of "for whom?" and "in what context?" Meaning can be made, or found, in certain contexts. It can exist, if we want it to, and if we think it does.

But postmodernism does not dictate meaning, and it does not mandate meaning. In this respect, postmodernism bears a striking resemblance to myth--meaning may exist, but if it is out of the mind, it might as well not. Ford explains this better: "No one questions whether life is meaningful when they are in love or when their team scores a goal." Meaning may be there, in certain moments and contexts, but life does not require meaning. We can live content and happy lives even if it does not all "make sense."

Philosophy
Understanding philosophy means understanding--and rejecting--myth. From the very beginning of his discourse on philosophy, Ford speaks about transcending the mythic worldview: "[Philosophy] goes beyond appearances--the 'bright particulars' of the heroic or mythic mind." This rejection is a hallmark of the philosophic worldview; it is also one of its few commonalities with postmodernism. Just as postmodernism encourages radical skepticism, philosophy encourages radical ascendance--a movement beyond material instances and into the philosophic Form.

Platonic Forms
The Form is the defining 'unit' of the philosophic worldview. Plato's Theory of Forms--as sarcastically iterated by Socrates--is a process; one begins with many material instances of something, like "virtue" in Meno or "piety" in Euthyphro. The speaker then goes beyond those "bright particulars" and finds a common notion (a "defining concept or principle"), and then the pure Platonic Form--whether of virtue, or piety, or any other concept. This Form is the true essence of the subject; a "category that can be universally applied." By questioning and attempting to move past simple material instances--as Ford describes it, going from "beautiful to Beauty, or appearance to Reality"--the true Form is revealed.

Discontent
While questioning is certainly an important part of the philosophic worldview, it is not the best way to describe the initial process of "moving beyond the 'bright particulars.'" Ford labels this process (or feeling) as "discontent." The philosophic mind, he says, views the world as a puzzle to be solved, or question to be answered. The chief goal of philosophy is to know and learn the essence of so many things--to be able to "act consistently and predictably." Feeling discontent about the incongruencies and inconsistencies in the many instances of "justice," for example, leads us to find commonalities in those instances, and eventually to a Platonic Form of "justice" which can be applied to all those instances.

Meaning
This process of abstracting ideas such as "justice," from material instances to common definitions to true Forms, can make finding meaning difficult. However, this discontent and abstraction is also essential to finding meaning--without "stepping outside of" oneself, or abstracting oneself, one cannot ask any questions of meaning at all. We question if there is some Form of meaning, something which unites many disparate "meaningful and meaningless moments;" and yes, there is meaning, says Ford. However, there is not Meaning. Moments are meaningful because they "point to" the existence of a Form--Ford uses an example of a soldier's death being meaningful, because it is a material instance of "patriotism." Meaning exists when we connect particular moments to that higher realm of Forms.