This is the point you seem to keep missing: Since we don't know (per postmodernism) what objective reality is, then knowing whether someone is honest is also unknowable.

That is the self-contradicting nature of postmodernism. It claims to value something it claims cannot be known.

Since I didn't say there is nothing to it, the rest of your post is irrelevant. I was simply pointing out the fact that any interpretation that I might give to it would be only one among a myriad of interpretations.

The issue we are talking about is certainty. The fact that no one can agree on what Jesus or the Bible is saying in pretty good evidence that certainty doesn't even exist within Christianity.

This has nothing to do with whether or not anyone else has this problem. Pointing this out is an avoidance, not a position.

I'm not missing this point. It is only further evidence that any claims to certainty on any point are contradictory. Postmodern thought simply accepts this. By nature we are subjective beings and subjectivity is the only thing we have.

Claiming that objectivity exists without being able to demonstrate it, other than pointing out the contradictory nature of other viewpoints, is not objective proof of anything.



And this is the point you keep missing. Postmodernism is not claiming objective proof. It is simply admitting that we ultimately base what we decide is true on a subjective means. This is the default position in the absence of any other demonstration. It is an attempt at honesty, not a claim of ultimate honesty.

Christianity does this same thing by appealing to Faith, which in reality is not evidence of anything even though Paul claims it to be evidence of things not seen.

The only thing I see coming from Christian thought is attacks on other attempts at truth. The implication is that if they are discredited, then Christianity must be true.

It makes far more sense to me that the default position is "I don't know" than Christianity. Christian claims just seem arrogant to me.

The only way postmodernism can ever be championed, is through such gobbledygook, by misusing words so that they have no meaning, and then claiming there is no meaning.

It is not an attempt at honesty. It is an attempt to appear honest, while denying honesty is possible. That's my point about fleeing responsibility. By simply claiming the impossibility of evaluating outcomes, it eliminates accountability and responsibility.



Don't know how Christianity got involved. I have been using nothing other than the simplest logic, which demonstrates the vapid nature of postmodernism.

Does 2+2=4? or 22? Postmodernism avers we can never really know, since all mathematical systems are merely human representations of symbolic relationships which can never be verified.

As a philosophy, postmodernism is a cheat. For example, ask the postmodern if the law of gravity actually exist? Since reality is subjectively constructed postmoderns can never be certain. But they don't jump off tall buildings, just in case.

And don't bother debunking Modernism. I already have. Your continued posts against certainty and, most recently, out of no where, on Christianity demonstrate that postmodernism is a reactionary philosophy. It knows what everything is not, but doesn't know what anything is.

A very interesting subject. "Postmodernism," the philosophy, is not easy to understand esp. with so many cumbersome quotes and definitions on the web often jammed full of long mysterious words like epistomolgy, ontology, etc. The clearest expression of it's main ideas I've yet found is in the following quotation from a PBS glossary.


Postmodernism: ‘A general and wide-ranging term which is applied to literature, art, philosophy, architecture, fiction, and cultural and literary criticism, among others. Postmodernism is largely a reaction to the assumed certainty of scientific, or objective, efforts to explain reality. In essence, it stems from a recognition that reality is not simply mirrored in human understanding of it, but rather, is constructed as the mind tries to understand its own particular and personal reality. For this reason, postmodernism is highly skeptical of explanations which claim to be valid for all groups, cultures, traditions, or races, and instead focuses on the relative truths of each person. In the postmodern understanding, interpretation is everything; reality only comes into being through our interpretations of what the world means to us individually. Postmodernism relies on concrete experience over abstract principles, knowing always that the outcome of one's own experience will necessarily be fallible and relative, rather than certain and universal.’ -http://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/gengloss/postm-body.html

Sounds reasonable, e.g. in religion we know that abstract principles are worthless without experience- everyone's experience is different.

Calling my statement gobbledygook is not a rationale. Its subjective. You simply are demonstrating my point.



Didn't say it was impossible to evaluate outcomes. Now you're making stuff up.



If I have to explain that to you, then there is no point dialoging.



That's your problem. Life is complex.

The reason the Christian world is divided on the concept or topic of truth is because they all build on the same book and the book is half the truth. God said to build on him. God also said that man can only live by every word that proceeded from the mouth of God. Not every word that Rome says proceeded from the mouth of God. Men who bind their understanding to the book are bound to the teachings of Rome when they have access to a much greater teacher that was promised. Yet men are raised to beliee the book is their shepard. This is a sad world.

If you interested in seeing just a peice of the end to the Christian confusion. Carefully review the information at this link. If you stop short of page 35 you will be missing out on an amaing ancient testimony that illustrates the current state of mankinds salvation. The witness presented is verified ancient by more than one source.

I hope this information blesses you greatly. You will need PDF viewer to see the information.

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/the%20death%20and%20resurrection.pdf

Since, according to you, everything is subjective, then so is what you said--which reduces everything to nonsense, no matter how many abstract nouns and verbs are attached to it.

This statement condemns itself.

Thanks for posting this. This is a good summary.