<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: One of the Best Treatments of Postmodernism ever Written
Review: I cannot speak highly enough of this book. Middleton and Walsh have put together a superb book treating the rise of postmodernism from a Christian theological perspective. Middleton and Walsh are to be commnded for doing what few other evangelical theologians have been able to do: actaully reading, understanding and engaging postmodern writers. Other medicore and reactionary theologians like Millard Erickson, David Wells and (especially) Douglas Groothuis have attempted to write Christian "refutations" of postmodernism simply by digging in their heels and covering their ears, wanting to return to the "good old days" of modernity (which were of course, only good for white males).
Walsh and Middleton offer a far superior treatment of the issues that engages critically and constructively with Derrida, Rorty and other key postmodern figures. One of the great achievments of this (over-against the afore mentioned authors) is that Middleton and Walsh don't just tip their hat to the evils of modernity and then go on to espouse the philosophical presuppositions that undergird it. Rather they seriously reckon with the fact that modernity was a tower of Babel and was only able to grow through violence and exploitation (particularly of women, blacks and the third world). This honesty is much needed in light of the callous and superficial treatments given by theologians such as Groothuis (though, in fairness he does care about gender issues).
The other facet of this book that is particularly commendable is the fact that Walsh and Middleton actually examine how the biblical narrative is able to withstand and speak to the postmodern critique of metanarratives rather than simply attempting to show how postmodernism is "self-refuting" as others try to do. Walsh and Middleton show how the particular Christian narrative is able to avoid the postmodern criticisms of totalization and violence. This response, is I think the right way to engage such questions rather than simply using modernistic philosohical categories to refute postmodern criticisms which is to beg the question from the begining.
There is too much in this book to go into it in depth. One of the most helpful contributions of Walsh and Middleton is their articulation of a covenantal epistemology of gift over-against the epistemology of domination of modernity and epistemological anti-realism of radical postmodernity (and the souped up modernism that sometimes masquarades as critical realism). Their grounding of epistemology in God as creator and covenantal gifter is a splendid alternative to the other options that many theologians simply borrow from modernist philosophy.
Finally, this book is also very readable and engaging. While it certainly doesn't read like a children's book, it is far more accesible than many of the other Christian treatments of postmodernism. As such, I believe that this is an ideal book that has much to say, not only to the academy but to the church as a whole.
Rating:
Summary: The good old days were not that good
Review: I loved reading this book. It begins with a review of modernity, and explains how it is based on "the progress myth." Essentially the notion that science will win out. It accepts the pitfals of this position and then develops the postmodern response. The authors then point out that postmodernity is also based on a flawed myth. Orthodox christianity is developed as an alternative- based on a true myth. Much better than a call to return to the good old days.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Summary of the postmodern question
Review: If you want to read one book on a Christian response to the post-modern cultural phenomenon, I don't think this is the one. They survey a number of theorists on post-modernity, but they do little to convert jargon into English. They offer a modest contribution by suggesting the obligation to acknowledge a "call" to be stewards of creation in response to God's "gift" of creation, but I'd suggest you read Walter Truett Anderson's "Reality Isn't What It Used To Be" for a first-hand account by a thoroughly post-modernist and then pick up Dietrich Bonhoffer's "Cost of Discipleship" for the Christian response part of the equation.
Rating: 
Summary: Authors Give Away Too Much
Review: Middleton and Walsh demonstrate a solid knowledge of the postmodern (poststructuralist) critique of truth. And they are correct is asserting that this critique must be dealt with as Christians, not dismissed. I would even join them in agreeing that truth, though it may exist, cannot be known without the uncertainty generated by our contextualized perspectives on truth.However, I disagree with the step that Middleton and Walsh take in casting the claims of Christianity as therefore preferable over other claims because of the salutary benefits of Christian claims. In other words, the inaccessibility of truth may result in power-backed claims to truth winning out over the truth claims of the weak simply because it's all about power, but I don't agree that Christianity should therefore get positive points because it is the religion of the weak and marginalized. That's rhetoric, or sophistry. Christianity deserves an audience for its claims because many of its claims reflect the completely legitimate conclusions to be drawn from a real story that began long ago and continues today. That is the story of the relationship between God and man. This story is recounted by many people - by Jewish leaders during Seder meals, by the Biblical authors, by Brian McLaren in his recent book The Story We Find Ourselves In, and so on. Each of these people bring their perspectives to their retelling of the story, but the story exists in external reality just as much as your computer screen does. The story must be engaged with - to completely deny the story requires doubting consciousness and thereby doubting the presence of reality. And that's a legitimate conclusion, as long as your honest about its implications for your life. The humility that a poststructuralist brings to discourse over the stories that comprise reality, a humility generated by awareness of one's perspective, is what animates a postmodern approach to Christian theology. Middleton and Walsh's approach is animated by the rhetorical strategies of those who seek to capitalize on the newfound inaccesibility of truth by portraying their truth claim as more beneficial or salutary than others.
Rating:
Summary: Authors Give Away Too Much
Review: Middleton and Walsh demonstrate a solid knowledge of the postmodern (poststructuralist) critique of truth. And they are correct is asserting that this critique must be dealt with as Christians, not dismissed. I would even join them in agreeing that truth, though it may exist, cannot be known without the uncertainty generated by our contextualized perspectives on truth. However, I disagree with the step that Middleton and Walsh take in casting the claims of Christianity as therefore preferable over other claims because of the salutary benefits of Christian claims. In other words, the inaccessibility of truth may result in power-backed claims to truth winning out over the truth claims of the weak simply because it's all about power, but I don't agree that Christianity should therefore get positive points because it is the religion of the weak and marginalized. That's rhetoric, or sophistry. Christianity deserves an audience for its claims because many of its claims reflect the completely legitimate conclusions to be drawn from a real story that began long ago and continues today. That is the story of the relationship between God and man. This story is recounted by many people - by Jewish leaders during Seder meals, by the Biblical authors, by Brian McLaren in his recent book The Story We Find Ourselves In, and so on. Each of these people bring their perspectives to their retelling of the story, but the story exists in external reality just as much as your computer screen does. The story must be engaged with - to completely deny the story requires doubting consciousness and thereby doubting the presence of reality. And that's a legitimate conclusion, as long as your honest about its implications for your life. The humility that a poststructuralist brings to discourse over the stories that comprise reality, a humility generated by awareness of one's perspective, is what animates a postmodern approach to Christian theology. Middleton and Walsh's approach is animated by the rhetorical strategies of those who seek to capitalize on the newfound inaccesibility of truth by portraying their truth claim as more beneficial or salutary than others.
Rating: 
Summary: Making the Bible safe for Eisogesis
Review: This book purports to be both a critique of Postmodern culture and a Biblical path into the future. In the end it is an almost total acceptance of the postmodern revolt against enlightenment rationalism, complete with the implication that the Christian church of the last few centuries is hopelessly absorbed into that "enlightenment project".
While the authors do a bit of critique of the fringes of radical PM, they have totally woven themselves into the garment. True to the more radical positions of the PM movement, the assumption is that that we have two choices and only two - Modernist arrogance or Postmodern subjectivity. While they authors accept the PM notion that all "totalizing" systems are evil, they blindly swallow the most totalizing and destructive notion of all, that we are hopelessly locked into subjectivity about anything and everything.
In addition, regular usage of left of center code words such as "victim", "oppressor", "violence" and "terror" show the real cards the authors are holding. If you have a position of power or influence it is assumed you MUST be an oppressor, you have no choice because of your Western Enlightenment cultural arrogance. If you suggest you know something truly, you are part of the enlightenment system "totalizing" intellectual constructivism and thus of violent oppression. Simply asserting that something is true is an act of intellectual violence, which crushes the dignity of someone else whose viewpoint is different.
Their solution is to embrace the metanarrative of the Biblical story, in which the oppressed and suffering Israelites are rescued from Egypt, or in which Christ's identification with the poor and oppressed lights a path to radical equality. So they suggest a third alternative in a Biblical Metanarrative, but even that solution assumes the very philosophy they supposedly are critiquing.
In the end, though much is said about the Bible, since nothing can be deemed objective, the Bible cannot be used to test and evaluate the validity of Socrates, Bacon, Derrida, Foucault or anyone else. Scripture is just another story that may be intriguing and in fact unique because it seems to suggest answers that are not "oppressive" to the "marginalized". The proposed answer is to subjectively enter the "story" of the text and creatively write new chapters of the history of salvation based on what is in the end, very squishy and uncertain estimations of what God might be doing.
Thus PM eisogesis is imposed on the text. The Old Testament is not a story of human rebellion against God and honest records of triumphs and failings of fallen humans, rather it is reinterpreted from a PM viewpoint as a story of God's actions to right injustice and thwart the oppression of the marginalized by the unjust rulers. In the NT Christ's resurrection has more to do with identifying with the poor and oppressed than any 2000-year-old orthodox sense of atoning for personal sin.
The difference between these ramblings and the prophetic (though not flawless) analysis of someone like Francis Schaeffer is that Schaeffer rejected BOTH modernist rationalism AND the growing rejection of and "escape from" reason. As fallen and finite beings we can never know exhaustively or perfectly, but we can know sufficiently and truly - objectivity is imperfect, but not an illusion.
This inability of PM thinkers to see culture and personal perspective as an influence on but not a complete destruction of objective reality is frightening. It is also silly. Try as the PM advocates might to deny reality, it ends up crashing down on them eventually.
I suppose I could go down to my bank and suggest to the officers there that my perception of my account balance is quite different from their totalizing linguistic construct. As they try to toss me out on my ear, I could protest that their objective reading of the data is hopelessly enmeshed in their modernist illusions of objectivity and certainty and such totalizing views of mathematics and western economics are oppressive and violent to my freedom and dignity and economic well being. I could suggest that they should identify with my oppressed state. Of course the violence they would do to me at that point would go beyond language games. And the objective reality of my actual account balance would not bend to my subjective construction of it.
Modernism may need correcting, but intellectual suicide is not the answer.
Rating:
Summary: What is truth?
Review: To a certain extent, the title says it all. The truth is stranger than it used to be. Who would have ever guessed that there would be a book that takes both the postmodern intellectual paradigm and the evangelical sense of the Bible seriously? And yet, here it is. Perhaps this is a testament to both the resilency of the Bible in the face of even the most monumental of paradigm shifts in cultural and intellectual history, as well as an admission on the other hand that postmodernity is 'here to stay', and the differing intellectual pieces that make up postmodernism must be addressed, not ignored. Authors Middleton and Walsh ask in the first chapter four key questions, that they put in context of the controversy over honouring the discovery of Columbus in 1992. Whereas in the not-too-distant America, the 500th anniversary of Columbus' voyage to the New World would have been heralded as an historical success, in the growing postmodernity sensibility, the varying interpretations of Columbus (the destruction of Native America, the original intention of colonialism and resource exploitation, the fact that others had in fact 'discovered' America first, etc.) made sure than no particular view held sway. This was new -- we no longer knew who we were. Who are we? Where are we? What's wrong? What's the remedy? These are the key questions, and in typical postmodern fashion, they are deceptively simple in construction, and nearly impossible to answer completely. Whereas modernity saw society as always in progress, a sense of continuing evolution toward the better, postmodernity saw the failures of this -- empires fall and don't always lead to better situations; science cannot in fact answer all questions and solve all problems; reason and intelligence and individuality are not the unqualified 'goods' that the Enlightenment made them out to be. But not only is our worldview different, but how reality is constructed and deconstructed is different (can there be a book on postmodernism that does not reference Derrida? If there were, would it be worth anything?). The self becomes de-centered, and objective history and society gives way to narrative -- Middleton and Walsh reference Alistair MacIntyre's significant work 'After Virtue', which, while far from being a postmodern book, anticipates much of postmodernism's interest in recovering useful aspects of the ancient and pre-modern. One of the concerns of postmodernism in relation to narrative is the distrust of the universalising and totalising nature of metanarratives, i.e., making all things fit into one story, usually told one way. The authors an interlude serving as a bridge between the two primary sections of the text, here to examine a few crucial points, one of which being an obvious problem -- if postmodernism is suspicious of metanarrative, how can Christianity and its attendant scriptures have any real authority, being one of the greater and more powerful metanarratives in human history? Middleton and Walsh suggest that metanarratives may be pharmacological in nature -- take enough and it is a remedy, take the wrong dose, and it is poisonous, even fatal. One thing vital to the biblical project of the authors is that this become not just a story, but our story, something that we not only believe and espouse, but inside of which we dwell. Referencing such biblical scholars as Brueggeman and Trible, Middleton and Walsh acknowledge the need to be honest about the diversity within the scriptures and the sometimes terrible texts included. There is an overall chiastic structure to the book, akin to various biblical passages in both testaments. Middleton and Walsh look for internal norms and guidance from scripture -- while these might be arguable, they correctly identify that postmodernism in-and-of-itself does not provide a norma normans. One criticism of Middleton and Walsh's overall approach is that they tend to see postmodernism as more monolithic than in fact it is; perhaps this owes more to the structure and limitations of the text than to their actual views. Ultimately, Middleton and Walsh look at the biblical texts in ways that probably become too liberal for most strive to see the Bible as an inerrant text. However, it would be hard for anyone to say that the biblical text is not taken seriously, both as a normative document and as a living embodiment of God's word. Perhaps God is, in God's own self, postmodern, defying conventional notions of foundation and totalising -- the fact that God created things that are not God might speak to this. A fascinating text.
Rating:
Summary: What is truth?
Review: To a certain extent, the title says it all. The truth is stranger than it used to be. Who would have ever guessed that there would be a book that takes both the postmodern intellectual paradigm and the evangelical sense of the Bible seriously? And yet, here it is. Perhaps this is a testament to both the resilency of the Bible in the face of even the most monumental of paradigm shifts in cultural and intellectual history, as well as an admission on the other hand that postmodernity is 'here to stay', and the differing intellectual pieces that make up postmodernism must be addressed, not ignored. Authors Middleton and Walsh ask in the first chapter four key questions, that they put in context of the controversy over honouring the discovery of Columbus in 1992. Whereas in the not-too-distant America, the 500th anniversary of Columbus' voyage to the New World would have been heralded as an historical success, in the growing postmodernity sensibility, the varying interpretations of Columbus (the destruction of Native America, the original intention of colonialism and resource exploitation, the fact that others had in fact 'discovered' America first, etc.) made sure than no particular view held sway. This was new -- we no longer knew who we were. Who are we? Where are we? What's wrong? What's the remedy? These are the key questions, and in typical postmodern fashion, they are deceptively simple in construction, and nearly impossible to answer completely. Whereas modernity saw society as always in progress, a sense of continuing evolution toward the better, postmodernity saw the failures of this -- empires fall and don't always lead to better situations; science cannot in fact answer all questions and solve all problems; reason and intelligence and individuality are not the unqualified 'goods' that the Enlightenment made them out to be. But not only is our worldview different, but how reality is constructed and deconstructed is different (can there be a book on postmodernism that does not reference Derrida? If there were, would it be worth anything?). The self becomes de-centered, and objective history and society gives way to narrative -- Middleton and Walsh reference Alistair MacIntyre's significant work 'After Virtue', which, while far from being a postmodern book, anticipates much of postmodernism's interest in recovering useful aspects of the ancient and pre-modern. One of the concerns of postmodernism in relation to narrative is the distrust of the universalising and totalising nature of metanarratives, i.e., making all things fit into one story, usually told one way. The authors an interlude serving as a bridge between the two primary sections of the text, here to examine a few crucial points, one of which being an obvious problem -- if postmodernism is suspicious of metanarrative, how can Christianity and its attendant scriptures have any real authority, being one of the greater and more powerful metanarratives in human history? Middleton and Walsh suggest that metanarratives may be pharmacological in nature -- take enough and it is a remedy, take the wrong dose, and it is poisonous, even fatal. One thing vital to the biblical project of the authors is that this become not just a story, but our story, something that we not only believe and espouse, but inside of which we dwell. Referencing such biblical scholars as Brueggeman and Trible, Middleton and Walsh acknowledge the need to be honest about the diversity within the scriptures and the sometimes terrible texts included. There is an overall chiastic structure to the book, akin to various biblical passages in both testaments. Middleton and Walsh look for internal norms and guidance from scripture -- while these might be arguable, they correctly identify that postmodernism in-and-of-itself does not provide a norma normans. One criticism of Middleton and Walsh's overall approach is that they tend to see postmodernism as more monolithic than in fact it is; perhaps this owes more to the structure and limitations of the text than to their actual views. Ultimately, Middleton and Walsh look at the biblical texts in ways that probably become too liberal for most strive to see the Bible as an inerrant text. However, it would be hard for anyone to say that the biblical text is not taken seriously, both as a normative document and as a living embodiment of God's word. Perhaps God is, in God's own self, postmodern, defying conventional notions of foundation and totalising -- the fact that God created things that are not God might speak to this. A fascinating text.
Rating:
Summary: A good start on postmodernism
Review: Walsh and Middleton, famed for their work on The Transforming Vision, have continued in their endeavor to wrestle with Christian faith in light of our present culture. By starting off with an excellent overview of how we came to be in the state we now know as "postmodernity", Walsh and Middleton write a scathing attack on modernity. The reader becomes relived when we can appreciate that in fact there are many good things to which we may bid farewell in modernity. The concept of the autonomous, objective self is replaced by cultural and worldview lenses. Here is where Walsh and Middleton are strongest and where this is in many ways a continuation of The Transforming Vision - they employ the concept of the "Wordview" to show that Christianity is also one among many worldviews. How this worldview is enacted in culture is the second part of the book. Ultimately, it is not just a "view" but a perspective that is told through stories - narratives. The Christian story is a narrative through which we continue to live out. This is where the more dubious idea of the "biblical metanarrative" is described in the book. Postmodernity is precisely a rejection of ANY metanarrative, particularly the modern metanarrative of the objective, autonomous human who can manipulate nature and know truth objectively. And it is a metanarrative that has often co-opted Christian faith over the past few hundred years. While Walsh and Middleton acknowledge that this is true, they nonetheless make a case that the best way to express the Christian faith is to live out the biblical metanarrative of the faith in our culture. I find their argument that a maetanarrative can be proclamed as normative to not be entirely convincing. They argue that by its nature of being an inclusive, non-human centred narrative that it can appeal to the postmodern mind. I do not see how this is going to be convincing as a normative claim. With that said, it is one of the better books to wrestle with the philosophies of our age. And I applaud them for it.
<< 1 >>
|
