Julian’s post on JBP as postmodern


About PaulVK

Husband, Father of 5, Pastor
This entry was posted in Daily Links and Notes. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Julian’s post on JBP as postmodern

  1. I’ve read only this one post of Julian’s. I found it mostly nonsense and self-righteous justification.

    What did you think?

    • Julian says:

      I disagree. Tell me why you think so 🙂

      • Of course you disagree, or you wouldn’t have written it in the first place.

        If you actually want some effort in this, I owe you more. I’m only relating my impression, rather than analyzing.

        It doesn’t seem to me you pay attention to JP, but impose your preconceptions.

        It doesn’t seem to me you understand postmodernism well, but I’m not qualified to assess the point.

        I think you miss JP’s balance and breadth. “It’s complicated, nonobvious.”

        Paul has made some astute observations about JP. My impression was you hadn’t listened to Paul either.

        Again, not much of an effort from me. Perhaps some specifics from you for me to try to address?

        • Julian says:

          I would love to hear more, having a blog is all about honing your ideas so I appreciate good faith criticism.

          Some things to get out of the way first, I am not using Postmodern in a critical way, nor am I using it in a particularity rigorous, well defined way. I see postmodernism as a critique of the modernist epistemology, a recognition that there is a meaning crisis, a focus on the subjective instead of the objective, a phenomenological approach, a critique of liberalism and the modern politics order and a deconstruction of modernist ways of thinking and seeing the world.

          I think Peterson maps on more to a postmodern than a modern way of thinking, though he is slippery here. Ultimately I think he is somewhere beyond both as I say in my conclusion.

          I have been following both PVK and JP quite closely, so I think I have a good grasp of what both are saying.

          As for specifics, I think my key point is this: postmodern thinkers think phenomenologically, as does Peterson. It seems to me that the logic Peterson uses to call The new atheists Christians, is the same logic the social justice types use to call the United States a “white supremicist” country. Neither is operating at the level of explicit belief.

          Just a quick response, hope that’s enough to get a conversation going.

        • Julian says:

          Another commenter had a similar critique on my blog, here is how I defined my use of postmodernism for him:
          Postmodernism, as I think of it, takes phenomenology and existentialism seriously and thinks in those terms. Thus there is a greater focus on the subjective experience of the individual, which isn’t characteristic of modernity as I think of it. This existential/phenomenological outlook, opens up critiques of modernist epistemology. Postmodernists are also concerned with the crisis of meaning modernity has created and either revel in it, or try to come up with solutions. Finally, Postmodernists offer political critiques of the modern political order and ideas of progress: here I would say Peterson is not a postmodernist because he is a liberal in the classic sense and is very much a defender of the modern political order.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s