Had a series of interesting conversations last night while hanging out with some of my colleagues which included an administator at work, two science, one english and social studies teacher and a local journalist. The conversation centered around philosophy, particularly postmodernism and it's relationship to Christianity. I won't go into all of what was said because it would probably take me hours so I'll limit myself to a few comments. For most of the evening I found myself covering the usual ground which means "trying" to explain what Postmoderism is not. Most folks associate Postmodernism with moral relativism/ anti-reason/logic/science/technology and religion. Did my best at trying to explain that postmodernism, as I understand/interpret it, is not against modernity and it's applications, but do concede it raises doubts and is critical to the "supremacy and monopoly" of the Enlightment/Modernism's methodology, assumptions, and applications. In my world, questioning or being critical of something is not the same thing as being against/anti, but, unfortunately alot of folks don't seem to understand or agree with this nuance.....regarding moral relativism.....In my book everyone is a moral relativist if you interpret moral relativism as an attempt to take situations and context into consideration when making ethical decisions which I believe is what everyone does to one degree or another. Also, as I understand postmodernism and ethics, postmodernists are not saying truth, right and wrong, etc. don't exist, but rather, they and I, do question the "foundations" truth claims are based on, which means that rationalists, fundamentalists,existentialists, or any other ists or isms no longer get a free ride...either or/black and white is no longer naturally assumed particularly when it comes to historical,theological,philosophical interpretation and metaphysical certainity. This does not imply that truth with a capital "T" does not exist but my ability to fully understand and assertain the full scope of such intellectual endeavors is limited by my limits as an individual and the limits of science, reason, etc.....thus....."moral assertions" about this or that are generally limited to "acts" of inhumanity/harm to other humans, mother earth, and the creatures that share the planet with us......regarding the relationship between postmodernism and Christianity.....One participant attempted, unsuccessfully, imo, to persuade everyone that the relationship and the effects of postmodernism on Christianity was nothing new under the sun but I did attempt to suggest that I do believe what we are seeing is "qualitatively" different than anything we have seen in the past. For thousands of years Christians and non Christians have argued and attempted to persuade each other about the Bible, the nature of Christ, and the various ethical implications and applications of the Christian tradition and worldview.....but.....during this time, as I understand and interpret it, most of the participants, most of the time, took an either or/black/white approach to such matters which often resulted in a sense of moral supremacy and assurance of certainity for the winners and heretical/pagan status for the losers....but....here is what I see as different in the current postmodern intellectual climate.....either or/blackwhite, is no longer the "only" or even the primary option for alot of folks, especially, when it comes to metaphysical questions, historical interpretations of the Christian tradition, and doctrinal conclusions about this or that....or the put it another way....both/and is now an "acceptable" if not perferable option for alot of folks....The implications....Did Jesus rise from the dead, walk on water, and heal the sick? Was he really born of virgin?....and.....did he pre-exist "before" he was born as John's Gospel asserts? I have my own opinion but "I" am no longer particularly interested in either asserting my own particular perspective nor do I believe it is probable that certainity can "ever" be achieved on such matters....which is why...."I" am willing to "live" and "accept" a both/and approach in the realm of metaphysics and theological interpretations, until or unless, new overwhelming evidence becomes self evident to me and everyone else in the future or a new fool proof Enlightment methology is introduced.....but....don't hold your breath.....things may become "somewhat" clearer in the future but history and the limits of the planet and the human race suggest to me that we will never achieve certainity or perfection. It's just the nature of the beast....anyway......back to my point.....Postmodernism, as I understand it, has effected the way we see and interpret the world and is "qualitatively" different, imo, from anything we have seen up to this point. In the past, Christians fought against each other, heretics, and the infidels, over this or that in an attempt to assert and impose their own interpretation of the Bible and reality and for what end? Not much to show for it from where I stand which is why I think alot of folks are more open to the idea of accepting a both/and approach when it comes to matters of metaphyics, doctrinal interpretation, and our acceptance/tolerance of the various/numerous Christian traditions which are a part of our history.......I hope this makes sense to anyone who might stumble across my attempt to communicate what I have been processing for quite a while now....