Postmodernist Vs. Modernist Vs. Personal Position on Faith

Soc 380 Final Essay

Topic 1: Postmodernist vs. Modernist vs. Personal position on Faith

Topic 2: What did you learn in this class?

Written By: Angela Gonzalez

Topic 1: Postmodernist vs. Modernist Position on Science and Religion

We have all at one time or another asked ourselves the question “Should I believe this?” Doubt is simply another part of the human experience. When we doubt our faith, however, it can be more crucial than many other doubts we have, because of the believed consequences that come along with it. Where there is doubt people begin to look for ways to rationalize whether what they believe is more right than what someone else believes. Science and religion, two means in which knowledge is obtained from the world, are used by post modernist and modernist to justify faith or lack there of. In this paper I will discuss the contradicting views postmodernist and modernist have on the separation and overlap of scientific knowledge and religious knowledge. Whether you believe one view over the other boils down to personal choice and acceptance of the idea based on ones experiences, therefore I will also discuss my opinion on the connectivity among faith, rationality, objective truth and ways of gaining and testing the truth of knowledge for both science and religion.

Let’s begin by discussing the Enlightenment thought of modernist’s that only that which can be scientifically measured and quantified and reasoned through logically is true knowledge. We can have true knowledge about time in space, fitness, age or the power of your punch, but what, about things that can not be scientifically measured such as beauty, morals, and other matters of the spirit. It does not seem right to say that we can not obtain true knowledge of such things so we have inherited the modernist belief that such things are matters of opinion. In other words, they are subjective matters having only to do with the individual’s experiences and preferences.

This modernist scientific mindset is devastating for religious beliefs. Though some religious beliefs can be empirically tested there are others, such as the nature of God and justification by faith which cannot be weighed or measured. These central elements of religious knowledge can therefore be said to be matters of personal opinion, or worse figments of imagination. This contradicting relationship between the scientific and religious approach of knowledge can have a tragic effect on a believer of faith because it is very easy for the individual to get caught up in providing for themselves the kind of impossible logical certainty for their beliefs a nonbeliever might demand.

On the other hand, there are postmodernists who deny the very possibility of true knowledge at all. Postmodernists believe that truth is made up of our own imagination and desires. They believe there is no single account, or meta-narrative, of reality that covers everything. Instead they believe that there is no way to know definitive truths at all. Therefore, our own realities are created for us partly by our society and partly by our own exercise of power. Since postmodernists say evidence means nothing regarding the truth value of our faith, the idea that truth is found in many different religions is now valid. This non-scientific approach to knowledge also causes problems with the religious approach to knowledge because it leaves believers wondering why they should hold to their beliefs when others might be more attractive to the lifestyles they wish to live.

On one hand there are the modernists who believe that reason is the only truly reliable source of knowledge and on the other hand there are postmodernist who seem to believe in anything, everything, and nothing. I personally do not swear by one or the other when it comes to my position on faith, truth and knowledge. I can not completely disagree with modernist about the value of scientific and mathematical reasoning. Scientific analysis has proven that the world is round and physics can tell you how fast you can drive on a curve without tipping over; however, the immeasurable knowledge of the spirit I feel has more importance than that of the external nature. Without individual spirits a human is merely a robot.

I also feel that an individual’s faith cannot be rationalized but the need for faith in society can be because if faith did not exist people would live in misery of the unknown. However, doubt and worry I feel is sometimes a good thing because it acts as a jumpstart to new knowledge by encouraging critical thinking.