Postmodernism and its Resolution
An Attack on the Enlightenment
In the late 20th century, a movement emerged arguing powerfully against the claims of the Enlightenment and its scientific offspring.
The problem lay primarily with social science and societal use of natural science, because it is rather difficult to attack the testability and usefulness of the products of physical and biological science—although many postmodernists do.
Whereas postmodernism is a reaction against the 18th C Enlightenment and attacks its universalist claims for reason and objective structures of knowledge, the New Enlightenment of the 21st C is an evolution of that Enlightenment, respecting and encompassing its strengths but placing these within an illuminating context partly articulated by postmodern thinkers. See details.
Analysis of the Postmodern Mindset
Postmodernism is not a monolithic formalized doctrine. The following list of characteristics includes comments from the perspective of the THEE-Online Project and the New Enlightenment.
■ Rejection of grand narratives that explain history, society and human progress.
While postmodernism may be correct that knowledge is largely fragmented and local, that is no reason to ignore grand narratives, reject all the principles developed or deny their imaginative power. After all, postmodernism has all the features of a countervailing grand narrative.
THEE is a systematization and classification of observations that anyone is free to accept, refine or reject. It naturally includes many of the observations about power, culture and language made by postmodern writers.
■ Relativism and rejection of objective truth.
Truths, facts and knowledge are indeed often socially constructed, but that does not mean that it is impossible for facts and laws to be developed that can be recognized as valuable across cultures. Objectivity in science is simply the outcome of the methods employed. Serious scientists are aware that theories are provisional until falsified while reality itself is viewed as inherently unknowable. Postmodernism seems to regard its own principles as an objective truth.
THEE has identified 5 different forms of truth-and-reality emerging from the taxonomic structure. One of these fits postmodernism because it identifies social construction and the importance of perspectives in shaping knowledge. See details.
■ Suspicion of reason and logic.
Reason and logic are tools commonly used to serve dominant interests. However, that does not mean that reason and logic cannot be used for other purposes including disinterested inquiry: 'disinterested' meaning inquiry driven by specific values that counter bias. While it is easy to be misled and make reasoning mistakes, it is hard to see exactly how any person or group could function if they entirely rejected reason and logic.
THEE does use reason and logic, and any errors here should be identified as soon as possible. But reason and logic alone were not enough: discoveries also depended on awareness and the imagination.
■ There is no value-free inquiry because language and norms create knowledge.
Postmodernism asserts that reality, identity, knowledge and morality are constructed through language, social practices and cultural norms. That is probably true, and so we must ask what practices and cultural norms produce the most useful knowledge. Enlightenment-inspired approaches have been demonstrably valuable, but they have limitations especially in the social sciences—which, unsurprisingly, is where postmodern arguments are strongest.
THEE's structure confirms the postmodernist claim that no endeavour is value-free. So the important question is what values are being brought to bear in any particular case. In addition, the taxonomy identifies different inquiry ideologies including some used by postmodernists. See details.
■ Power and ideology are central to knowledge and indeed everything.
Power and ideology are indeed central to societies and their choices. But individuals and disciplines can still obtain and develop knowledge using criteria they believe appropriate. Any society that chooses to punish and control scientific exploration and systematic inquiry becomes poorer.
THEE is transdisciplinary so it does not fit within university power structures, and it uses systems thinking which struggles to get recognition and funding. It is not a product of societal power or any specific ideology, but rather analyses that power and includes and classifies many ideologies. The approach has its roots in the work of Schopenhauer and Freud with inputs, mostly unreferenced, from leading classical and modern thinkers and inquirers, .
■ Cynicism towards progress and universal values.
This cynicism reflects the distrustful, contemptuous and pessimistic thread that runs through some postmodernist writing. The reduction of the greats like Newton and Einstein to mere producers of cultural texts denies their profound and beneficial impact on all societies.
THEE proposes that there are universal ultimate values: peace, justice, strength, love, truth, freedom, beauty and more. Their realization for all is what progress is about. Exactly how those values are realized is a matter for imperfect human beings who seek what is good.
The Dialectical Resolution
If the 18th Century Enlightenment is the thesis, then postmodernism is the necessary anti-thesis. That polar opposition calls for a resolution in a synthesis, which is beautifully provided by the New Enlightenment of the 21st Century,
It is only through awareness that the harmful operation of power in society, including within scientific establishments, can be fully appreciated and potentially managed. It is only through responsibility, that desirable values can be intelligently incorporated into inquiry and other social endeavours.
The New Enlightenment is not a totalizing philosophy with a specific program for humanity. THEE itself provides for a great diversity of mindsets and a multiplicity of perspectives.
The New Enlightenment identifies the potential for human beings to use values to function in a way that will be far more satisfactory for themselves and their societies. Whether a constructive path is chosen or whether forces focused on power, wealth, deception and control take over is an existential choice for each and all.
Originally posted: 20-May-2026.
