I found an article about neomodernism on probe.org today, which addresses the inevitable coming of the new age of thought and how that might possibly affect us.  Since I am (admittedly) not an expert in the area, I am trying to soak up every bit of knowledge I can find about what this new mindset and worldview would consist of.  I doubt this author would contend to be an expert in defining the term, but he does have an M.A. from Southwestern (so that helps).

link:  What Comes After Post-Modern?

ps – If anyone knows of any good, scholarly sources for this topic, let me know.

I decided to check the most obvious of sources about neomodernism, that is, wikipedia.  Here is the link to the article, and I suggest that you read it.  Basically, what people are connecting the word “neomodernism” to is exactly what I described in my original post on the topic, minus the apathy and association with agnosticism.  As expected, neomodernism does not endorse “absolutes” of any kind.  It does, however, contest that there are purposes, and that there is only one intent given to an authorial work.  It didn’t suprise me to see Richard Dawkins’s name on the page either.  Atheism and neomodernism seem to go hand-in-hand.  Most of the atheists that I have known tend to think of themselves as intellectual counter-culturalists.  Thus, they percieve order, even natural order and basic truth, but do not purpose absolute truth other than that they are “absolutely sure” that God does not exist.

In my opinion, this philosophical construct of the humanities more aptly defines the reality of what many believe in society at present: percieved and undeniable order, but unwillingness to have faith in the unseen.

Here is an interesting blog article, apparently written in 1998 (and not sourced, unless it was the actual author), which deals with the need for new modern principles in the realm of art.

http://guydenning.blogspot.com/2006/01/neo-modern.html

It’s kind of a dry read, but it reamains at least somewhat thought provoking nonetheless.  You will notice that this author prefers not to use the term “postmodern” but rather sees the postmodern movement as an extension of modernism, as many do.

Don’t expect me to update much over the next few weeks, things are about to get chaotic in my life.  I will probably recover in about a month.  (I’m getting married!!!!! )

Oh, and the #1 page on google search for “neomodernity” is ME!  I still don’t claim “neomodernism” and “neomodern” however.  It’s a word that has been thrown around quite a bit more than I originally thought.

*update* – Turns out that it is an actual article by Guy Denning, who is a major proponent of neomodernism.  Wikipedia has a bit of information on him:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Denning  It’d be kind of neat to try and get an interview with him.

It seems to me that many of the Christian elite are attempting to prove society for what it appears to them to be, that is, a postmodern society full of nonsensical anti-truths.  In my observations, I seem to think that society at present truly is not so, at least not in the most radical sense of postmodernity.

Today, one would be hard pressed to find universities with professors who are completely dedicated to postmodern theory.  Postmodernism simply is not making the waves that it once made in the 1970s.  Its time in the spotlight is almost over, and many now see it as mere triviality, a funny laugh in the face of traditional methods.  Also, experimentation with postmodernism in the arts can only last for so long, because, well, it’s boring and it doesn’t make sense.  Nobody really wants to read a book that has no statement, watch a movie that has no resolution, or listen to music that does not appeal to natural senses.

In the stead of postmodernism, a sort of neomodernity fueled by agnosticism seems to be rising.  You also may call it apathy, if you will.  An undeniable fact is that modern society is full of information, and this fact rings true more so now than it ever has in the past.  Information is at the fingertips of anyone within reach of a computer.  A few key presses, and you are magically shown tutorials about how to do practically everything imaginable.  Also, television programs such as Discovery Channel’s “How It’s Made” are removing the sense of awe at the world around us.  Human beings understand how things work in much greater detail than ever before, and this leads to a basic sense of confidence in science, intelligence, technology, progress, and the future.

It takes a bold person to be an atheist.  Atheists are those who are, quite frankly, shooting their gun before aiming.  “Aha!” they say, “We have proven that their is no God!”  If they were honest, they would admit that their observations are incomplete.  If an atheist believes in science as the savior of mankind, that mankind can explain its existence through simple trial and error methods, then the atheist believes (on faith) that evidence will eventually arise that God does not, in fact, exist.

Most people are aware, however, that a cohesive, flawless, sensical scientific explanation of human existence simply is not available.  A great majority of these people do not believe in religion for the same reason that they are not atheists, because it requires the (quite critical) element of faith.  There are only two options remaining for those who do not leap out on faith:  despair or assumption.  Taken to its logical end, postmodernity ends in despair; yet this trend does not completely resonate throughout society.  Certainly there are those who lose their will to live, but they are few and far between.  Humans generally want to be alive.  Thus, there arises a group that will not reject logic, but will rather cling to it earnestly in the hope that eventually there will be an answer.  These are the neomodern agnostics.

Just what is a neomodern agnostic?  A person who rejects all notions of faith, relying solely on the observable, hoping for the eventual verification of broad scientific theory.  These are people who say, “We do not know, and at least for the present we cannot know, but eventually we might know.”  In predictable fashion, the “pendulum of world change” is swinging back toward much more Modernist tenets.  As a result, Feminists, Homosexual Advocates, Marxists, and Neo-hippies are much more bold in their advocacy, because they actually have a framework to set their worldview in.

An example for clarity’s sake:  Here we have Jane, a neo-modern, agnostic feminist.  She does not believe in God, because it requires too much faith on things that we do not (and in her eyes can not) know at present.  She is not an outright atheist however, because there is not enough evidence (yet) to disprove God.  She believes in the logic of science, and she has enough education to know that new discoveries about human beings and the universe are being made at rates which have never been precedented.  She is a hopeful person, hoping that humanity will eventually make amazing and alarming discoveries about the world she lives in that will further disprove the existence of a Higher Power.  She trusts in the knowledge of the scientists who are making these advancements.  Thus, she moves on about her life advocating for a cause that seems to her to be altruistic, relieving those who she deems to be oppressed (women) from a patriarchal, absurdly faith-based worldview.  Based on the limited amount of non-faith based information that she has, this is what she does to “make the world a better place,” and this gives her a reason for existence.

Postmodernism did indeed cast its ever-changing shadow over intelligentsia for some time, but its reign is slowly coming to an end.  Meet the new (and old) American idol:  Scientific Progress.

As followers of Christ, we should realize that agnostic activists are at least honest, yet they limit themselves to the amount of information that they know through observation.  We should pray that God would soften their hearts and open their eyes to the Truth of His word.