Ira Chernus  
PROFESSOR OF RELIGIOUS STUDIES
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT BOULDER

 

STUDIES AIDS FOR RLST 2400

 

STUDY AID:  MODERNITY

 

            In our study of "the American way of life" we have looked at some ways in which mainstream U.S. traditions typify the modern industrial age.  It began to develop in 17th century northwest Europe.  It reached its full development in western Europe and the U.S. before World War I (1914).  Although it is influenced by religious traditions, it is largely a secular nomos.  The reading from Theodore Roszak shows some of the basic elements in modernity.  Here is a summary of those elements: 

 

1.         The public (economic and political) sphere of life is separated from the       private sphere of individual meaning (including religion)

2.         The public sphere is dominated by the myth of objective consciousness,       which says that:

            a. All reality is divided into the rational mind (In-Here) and the material                  world (Out-There)

            b. In-Here should have full prediction of, and control over, Out-There,                     which is inert

            c. Machines are the ideal model for a perfectly functioning In-Here; machines should therefore have as much power as possible

3.         Society is a technocracy run by experts who implement the myth of objective             consciousness most fully

4.         Technocratic knowledge is value-free; it can be applied to any goals

5.         Public goals and values do not need to be sanctioned by religion

6.         Truth means technocratic knowledge, not the wisdom of choosing good goals

7.         The best political system, democracy, requires each citizen to function as     a purely rational intellect

8..        The democratic process is subordinated to the demands of the technocracy

9.         Technocrats can provide the highest good for society--material progress

10.       The individual's value depends on playing a bureaucratic role within the             technocracy

11.       By modelling oneself on technocrats and machines, the individual can be      most productive and achieve the fullest possible self-development

12.       In modernity some basic needs are still unmet by the production system.

13.       Therefore society still values new ideas about how to improve, how to make             more progress, even if it means major changes in the existing nomos. 

14.       Individual identity and meaning arise from hopes for a better future, which   requires a clear awareness of the difference between the past and present.

 

 

 

STUDY AID: THE CONSUMER SOCIETY:  Here are some of the key points that distinguish the consumer society (from around the 1920s to around the 1960s) from the modern society that preceded it, according to Marcuse:

 

1.         Now technology can meet everyone's basic or true needs with relatively little labor required.

2.         Since we can produce more than we really need, the individual's main role in society is to consume.    

3.         Individuals now achieve meaning primarily by consuming rather than producing; the consuption system defines what counts as "meaningful" in  terms of the goods & services we can buy.

5.         In order to find personal meaning and form our identities, we must internalize the system's idea of meaning; i.e., we must work in order to be able to consume more commodities.

6.         When we consume a commodity (a good or service) we are actually consuming the entire system of which it is a part.

7.         Each commodity is a sign of some level of status in the society, though the link between commodity and status level is largely arbitrary.

8.         Our main task in society is to learn the system of commodity-signs and participate in it by consuming.

9.         The nomos of the consumer society is legitimated not by some divine or cosmic reality, but by its ability to go on producing new commodities.

10.       Consuming is the way we root ourselves in the contemporary nomos and therefore gain a sense of security and meaning in life. 

11.       There is no way to articulate alternative routes to a meaningful life; all possible alternative ways of life are by definition meaningless.

12.       Since all our needs, as the system defines them, are met by the system, and alternatives can't be imagined, there is no room for criticism or visions of a better future. 

13.       We feel free within this system because it defines freedom in terms of making choices between commodities (most of which are virtually identical and/or unnecessary) and making choices between political candidates, all of  whom support the system.

14.       Since there is no way to imagine a realm of freedom outside the system, the individual's true freedom to define his/her own needs disappears; the individual is increasingly alienated.

15.       The production/consumption system sees itself as perfectly rational, because it defines rationality in terms of technical reason and the myth of objective consciousness:  rational means more efficient at getting jobs done, not wiser in knowing whether jobs need to be done at all.

16.       All protest against the system seems irrational, since there is no way to see how alternatives could be efficiently put into operation.

 

 

 

STUDY AID:  MODERNISM

 

            The modern nomos seems to have great confidence in its ability to represent reality literally and accurately, so that it can control reality.  But within modernity a major doubt grew up that undermined this confidence.  The doubt is reflected in the cultural style known as "modernism."  Here are some of its principal feature: 

 

1.         Rapid change makes it harder to believe in a coherent unified world  Out-There; this in turn casts doubt on a firmly unified self In-Here. 

2.         Critics within the modern nomos raise questions about the myth of objective consciousness.  They ask whether reality can be rationally analyzed and  controlled.  They ask whether there really is a clear difference between  In-Here and Out-There, between subject and object.

3.         This leads to doubt about how images (words, pictures, etc) can really "re- present" external reality (Out-There)--how we can genuinely relate to "authentic" reality.

4.         Therefore images become detached from the reality they are supposed to represent.  The images become independent realities of their own; reality  becomes even more fragmented.

5.         Modern people are ambivalent about unity or totality.  They want to get it back to preserve their sense of meaning in life, but they fear it will limit their individual freedom.

 

 

STUDY AID:  POSTMODERNISM 

 

Here are some of the key points of the postmodern (PM) nomos, which is supposed to have begun in the 1960s and developed fully during the '70s and '80s, according to Gitlin and Jameson: 

 

1.         PM (= postmodernism) completes the tendency toward fragmentation begun within modernism:

            a. Images become signs; they do not point or refer to any reality beyond themselves; they are self-referential.

            b. The signs are random pieces, drawn from random codes, put together in   random ways; the various signs within a cultural artifact do not unite to         form a unity.

            c. All styles and genres, from any era in the past as well as the present, can be combined in any manner; there is no difference between "high" and   "lowbrow" or "mass" culture.

            d. Since signs have no relationship to reality, the meaning of each sign is arbitrary, and the meaning of each artifact containing the signs is           arbitrary.

            e. The signs may comment on each other, through a process of transcoding, but they cannot form a new code, so they comment on anything beyond           themselves or have any meaning beyond their mere existence. 

2.         In PM people no longer look for unity or the meaning of the totality; theyassume the fragmentation and meaninglessness:  "Modernism tore up unity and postmodernism has been enjoying the shreds" (Gitlin).

3.         Some interpreters see PM as a response to the counterculture of the '60s:the nomos of modernity and consumerism, and the myth of objective      consciousness, were rejected; psychedelic culture carried fragmentation to   the extreme; but no new nomos emerged to give new meaning to life.

4.         Instead there is "knowing indifference"; the fragmentation of PM is   deliberate and self-conscious; it is like a game in which all the players        know that it is just a game; the dominant mood is irony.

5.         PM has no sense of history: the past becomes a grab-bag of images, all of equal value (or of no value); there is so much novelty that we aren't            shocked by anything; we feel we've "seen it all"; so we don't look forward to anything.

6.         All change seems to lead to further fragmentation and disintegration, so itseems safer to avoid all change.

7.         The absence of a future and the fear of change, combined with the production/consumption system's capacity to satisfy all our wants, persuade             us that nothing can or should ever change; no criticism of the whole system seems worthwhile or even possible.

8.         PM individuals develop schizophrenic-like personalities; our minds are  filled with random images, and we don't worry about finding any unified            meaning or "authentic" relation to external reality.

9.         We get our identities from participating in many different bureaucratic roles and in many different social groups, but we don't try to relate them          to each other. 

10.       Many advocates of PM see it as the epitome of freedom:  since there is no unity there can be no single authority in society, no need for conformity,             no need to find our "true self".

11.       Critics of PM, such as Jameson, suggest that it has an underlying totality that undermines our freedom:  we are all stuck in the market & media system      (the production/consumption system) of late capitalism.

 

12.       Commodities become signs, and vice versa; each time we consume a commodity or a sign we are actually consuming the entire system of late capitalism-- we are consuming the process of consumption.

13.       PM means the global triumph of U.S. capitalism and culture; people all over the world have the "deep insane conviction that it has made all their       dreams come true" (Baudrillard).

14.       PM culture is defined by the mass media, especially television; life becomes an endless process of switching channels and consuming commercials. 15.        PM culture has several kinds of appeal:

            a. By consuming commodities and the media we consume the entire PM nomos, which gives us whatever sense of meaning we can still gain.

            b. PM's diversity and democracy make us feel free.

            c. Consumption offers a euphoric "commodity rush."

            d. Media images and commodities have great erotic appeal.

            e. The "postmodern sublime" fills us with awe; through consumption we gain a feeling of power, because we can relate to what is most powerful,    infinite, and "totally other" in our world--the late capitalist system itself.

16.       Fundamentalism is the characteristic form of religion in PM culture because it denies tensions:  between what is and what could be, between the past         and the present, between the literal and the spiritual. 

17.        PM's diversity brings richer options, more freedom, justice, and tolerance.

18.    But diversity also limits groups to micropolitics; all accept the market and the media as common ground

19.       Therefore cultural diversity may make it harder to challenge the totality;  it may create the illusion that once all groups are participating freely in       the mainstream, nothing more is needed to make life better for all.