One consistent thread of postmodernism is to deny that human beings can possess absolute truth. This is not necessarily to say that Absolutes do not exist (although some indeed say this), but rather that our condition as human beings makes it impossible for us to grasp them. This makes a lot of people very uncomfortable and some downright angry.
Merold Westphal, in Overcoming Onto-Theology, makes the following observation about these objectors:
One does not even have to listen very closely to those who present themselves as defender of Absolute Truth or Absolute Values to hear the all too frequent follow-up: “And since We are the defenders of Absolutes, it should come as no surprise that we are the ones in possession of them. Our theories are the Truth and our practices are the Good.” One of the tasks of a theologically motivated appropriation of postmodernism is to challenge this move in all its forms, blatant and subtle. For just as I do no become purple by speaking about violets, so I do not become absolute by speaking about God. The divine character of revelation does not cancel out the human character of my attempt to say what it means. (79)
Excellent post because those who pretend to “possess” the “truth” are potentially very dangerous. The whole so called ID movement fits into this category. One of the influential books is titled Total Truth.
Please check out these related references on Truth, Reality, and The Beautiful.
1. http://www.dabase.org/2armP1.htm#ch1
2. http://www.dabase.org/dht7.htm
3. http://www.dabase.org/truthfrl.htm
4. http://global.adidam.org/books/eleutherios.html
5. http://global.adidam.org/books/transcendental-realism.html
Thanks for the comment John, and offering up your references.
I do find myself in disagreement — often profoundly — with much contained in those links. I browsed through #4, and by my reading it would fall under the same indictment from what I shared as the ID movement does. Not only this, but at least the ID movement provides some arguments… all I see here is simple assertions.
Still, I’m wondering, what do you find attractive about these writings? What is it that causes you to offer them up on a blog like this? I’m curious…
Matt, I have pointed you to these references to introduce you to the most extraordinary Divine Revelation ever given on this planet. Such a claim is of course is a complete offence to the usual Christian and indeed all westerners.
What then are Adi Da’s qualifications, and what is His perspective.
He IS the Divine Conscious Light Incarnate in a human form, for real right now in 2007-2008 — -not 2000 years as the mythological “jesus”.
He speaks from and as the “perspective” of the Divine Conscious Light. Again this is “impossible” for us westerners. See.
1. http://www.kneeoflistening.com
2. http://www.dabase.org/tfrbklih.htm
I came across your blog via a browse on What Would Jesus Deconstruct. The answer is of course everything about pharasaical (false)religion. And most, if not all, of what is called religion in this day IS false. See for instance.
1. http://www.dabase.org/exochrist.htm
2. http://www.dabase.org/spiritw.htm
This necessary deconstruction of ALL of our illusions is exactly what Adi Da has done.
In some sense Adi Da’s essays seem to be mere statements, but all of His writings are precisely argued and reasoned and Adi Da invites/demands that people consider His arguments thoroughly. He has always quite explicitly stated — -do NOT believe anything that I say — -thoroughly study and consider my written word and really find out if it is true.
You state that the ID movement offers arguments, which they do. But they are false arguments and essentially dishonest too, concealing a hidden, essentially dark, even totalitarian, agenda.
The title Total Truth bears witness to this possibility. We “possess” the “only truth” and we are going to do whatever it takes to re-create USA culture after our own image. And look at their politics and cultural affiliations altogether.
They have nothing whatsoever to do with Real God or the Divine Conscious Light.
John: sorry that your comment sat waiting for approval for so long: I was on the road and any comment containing more than 2 links is automatically held for moderation.
I thank you for coming back with more engagement in this conversation. I affirm that Adi Da appears to have some very wise things to say about life, while rejecting his claims to divinity.
You are, however, engaging in a fundamental misunderstanding of deconstruction. Deconstruction (as far as anyone can define it) is not so much a stripping away of illusions as it is about pointing out the contradictions and instabilities within every determinate conception of truth, exposing us to the undecidability that is the condition of every decision. The stripping away of illusions is an old Enlightenment chestnut (think Kant) but deconstruction shows that everything has a bit of illusion woven into it.
Oh, and I’m a Canadian.