The Self after Postmodernity

by Calvin O. Schrag

Sketching a new portrait of the human self in this thought-provoking book, leading American philosopher Calvin O. Schrag challenges bleak deconstructionist and postmodernist views of the self as something ceaselessly changing, without origin or purpose. Discussing the self in new vocabulary, he depicts an action-oriented self defined by the ways in which it communicates. The self, says Schrag, is open to understanding through its discourse, its actions, its being with other selves, and its experience of transcendence.

In his discussion, Schrag responds critically to both modernists and postmodernists, avoiding what he calls the modernists' overdetermination of unity and identity and the postmodernists' self-enervating pluralism. He agrees with postmodernist attacks on both the classical theory of the self as a metaphysical substance and the modern epistemological construal of the self as transparent mind, yet he maintains that jettisoning the self as understood in these terms does not mean jettisoning it altogether. The self as subject is not dead, nor are the constitutive features of self-formation and self-understanding. In addressing the role of culture in the dynamics of self-formation, the author offers a critique of Max Weber's and Jürgen Habermas's view of modernity as a radical differentiation of three cultural science, morality, and art; he adds religion as a legitimate fourth cultural sphere. The overview of Schrag's philosophy that The Self after Postmodernity provides will appeal to readers with an interest in literary criticism and religion as well as philosophy.

Genres: Philosophy

176 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1997

Reviews

[Eric · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book is now almost 30 years old, and takes its stance after the rise (and fall?) of postmodernism. Schrag is careful to acknowledge that the Cartesian self is still passe, but still maintains the self survives, though in what appears to be ephemeral form. Communication is the core of the newly reconstituted self, allowing the self to rise from the ashes of deconstruction. But communications should be positive (my word) and supportive, not negative. Not sure how the new self talks only from good thoughts, but I concede this is an area of "I know it when I see it." Even though we can determine (not rigorously of course) what is supportive and what is destructive speech, Schag offers no reason why to favor nice speech. Why could not the Schragian self arise from the abyss, spouting Nietzsche, laying low before him all who stand in his path to the Ubermensch?

The book offers no new and radical defense for the self, but instead seeks only to leave the reader with a limited hope that they can talk with other (selves) and constitute themselves anew. But in defense of Schrag, when the book came out the wasteland of Western though seemed pervasive, meaning Schrag was taking more of a contrarian position than would appear nearly 30 years on. No new metanarrative dominates the academy, which has the side effect of diminishing the impact of the book.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book travels between four concepts of self-hood, building up not to a conclusion but a finished survey. I thought the choices of po-mo representatives were made well for the topic at hand. The book itself is thankfully much easier to read--in fairly plain English--unlike most postmodernists.