What do you think?
Rate this book
Beyond the Modern Age: An Archaeology of Contemporary Culture
The modern age has produced global crises that modernity itself seems incapable of resolving deregulated capitalism, consumerism, economic inequality, militarization, overworked laborers, environmental destruction, insufficient health care, and many other problems. The future of our world depends on moving beyond the modern age. Bob Goudzwaard and Craig G. Bartholomew have spent decades listening to their students and reflecting on modern thought and society. InBeyond the Modern Age they explore the complexities and challenges of our time. Modernity is not one thing but many, encompassing multiple worldviews that contain both the source of our problems and the potential resources for transcending our present situation. Through an archaeological investigation and critique of four modern worldviews, Goudzwaard and Bartholomew demonstrate the need for new ways of thinking and living that overcome the relentless drive of progress. They find guidance in the work of Rene Girard on desire, Abraham Kuyper on pluralism and poverty, and Philip Rieff on culture and religion. These and other thinkers point the way towards a solution to the crises that confront the world today. Beyond the Modern Age is a work of grand vision and profound insight. Goudzwaard and Bartholomew do not settle for simplistic analysis and easy answers but press for nuanced engagement with the ideologies and worldviews that shape the modern age. The problems we face today require an honest, interdisciplinary, and global dialogue. Beyond the Modern Age invites us to the table and points the way forward."
Paperback
Published May 7, 2017
10 people are currently reading
97 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
Read
July 15, 2017What happens when two academics from different disciplines get together to discuss the ailments of present-day society and some possible solutions? They pen a book, print it and get it publicized! And so Bob Goudzwaard, professor emeritus of economics and social philosophy at the Free University in Amsterdam, and Craig G. Bartholomew, the H. Evan Runner Professor of Philosophy and professor of religion at Redeemer University College in Ancaster Ontario, dean of the St Georges Centre for Biblical and Public Theology, and adjunct faculty at Trinity College Bristol, have done. “Beyond the Modern Age: An Archaeology of Contemporary Culture” is a 320 page weighty monograph digging down to the bedrock of four modern worldviews, dusting off and cataloging their finds, discussing ways to move beyond those worldviews, and finally, offering some guidance on approaches for bringing healing to a world of confusion and perplexity.
“Beyond the Modern Age” is a stout read with college students in mind, as well as those wondering what is happening in the 21st Century. Goudzwaard and Bartholomew do a load of dirty work excavating the history and trajectory of four modernities; the classic, the structural-critical, cultural-critical, and the post. While exhuming the artifacts of these four modernities the authors address the danger of ideologies and describe their three basic characteristics. First is that “one or more concrete societal goals must be achieved, acquired, or preserved at any cost.” Next, there is an increasing “dependence on the means or instruments needed to accomplish the goal.” Finally, the selection and imagery of who is “the enemy,” those who “oppose the implementation of the ultimate goal” and are the “obstacle to the dream offered by the ultimate goal, and thus must be eliminated by all means” (65-6). The writers then describe the four ultimate goals which activate people around the world: revolution, identity, material progress, and guaranteed security. The danger of being drawn into ideologies is that once the “ideologies take hold, then from that point forward people will tend to justify or legitimize any means of breaking out of their dreadful impasse” (72). I personally found this deliberation on ideologies a highly fruitful segment in the book that has sent me off pondering much that I see happening in the U.S.A. presently.
Probably the most significant portion of “Beyond the Modern Age,” at least in my mind, was the middle five chapters. In this second part of the book Goudzwaard and Bartholomew thoughtfully work through the deep contributions of Kuyper, Rieff and Girard in moving toward healthy solutions. The predominant theme has to do with healthy religion and how it can be part of the cure and not the disease. Even though religions “are far more in touch with the reality of evil” they are “not always in touch with their vulnerability to being coopted in the cause of evil” (110). And so the authors lay out six marks of healthy (Christian) religion for public life. First is that healthy religion is “self-critical, being willing to take a close look at itself” to see how it has been shaped by one of the modernities, “and to resubmit itself to the scrutiny of Scripture and the catholic tradition” (113). A second mark is that healthy religion “will see clearly the relevance of the good news in Christ for the whole creation, for the whole of society today” (116). This will entail the third mark of recovering the Missio Dei, since the church “is part of God’s mission to recover his good, “shalomic” purposes for the entire creation” (118). The fourth mark is the preferential treatment of the poor, working “to inoculate itself against consumerism and alleviate poverty wherever it is found” (122). Further, the fifth mark is to take spiritual formation seriously, while the last is the attempt, however defectively, “to live the solution” (123). All five middle chapters swirl around the theme of healthy (Christian) religion.
The last two chapters of “Beyond the Modern Age” are looking for ways to engage the contemporary crisis and move forward in two primary areas: economic life and climate change. Due to the nature of their subject these chapters are tedious, but not overwhelmingly so. The authors successfully make the case for the importance of embracing the economy of care and the economy of enough. The book ends with an epilogue that gives the background story to who Bob Goudzwaard is and his endeavors in economics and politics.
Largely, “Beyond the Modern Age” is an important volume. The authors are thoughtful, deep, global, and charitable. It is a dense read, and I did have to take days-long breaks between some of the sections to figure out what I was reading and why it was important. But if you’re concerned with what is happening in our generation, and desire to be like the men of Issachar “who had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do” (1 Chronicles 12.32), then I seriously recommend this book.
Thanks to InterVarsity Press for providing, upon my request, the free copy of the book used for this review. The assessments are mine given without restrictions or requirements (as per Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255).
“Beyond the Modern Age” is a stout read with college students in mind, as well as those wondering what is happening in the 21st Century. Goudzwaard and Bartholomew do a load of dirty work excavating the history and trajectory of four modernities; the classic, the structural-critical, cultural-critical, and the post. While exhuming the artifacts of these four modernities the authors address the danger of ideologies and describe their three basic characteristics. First is that “one or more concrete societal goals must be achieved, acquired, or preserved at any cost.” Next, there is an increasing “dependence on the means or instruments needed to accomplish the goal.” Finally, the selection and imagery of who is “the enemy,” those who “oppose the implementation of the ultimate goal” and are the “obstacle to the dream offered by the ultimate goal, and thus must be eliminated by all means” (65-6). The writers then describe the four ultimate goals which activate people around the world: revolution, identity, material progress, and guaranteed security. The danger of being drawn into ideologies is that once the “ideologies take hold, then from that point forward people will tend to justify or legitimize any means of breaking out of their dreadful impasse” (72). I personally found this deliberation on ideologies a highly fruitful segment in the book that has sent me off pondering much that I see happening in the U.S.A. presently.
Probably the most significant portion of “Beyond the Modern Age,” at least in my mind, was the middle five chapters. In this second part of the book Goudzwaard and Bartholomew thoughtfully work through the deep contributions of Kuyper, Rieff and Girard in moving toward healthy solutions. The predominant theme has to do with healthy religion and how it can be part of the cure and not the disease. Even though religions “are far more in touch with the reality of evil” they are “not always in touch with their vulnerability to being coopted in the cause of evil” (110). And so the authors lay out six marks of healthy (Christian) religion for public life. First is that healthy religion is “self-critical, being willing to take a close look at itself” to see how it has been shaped by one of the modernities, “and to resubmit itself to the scrutiny of Scripture and the catholic tradition” (113). A second mark is that healthy religion “will see clearly the relevance of the good news in Christ for the whole creation, for the whole of society today” (116). This will entail the third mark of recovering the Missio Dei, since the church “is part of God’s mission to recover his good, “shalomic” purposes for the entire creation” (118). The fourth mark is the preferential treatment of the poor, working “to inoculate itself against consumerism and alleviate poverty wherever it is found” (122). Further, the fifth mark is to take spiritual formation seriously, while the last is the attempt, however defectively, “to live the solution” (123). All five middle chapters swirl around the theme of healthy (Christian) religion.
The last two chapters of “Beyond the Modern Age” are looking for ways to engage the contemporary crisis and move forward in two primary areas: economic life and climate change. Due to the nature of their subject these chapters are tedious, but not overwhelmingly so. The authors successfully make the case for the importance of embracing the economy of care and the economy of enough. The book ends with an epilogue that gives the background story to who Bob Goudzwaard is and his endeavors in economics and politics.
Largely, “Beyond the Modern Age” is an important volume. The authors are thoughtful, deep, global, and charitable. It is a dense read, and I did have to take days-long breaks between some of the sections to figure out what I was reading and why it was important. But if you’re concerned with what is happening in our generation, and desire to be like the men of Issachar “who had understanding of the times, to know what Israel ought to do” (1 Chronicles 12.32), then I seriously recommend this book.
Thanks to InterVarsity Press for providing, upon my request, the free copy of the book used for this review. The assessments are mine given without restrictions or requirements (as per Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255).
July 12, 2017
In Beyond the Modern Age: An Archaeology of Contemporary Culture Bob Goudzwaard (Free University Amsterdam) and Craig Bartholomew (Redeemer College) provide an in-depth examination and critique of four modern worldviews. These four worldviews are: 1 )the classical modern worldview, 2) the structural-critical worldview, 3) the cultural-critical worldview, and 4 )postmodernism. In formulating their critique they lean on the work of Philip Reiff on culture and religion, Rene Girard on desire, and Len Goodman & Abraham Kuyper on pluralism. With this arsenal of contemporary thinkers, they proceed to put forth a positive proposal for a worldview which can contend with modern worldviews. This is a worldview which is thoroughly Christian but also fits well within our increasingly pluralistic world.
So what does this proposed Christianity for public life look like? The authors propose that Christianity which will be able to engage in our pluralistic world, and compete among the panoply of worldviews will be marked by the following:
1. It will be self-critical, willing to take a close look at itself, explore how it has been positively and negatively shaped by modernity, and resubmit itself to the authority of Scripture and tradition.
2. It will see clearly the relevance of the gospel for the whole of creation, for the whole of society and not just the individual soul or the institutional church.
3. It will be genuinely committed to the flourishing of all creation.
4. It will have a preferential option for the poor.
5. It will take spiritual formation seriously.
6. It will attempt to “live the solution.”
Their positive proposal is essentially and expansion upon points 3, 4, and 6. The problem of modernity, as they see it, boils down to an interconnectedness between population growth, environmental crisis, material production and consumption, economic crisis, decreasing global security, and deepening world poverty. The four modern worldviews have proposed solutions to these problems, however, they have not only failed to provide an adequate solution, some of these worldviews exacerbate the problems! Their answer to these problems is to set forth a solution in light of Reiff’s work on the sacred in culture, Girard’s work on desire, and the preferred option for the poor. They call this solution an economy of care. An economy of care flips upside down what modernist economies say is the “bottom line”:
Suppose our first priority is not dynamic economic growth but rather the ability to safeguard time, provide justice for the poor, protect and restore the environment, create more opportunities for meaningful employment, and care for the vulnerable. There is nothing to prevent these needs from becoming the starting point in an economic approach rather than expansion of material prosperity at all costs. (235)
They call this approach an “economy of care.” Although it may sound crazy, they are convinced that it is not simply wishful thinking. The authors point to several small scale instances in which an economy of care has worked for local communities. They also point to how an economy of care has had an impact upon the well-being and even economy of Holland. A Dutch study has shown that long term an economy of care would have a more favorable impact than either the market economy or welfare state on 1) employment levels, 2) quality of work, 3) the environment, 4) energy saving, 5) capital transfer to the South, and 6) government deficits. (254) And this economy of care could be implemented if “the Dutch people were willing to maintain average income and consumption levels at their present level and if they agreed to cooperate in orienting society, as a whole and in parts to these broader ends.” (254) All this to say, an economy of care seems not only plausible, but realistic! That is until we start thinking about the sinful condition of humanity. Maybe its my Calvinist bent (or maybe my realism), but I tend to believe that people are actually pretty selfish. Maybe they aren’t selfish with people they love and know, but they are certainly selfish about people that bear no relation to them. Not only that but people have a near future bias. In other words, people are prone to taking actions which serve their near futures rather than their further out futures. This means, that even though it may be irrational, people in general will be less likely to make sacrifices in the near future for the sake of a more secure future further out. Think about how people treat their health. Most people are more likely to not workout now because its painful for the near future even though rationally they know it is best for their far out future. If we can’t even get people to work out, how will we convince people to sacrifice their economic good in the near future for the sake of their far-out future, and more so, for the sake of the far-out future of other generations and of people from other nations and states! There is absolutely no reason to do so. That is, unless, there is a stronger drive compelling them to do so. Something like the gospel. The gospel has the power to reshape our desires, to shift our desires from self-centered and near-future oriented, to other-centered and eschatologically focused. The gospel really does have power. This book shows that the gospel really could have an impact on the flourishing of this world, and if taken seriously, provides a stronger alternative to the current worldview that are available.
Note: I received this book from the publisher in exchange for an impartial review.
So what does this proposed Christianity for public life look like? The authors propose that Christianity which will be able to engage in our pluralistic world, and compete among the panoply of worldviews will be marked by the following:
1. It will be self-critical, willing to take a close look at itself, explore how it has been positively and negatively shaped by modernity, and resubmit itself to the authority of Scripture and tradition.
2. It will see clearly the relevance of the gospel for the whole of creation, for the whole of society and not just the individual soul or the institutional church.
3. It will be genuinely committed to the flourishing of all creation.
4. It will have a preferential option for the poor.
5. It will take spiritual formation seriously.
6. It will attempt to “live the solution.”
Their positive proposal is essentially and expansion upon points 3, 4, and 6. The problem of modernity, as they see it, boils down to an interconnectedness between population growth, environmental crisis, material production and consumption, economic crisis, decreasing global security, and deepening world poverty. The four modern worldviews have proposed solutions to these problems, however, they have not only failed to provide an adequate solution, some of these worldviews exacerbate the problems! Their answer to these problems is to set forth a solution in light of Reiff’s work on the sacred in culture, Girard’s work on desire, and the preferred option for the poor. They call this solution an economy of care. An economy of care flips upside down what modernist economies say is the “bottom line”:
Suppose our first priority is not dynamic economic growth but rather the ability to safeguard time, provide justice for the poor, protect and restore the environment, create more opportunities for meaningful employment, and care for the vulnerable. There is nothing to prevent these needs from becoming the starting point in an economic approach rather than expansion of material prosperity at all costs. (235)
They call this approach an “economy of care.” Although it may sound crazy, they are convinced that it is not simply wishful thinking. The authors point to several small scale instances in which an economy of care has worked for local communities. They also point to how an economy of care has had an impact upon the well-being and even economy of Holland. A Dutch study has shown that long term an economy of care would have a more favorable impact than either the market economy or welfare state on 1) employment levels, 2) quality of work, 3) the environment, 4) energy saving, 5) capital transfer to the South, and 6) government deficits. (254) And this economy of care could be implemented if “the Dutch people were willing to maintain average income and consumption levels at their present level and if they agreed to cooperate in orienting society, as a whole and in parts to these broader ends.” (254) All this to say, an economy of care seems not only plausible, but realistic! That is until we start thinking about the sinful condition of humanity. Maybe its my Calvinist bent (or maybe my realism), but I tend to believe that people are actually pretty selfish. Maybe they aren’t selfish with people they love and know, but they are certainly selfish about people that bear no relation to them. Not only that but people have a near future bias. In other words, people are prone to taking actions which serve their near futures rather than their further out futures. This means, that even though it may be irrational, people in general will be less likely to make sacrifices in the near future for the sake of a more secure future further out. Think about how people treat their health. Most people are more likely to not workout now because its painful for the near future even though rationally they know it is best for their far out future. If we can’t even get people to work out, how will we convince people to sacrifice their economic good in the near future for the sake of their far-out future, and more so, for the sake of the far-out future of other generations and of people from other nations and states! There is absolutely no reason to do so. That is, unless, there is a stronger drive compelling them to do so. Something like the gospel. The gospel has the power to reshape our desires, to shift our desires from self-centered and near-future oriented, to other-centered and eschatologically focused. The gospel really does have power. This book shows that the gospel really could have an impact on the flourishing of this world, and if taken seriously, provides a stronger alternative to the current worldview that are available.
Note: I received this book from the publisher in exchange for an impartial review.
July 28, 2017
The eighteenth century brought us the Enlightenment and modernity, then during the late twentieth century as the promise of modernity, that technology didn't solve all our problems, many turned to post-modernism. Many of us were attracted to forms of postmodernism, because it seemed to free us from the shackles of a mechanical world view, allowing more room for faith. But, in the age of alternative facts, perhaps the promise of postmodernity has proven problematic. I'm not a philosopher, but how should we understand our age,and where it seems to be leading?
"Beyond the Modern Age" is a book written in tandem by an economist and a philosopher. Both are evangelical Christians of a Reformed type (apparently with Kuyperian tendencies). In a time when we hear that 81% of white evangelicals voted for Donald Trump, and his populist white nationalism, it is refreshing to hear that not all evangelicals think alike. Though perhaps the fact that Goudzwaard hails from Holland and Bartholomew from Canada makes a difference. In any case, I found the book to be thoughtful and revealing of possibilities for living faithfully in the current context. There are points of disagreement -- the authors do seem to take a narrower view of sexuality than do I, but otherwise they provide us with a vision of responsibility for creation and our neighbors.
The book is divided into three parts. Part One is titled "The Archaeology of Modernity. In the four chapters that make up the section, They explore four world views, the classical/mechanical worldview of the Enlightenment, then the structural and cultural critiques of that worldview, finally he looks at postmodernism. They find all four problematic, though all make positive contributions. After all, as they note, it was the classical world view that made the modern world possible. Things like economic and technological advance, along with freedom, democracy, and human rights are all principles that emerged with the Enlightenment. At the same time, this world view presents serious ethical challenges, especially in its libertarian guise. The structural critique has provided an important corrective, as there are many structures that have led to inequity in society need to be challenged and changed, especially in the economic realm. However, this critique also lends itself to ideological tendencies that can impinge on the private lives of individuals. They find the cultural critque more attractive, in that it is more relational and more sensitive to individual needs, but its appeal to altruism can lead to few positive results (it puts too much faith in people). As for postmodernism, its resistance to ideology and metanarrative is important. It calls into question the hubris of rationalism, but it also can lead to deep ambivalence to truth. By itself, this is a useful overview of modern worldviews and ideologies. But that's just the first section.
In part two, titled :Transcendence and Modernity," the authors introduce us to resources that they believe can assist us in transcending or moving beyond the modern age as it has existed. Standing at the center of this conversation is a reengagement with religion, but not just any forms of religion, healthy ones. They remind us that in many ways the secular turn has failed and the world is turning more and more to religion, especially in the Global South. In this context they also engage with Philip Rieff's "sacred sociology," and it is here in the discussion of sexuality that I had the most problems with the book. Unlike the authors I believe in the full inclusion of LGBT persons. Other chapters engage Rene Girard's discussion of desire and violence. This chapter was intriguing, as it helped me understand why people seem to desire what others desire. Finally, he looks into pluralism. While many evangelicals seem resistance to the possibilities of pluralism, they embrace it, but not just any pluralism, a nuanced form. Finally, the final chapter in the section focuses on the "starving Christ and a preferential option for the poor." Here the economist emerges, critiquing runaway, laissez faire capitalism. This option for the poor is, in their mind, and in mine as well, a sign of healthy religion. They don't call for total renunciation of goods, but recognize that this can be a possible response to the temptation of greed. They argue for an economy of care, which looks to the needs of the poor and of creation. They decry our consumerist culture.
Perhaps the most powerful section of the book is to be found in Part Three, "Finding Ways Beyond Modernity." They re-examine the four worldviews explored in the first section, exploring the crisis that we find ourselves in, and begin to lay out their vision of an economy of care. They speak of two kinds of economies, a tunnel economy and a fruit-tree economy. The tunnel economy is postcare. The focus is on consumption and production, and then mitigation of the negative effects. A fruit tree economy, on the other hand, is "pre-care." It puts needs of the other first, before consumption and production. This is, they suggest, an "economy of enough." With this in mind they speak of two kinds of labor, "directly productive labor" and "transductive labor." The first is focused on producing products for consumption. It is the basis of our current economy, which is running out of steam, and can prove damaging to humans and creation. Transductive labor, whether paid or unpaid, includes such actitivies as raising children, caring for the environment or the elderly, performing music or theater, education, etc. They note that government departments also belong her. While they don't increase production and don't automatically provide financial return, they have important value to society and culture, and with greater emphasis on these kinds of labor, unemployment could be resolved, especially in light of a switch to less labor intensive forms of production. Transductive labor is less susceptible to replacement by machines! This was fascinating to me and requires more attention on my part and those in American government!
The final chapter offers more suggestions on moving forward, on both economic and climate fronts. I would love for every climate-denying evangelical, especially ones who complain about the economic costs of mitigating climate change to read this chapter. Here's the kicker, they believe that science and technology will not solve all our problems. However, if people of faith, whatever their religion, will commit themselves to addressing economic challenges, allowing for an economy of enough, and to address climate related issues, there is hope for the future. In other words, let's recognize the secular roots of our current dilemma -- the embrace of that classical Enlightenment worldview that assumes that technology is the source of unending progress. Maybe that's bit too full of hubris.
There were points where I found myself adrift in the book, especially in the middle parts, but over this last section I found a book that needs to be read. I believe that climate-denying, consumerist evangelical Christians need to read this -- closely. But I think my progressive friends need to read it, so as to understand that there are allies on most, if not all, of the issues that bedevil us. It is also important to recognize the danger of ideology, especially political ideology.
"Beyond the Modern Age" is a book written in tandem by an economist and a philosopher. Both are evangelical Christians of a Reformed type (apparently with Kuyperian tendencies). In a time when we hear that 81% of white evangelicals voted for Donald Trump, and his populist white nationalism, it is refreshing to hear that not all evangelicals think alike. Though perhaps the fact that Goudzwaard hails from Holland and Bartholomew from Canada makes a difference. In any case, I found the book to be thoughtful and revealing of possibilities for living faithfully in the current context. There are points of disagreement -- the authors do seem to take a narrower view of sexuality than do I, but otherwise they provide us with a vision of responsibility for creation and our neighbors.
The book is divided into three parts. Part One is titled "The Archaeology of Modernity. In the four chapters that make up the section, They explore four world views, the classical/mechanical worldview of the Enlightenment, then the structural and cultural critiques of that worldview, finally he looks at postmodernism. They find all four problematic, though all make positive contributions. After all, as they note, it was the classical world view that made the modern world possible. Things like economic and technological advance, along with freedom, democracy, and human rights are all principles that emerged with the Enlightenment. At the same time, this world view presents serious ethical challenges, especially in its libertarian guise. The structural critique has provided an important corrective, as there are many structures that have led to inequity in society need to be challenged and changed, especially in the economic realm. However, this critique also lends itself to ideological tendencies that can impinge on the private lives of individuals. They find the cultural critque more attractive, in that it is more relational and more sensitive to individual needs, but its appeal to altruism can lead to few positive results (it puts too much faith in people). As for postmodernism, its resistance to ideology and metanarrative is important. It calls into question the hubris of rationalism, but it also can lead to deep ambivalence to truth. By itself, this is a useful overview of modern worldviews and ideologies. But that's just the first section.
In part two, titled :Transcendence and Modernity," the authors introduce us to resources that they believe can assist us in transcending or moving beyond the modern age as it has existed. Standing at the center of this conversation is a reengagement with religion, but not just any forms of religion, healthy ones. They remind us that in many ways the secular turn has failed and the world is turning more and more to religion, especially in the Global South. In this context they also engage with Philip Rieff's "sacred sociology," and it is here in the discussion of sexuality that I had the most problems with the book. Unlike the authors I believe in the full inclusion of LGBT persons. Other chapters engage Rene Girard's discussion of desire and violence. This chapter was intriguing, as it helped me understand why people seem to desire what others desire. Finally, he looks into pluralism. While many evangelicals seem resistance to the possibilities of pluralism, they embrace it, but not just any pluralism, a nuanced form. Finally, the final chapter in the section focuses on the "starving Christ and a preferential option for the poor." Here the economist emerges, critiquing runaway, laissez faire capitalism. This option for the poor is, in their mind, and in mine as well, a sign of healthy religion. They don't call for total renunciation of goods, but recognize that this can be a possible response to the temptation of greed. They argue for an economy of care, which looks to the needs of the poor and of creation. They decry our consumerist culture.
Perhaps the most powerful section of the book is to be found in Part Three, "Finding Ways Beyond Modernity." They re-examine the four worldviews explored in the first section, exploring the crisis that we find ourselves in, and begin to lay out their vision of an economy of care. They speak of two kinds of economies, a tunnel economy and a fruit-tree economy. The tunnel economy is postcare. The focus is on consumption and production, and then mitigation of the negative effects. A fruit tree economy, on the other hand, is "pre-care." It puts needs of the other first, before consumption and production. This is, they suggest, an "economy of enough." With this in mind they speak of two kinds of labor, "directly productive labor" and "transductive labor." The first is focused on producing products for consumption. It is the basis of our current economy, which is running out of steam, and can prove damaging to humans and creation. Transductive labor, whether paid or unpaid, includes such actitivies as raising children, caring for the environment or the elderly, performing music or theater, education, etc. They note that government departments also belong her. While they don't increase production and don't automatically provide financial return, they have important value to society and culture, and with greater emphasis on these kinds of labor, unemployment could be resolved, especially in light of a switch to less labor intensive forms of production. Transductive labor is less susceptible to replacement by machines! This was fascinating to me and requires more attention on my part and those in American government!
The final chapter offers more suggestions on moving forward, on both economic and climate fronts. I would love for every climate-denying evangelical, especially ones who complain about the economic costs of mitigating climate change to read this chapter. Here's the kicker, they believe that science and technology will not solve all our problems. However, if people of faith, whatever their religion, will commit themselves to addressing economic challenges, allowing for an economy of enough, and to address climate related issues, there is hope for the future. In other words, let's recognize the secular roots of our current dilemma -- the embrace of that classical Enlightenment worldview that assumes that technology is the source of unending progress. Maybe that's bit too full of hubris.
There were points where I found myself adrift in the book, especially in the middle parts, but over this last section I found a book that needs to be read. I believe that climate-denying, consumerist evangelical Christians need to read this -- closely. But I think my progressive friends need to read it, so as to understand that there are allies on most, if not all, of the issues that bedevil us. It is also important to recognize the danger of ideology, especially political ideology.
January 9, 2018
The first section of this book provides one of the best, concise diagnoses of "modernism" that I have ever read, as well as a very insightful breakdown of the four major "worldviews" of our time (classical modernism, structural-critical, cultural-critical, postmodernism). This section is worth the price of admission alone, and I would heartily recommend it to anyone who wants a more in-depth discussion of the various ways people are making sense of our "cultural moment." It's also an illuminating look into the ways that the Millenial generation is grappling with what's going on in the world.
The 2nd section is also extremely insightful, providing interaction with some heavyweight "religious" thinkers of our time (Rieff, Girard) and how to incorporate their work into current thought. I appreciate any Christian writers who "lean into" culture (as opposed to running away, bashing, or declaring war) and this section is a prime example of how to do this well. It's also a thoughtful apologetic for the importance of "healthy religion" in our time.
The 3rd section began to drag for me. Not because it isn't as insightful or thoughtful as the previous parts of the book (it is!) but because it veered away from my primary interests (philosophy, cultural diagnosis and engagement) and into "brass tacks" proposals in areas like politics and economics. That may be of serious interest to you, but I found it harder to work through (as opposed to the first 2 sections, which I breezed through).
Overall, this is an excellent book, with much to recommend. It's very much in the vein of the best culture-writing from a Christian perspective, and doesn't pull punches with critique, while also providing meaningful hope for a way forward. Highly, highly recommend.
The 2nd section is also extremely insightful, providing interaction with some heavyweight "religious" thinkers of our time (Rieff, Girard) and how to incorporate their work into current thought. I appreciate any Christian writers who "lean into" culture (as opposed to running away, bashing, or declaring war) and this section is a prime example of how to do this well. It's also a thoughtful apologetic for the importance of "healthy religion" in our time.
The 3rd section began to drag for me. Not because it isn't as insightful or thoughtful as the previous parts of the book (it is!) but because it veered away from my primary interests (philosophy, cultural diagnosis and engagement) and into "brass tacks" proposals in areas like politics and economics. That may be of serious interest to you, but I found it harder to work through (as opposed to the first 2 sections, which I breezed through).
Overall, this is an excellent book, with much to recommend. It's very much in the vein of the best culture-writing from a Christian perspective, and doesn't pull punches with critique, while also providing meaningful hope for a way forward. Highly, highly recommend.
October 3, 2020
Great book for this summer. A historical overview of how people rebelled against religion since Enlightenment. Also in history how evil attached to religion by masquerading as light. Very good logics and thoughts. Like the way how lots of philosophical/theological theories are quoted and summarized. This book gives me a very good introduction to some fundamental philosophy theories in recent centuries. May check out the books of those authors as well if I have time in the future.
Like the way that both the good and bad sides of either secularity or religion are discussed. Although there are overwhelming issues of our world, the authors provide us with a gleam of hope at the end of the book. In each era, it's important to have the courage to study and reveal the reality and then move forward with hope.
Like the way that both the good and bad sides of either secularity or religion are discussed. Although there are overwhelming issues of our world, the authors provide us with a gleam of hope at the end of the book. In each era, it's important to have the courage to study and reveal the reality and then move forward with hope.
April 9, 2022
Brilliant and hopeful
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews