From the readings we have done this semester it is evident that Modernity is reactionary in nature. Nietzsche was reacting against the Christian faith and ethics that he felt was a construction of humans and which taught one to look to the afterlife rather than this life for purpose. He reacted against this, teaching that God is dead and the ethics constructed around this belief in God must die with him, making way for a new system of ethics which lead to the Overhuman: a transcending of one’s humanity. The Surrealists and the Automatistes too were reacting against the ‘oppressive’ powers of their day, namely the Catholic Church and the ideals of Enlightenment. Sartre reacted against the general understanding of how things are perceived and given meaning, claiming that only existence is absolute, beyond that all is relative; things develop their meaning from the observers who project meaning on to them. These are three examples in a pool of many. Modernity is reactionary making it: atheistic, devoid of absolute meaning, able to create its own ethics, interested in the imagination, individualistic, and certain only of the existence of things, among other characteristics.
As many of my posts have commented on, this has left us bereft of a system of ethics and meaning. It has also led me to the conclusion that reacting to something in order to develop a new system of beliefs or practices is a dangerous path, not to be done lightly or without an examination of the possible consequences. Perhaps the better route is to work within the current framework, trying to understand what is wrong in order to improve upon it.
Jason DeRoche
0 Responses to “The Reactionary Nature of Modernity”