Eschatology, Progress, and Postmodernism

Physicists, Philosophers, Theologians all wrestle with what it means to live in an arena of space and time. Do they both exist? Do they constitute reality? Are they imposed categories? What does our exploration of these linguistic abstractions inform us about human epistemic reality, human ontology, (or perhaps human teleology) and the future of human questioning? Having lived and breathed the academic arena for so long, it is becoming apparent to me that postmodernism has had a profound influence on methodology in various disciplines and subdisciplines. Philosophers and scientists have come to rethink, and re-assess former categories and methodology within particular fields of study because of the thin boundaries long imposed between them. There are no clear boundaries between varying fields of study, only the rigid culturally defined bounds of human experience. So what then is knowledge in a postmodern world, where epistemically, the west is founded upon rigid categorical statutes deemed either dead or only part of a broader "conversation" in modern methodology?

Given the dangers of pure relativity within a postmodern world, where can human beings find ground on which to stand, on which to make an argument? Based on this question, it seems nay impossible to stand without faith in something foundational. Though I am not speaking about foundationalism in the philosophical sense -- approaching all argument from an assumption subjects that argument to trifling criticism for its lack of logic. There is no way to refute what that person has to say. But postmodernism opens the door for dialogue among varying points of view, so long as one argument doesn't kill the conversation. Thus, a theologian will always suffer criticism, because there is no way of escaping the ultimate claim that governs theological reflection -- i.e. God revealed in Jesus Christ to reveal true human nature and eschatological hope. But do theologians have merit in the categories of the world withThomas Kuhn blasting disciplinary boundaries wide open with a methodological, and perhaps sociological revolutionary theory?

What category is without merit in a postmodern world? Notably, since it was found that Baconian induction served well as a measure for predicting phenomena, progress has become that entity to be worshipped in rebellion against religion's foundationalism of sorts. Though disguised under an umbrella of objectivity, progress is nothing more than another foundation upon which to make an argument that prevents one from refuting that argument. What does it mean to think of the future in terms of progress? It means to impose cultural, scientific, and other paradigmatic categories as limits upon the future. Christians are no different. Revelation of the foundational element in Christendom as witnessed in their sacred document, their tradition, suggests a linear future and progressive chaos (thought by some currently to be the chaos resulting from the destruction of the categories and institutions that contain the sacred, a limited embodiment of unlimited possibilities, which, if let loose has been historically and culturally known to be highly destructive). Perhaps the trick is to figure out some way to embody what is sacred in our lives, rather than trying to contain it in institutions, in methodological discourse, in progress, in postmodernism, or any other category. If not, then I am afraid the future is very grave indeed...

Enough convoluted bunny trails and incomprehensive folly...the futuristic has been given another hightened status in society with the re-evaluation of space and time: what of time travel? Is it a scientific possibility? If so, what does this mean for the ontology of the universe? What I fear is the sacrifice of humility and compassion in the competitive drive for domination among the powers of the world, those who believe their arguments constitute the global epistemological conversation as ends.

I'll stop rambling...must get to studying before the superbowl...