Modernism,postmodernism and global standards setting

This paper discusses the key features of modernism and postmodernism, and critiques global standards setting from a postmodern theoretical perspective. The main areas of critique consist of the possibility of the creation of yet another totalizing discourse or grand narrative; debates around the particular and the universal; issues around representation; and power, knowledge and discursive formations. We argue that to treat modernism and postmodernism as a linear progression and as a bi‐polar categorization is to fall within the traps of modernism itself. We have thus avoided making a choice between modernism and postmodernism—between justification, objectivity, reason, universalism, proof and unity of science on the one hand and the postmodern emphases on language, power, and the particular, contingent and relational on the other hand.     

Rural studies of power and the power of rural studies: a reply to Philo

We seek to clarify some of the issues raised by Chris Philo [(1993), Journal of Rural Studies 9, 429–436] in his reply to our paper entitled ‘Rural studies: modernism, postmodernism and the ‘post-rural’’ [Murdoch, J. and Pratt, A.C. (1993),Journal of Rural Studies 9, 411–427]. We argue that a sociology of postmodernism would allow orthodox sociological tools to be used in the analysis of a changing social situation. These tools should be used reflexively and should be employed to show how the rural is the outcome of multiple sets of power relations. Sociological and geographical analyses can also be considered as social processes which give rise to particular conceptions of the rural. Thus, the practice of rural studies is also the practice of power.     

IDEOLOGY, FOUNDATIONALISM, AND SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

The issue of foundationalism and the growing irrelvance of sociological metatheorizing to the understanding of contemporary society is considered from the perspective of postmodernism. Foundationalism is treated as a form of ideology. Changes in the analysis of ideology are discussed briefly and the postmodern approach to the critique of grand narratives, or logocentrism, is introduced. Two meta-narratives, neofunctionalism and conflict theory, are criticized as illustrative examples of logocentrism. The postmodern critique is then applied to the issue of foundationalism as recently articulated in the "Seidman controversy." which is exposed as containing hidden foundationalist implications of its own. The critique of foundationalism raises three issues that are discussed: the possibility of a deontological social theory, narrative as social inquiry, and the social role of academics as intellectuals.     

(Pre)Occupied Locations: Subverting Marginality—Reply to Commentaries

In my response to commentaries by Hartman and Sedgwick, I examine the positions from which each chose to speak. Hartman's rather light approach performs a particular function: the mentalization of anal erotic and homoerotic desire through the introduction of surplus meaning. I explore the relationship of this approach to the absence of rigorous theoretical critique in his essay. I question Sedgwick's decision to limit her critique to the confines of queer theory; this results in a constriction of meaning rather than the expansion she purports to offer. I challenge her notion of growth through mutual recognition with a model of change that is based in psychoanalytic theory and practice. Contrary to her assertion, I do not jettison danger or gender destabilization from the discourse on anal eroticism between men, but I question these as obligatory or constitutive to its meaning.     

Five sketches of postmodernism

Abstract

There is a long history of work in systems thinking and operational research (henceforth referred to as ‘systems/OR’) geared to facilitating organizational change and/or wider social improvement. Recently, however, the ‘improvement’ agenda has been subject to a sustained critique from people who take an explicitly postmodern stance. This paper presents five ‘sketches’ of postmodernism, and draws out some implications for systems/OR. The first sketch is of a dogmatic postmodernism that places conversation at the forefront of its agenda, but fails to enter into a conversation itself. It therefore collapses under the weight of a contradiction between its theory and practice. The second is of a more open postmodernism that is prepared to recognize its own status as a conversational device, and thereby its own transitory nature. This suggests the need for the systems/OR community to act as participants in debate, continually developing their own and others’ views. The third sketch focuses on the central contradiction of a postmodern meta-narrative condemning all meta-narratives but its own. This raises some interesting issues, not the least of which is the realization that the term ‘meta-narrative’ is usually used pejoratively. We may therefore need to moderate the use of such language to facilitate productive debates on key issues of concern for the future of systems/OR. The fourth sketch looks at the irony of inevitable contradictions in postmodern theory, and the consequent move away from the notion that the role of rationality is to harmonize ideas. Several possible consequences for systems/OR are identified: further rational (harmonizing) explanations of ‘inevitable contradictions’ in postmodern theory may be provoked, or the shift away from a traditional notion of rationality may liberate systems/OR from a relatively narrow range of analytical methods. The fifth and final sketch examines the political consequences of postmodernism as expressed in liberalism. A disturbing picture is presented of the ‘privatization’ of forms of solidarity which are not legitimated through dominant ideologies, leading to powerlessness and alienation amongst those who experience largely unrecognized oppression, or who feel solidarity with the oppressed. A key implication is drawn out: there continues to be a crying need for new ideas in social theory to address the shortcomings of liberalism and inform the practice of systems/OR. People advocating postmodernism, amongst others, may make a useful contribution to the development of these new ideas.     

Postmodernism in marriage and family therapy training: doctoral students' understanding and experiences

The purpose of this study is to advance our understanding of how doctoral students perceive postmodernism's influence in the field of Marriage and Family Therapy (MFT). According to the literature, postmodernism has had a profound impact on many fields, including MFT. However, tracking of how postmodernism is actually being rendered in theory, research, practice, and training warrants investigation. This study utilized focus group interviews to investigate the perceptions of MFT doctoral students. Findings suggest that while participants are attracted to postmodern tenets, they also report feeling a mixture of liberation and excitement with confusion and fear regarding how postmodernism is influencing MFT models of therapy.     

Confronting Uncertainty: Lessons from Rural Social Work

Abstract

Communities in Australia and internationally are experiencing massive change. Climate variability is an aspect of change that social workers in Australia, particularly in rural areas, are grappling with. Vulnerable populations will be at increased risk as extreme weather events increase in frequency. Communities will be facing social challenges hitherto unknown. The experience of uncertainty and fragmentation as characteristics of postmodernism has exposed the ambiguous and contested nature of much of social work practice and contributed to a crisis of confidence for the social work profession. The move towards rationality and linear approaches in the postwelfare state is often at odds with the complexity and uncertainty of human situations that has always been social work terrain. It can be argued that social work, with its ethical base, person-in-environment approach, expertise in ambiguity and complexity, and recognition of context, is well-placed to manage postmodern uncertainty. Using the 2009 Victorian bushfire example, I argue that an uncertain future is an opportunity for social workers, those working in rural areas in particular, to reassert social work's moral purpose in working with communities facing change. Implications for social work policy, practice, and education are briefly explored.     

Postmodern rural geography? A reply to Murdoch and Pratt

Jonathan Murdoch and Andy Pratt's thoughtful response (Journal of Rural Studies9, 411–427) to Philo (1992) (Neglected rural geographies: a review. Journal of Rural Studies8, 193–207) is considered. Their suggestions about the engagement between rural studies and the intellectual currents of ‘postmodernism’ are important ones, and offer both an extension of the claims made by me and a critique of my own lack of self-reflexivity. I outline my partial agreement with their analysis, but offer certain qualifications arising from a different understanding of ‘postmodernism’. I indicate my approval of their call for a ‘sociology of postmodernism’ alert to the making of ‘the rural’ as a concept in circulation, but argue that central to this call is the necessity of investigating the senses of rurality held by all manner of ‘other peoples’ beyond the academy. In this respect, then, the approach of Murdoch and Pratt may be more consistent with my own ‘postmodern rural geography’ than it might first appear.     

Project Discovery: Social Work Research @ Southern Health

Abstract

The health sector uses a “person-in-environment” perspective reflected in multidisciplinary teamwork to understand and influence human lives. This standpoint accords closely with social work's knowledge and theory base, recognising that material, economic, political, organisational, and social structures interact, creating a complex array of factors impacting on individuals and families. Practice research activities are an effective way of exploring social work's particular contribution to health service provision. We describe and critique various models of practice research reported in the literature. A unique model of practice research that we are developing is discussed. Called Project Discovery: Social Work Research @ Southern Health 18 June 2011, this model demonstrates ways in which practice research may exemplify theoretically-driven and service-based research and in so doing advance social work's knowledgebase.     

Human Development Education for Social Workers in Multicultural Societies

In many countries, social workers are faced with the challenge of tailoring their practice to the diverse needs of children and families in multicultural realities. Our training and teaching practices, however, lag behind in their readiness to face this challenge. Attempts to reconcile cultural perspectives and postmodernism with the traditional goals of human development education are generally premised on the following assumptions: (a) postmodernist education fosters the ability to think critically and question assumptions underlying claims to knowledge; (b) theories should be evaluated for their usefulness and applicability to a more equitable society; and (c) a dialogic model of education in human development highlights the ‘inherently polysemous’ nature of human existence rather than transmitting a codified body of knowledge. The paper calls attention to the challenges of cross‐cultural psychology, indigenous psychology and postmodern critique and offers the means of confronting these challenges. Examples are based on teaching experiences in Israel and the US.     

The postmodern critique of ideology

Postmodernism is a complex cultural phenomenon which is characterised, among other things, by its distrust of totalising discourses, of reason and of universal truth. It propounds indeterminacy, the primacy of difference and the incommensurability between discourses, which are supposed to have their own regimes of truth. This is why postmodernism is suspicious about the critical concept of ideology, because according to its tenets it is impossible to pass judgement on a discourse from the perspective of another discourse. Hence the critical concept of ideology must be abandoned. However, an examination of Foucault's, Baudrillard's and Lyotard's work shows that they unwittingly end up re-introducing the concept through the back door thus contradicting themselves. While they doubt the validity of total discourses and of their ideological critique, they must assume the validity of their own critique of total discourses.     

The Christian difference: Surviving postmodernism

Abstract

Drawing on the work of Nicholas Boyle, this paper argues that postmodernism represents the intellectual style we should expect as part of developing global capitalist regimes. Accordingly, I argue that postmodernism is not a friend but an enemy to Christianity just to the extent the former tempts us to lose our history. In that respect, the challenge of postmodernism is no different than the challenge of modernity. It becomes the Christian task now to narrate modernity and postmodernity on our own terms rather than those offered by the postmodernists. But for Christianity to be capable of such narration, it must rediscover in its own life the significance of the church which is capable of surviving in a world which is in many ways quite accurately described as postmodern.     

Sociology and the public understanding of science: from rationalization to rhetoric

This paper contributes to the reappraisal of sociological theories of modernity inspired by the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK). As much as these theories rely on received ideas about the nature of science that SSK has called into doubt, so do they rely on ideas about the public understanding of science. Public understanding of science has been assumed to conform to the monolithic logic and perception of science associated with rationalization, leading to an impoverished view of the cognitive outlook of the modern individual. Rationalization has become the basis for the construction of theoretical critique of science divorced from any clear reference to public understanding, with the result that theory has encountered considerable problems in accounting for public scepticism towards science. However, rather than question rationalization, the more typical strategy has been to propose radical changes in the modernization process, such as postmodernism and the risk society. Against this, an alternative view of public understanding is advanced drawn from SSK and rhetorical psychology. The existence of the sociological critique of science, and SSK in particular, suggests that the meaning of science in modernity is not monolithic but multiple, arising out of a central dilemma over the universal form of knowledge-claims and their necessarily particular, human and social grounding. This dilemma plays out not only in intellectual discourses about science, but also in the public's understanding of science. This argument is used to call for further sociological research into public understanding and to encourage sociologists to recognize the central importance of the topic to a proper understanding of modernity.     

Theory as Story: A Postmodern Tale

After locating postmodernism in its historical and epistemological contexts, this article takes the postmodern position that the behavioral theories that have informed clinical social work practice over the last century are stories with texts written by authors whose place in historical time, life experience, and personal proclivities shaped both the plots of the stories and the manner in which they were told. A review of the most influential theory-stories lays the groundwork for addressing two questions: What can postmodernism do for clinical social work? And what can clinical social work do for postmodernism?     

The poverty of postmodern human services

Abstract

Postmodernism cannot or will not tell the difference between truth and falsehood, reality and simulacra, principle and dogma, or right and wrong. As a corollary, it is unable or unwilling to make any ‘veritable‘ difference to the nature or order of things. Indeed, there is no escape from, nor anything outside of, the ’panopticon of language’. Accordingly, there is no significant probative difference between the practice and experience of genocide, and talking or writing about it. All one can do is be sceptical about discourses, even those concerned with ethnic cleansing and the like. As ludicrous as this sounds, it has not prevented postmodernism from monopolising discourses about significant aesthetic, cultural, economic, intellectual, political and social practices and sensibilities. Postmodernism manifests itself in a host of disciplines, and its presence is being increasingly felt in human services education and practice. If, as I shall argue, postmodernism is such a thoroughly baseless, reductive and inert doctrine, then why persist with it? The poverty of postmodernism prompts a timely return to the rich legacy of Marxism.     

Applying Post-structuralist Ideas to Empowerment: Implications for Social Work Education

In this article we reflect on the trouble we have encountered while teaching post-structuralist ideas to students who privilege empowerment as a theoretical position. We briefly define empowerment theory and outline its modernist anchoring. We introduce Foucault's analysis of power to critique and examine the discursive practices of how power operates when some students talk about empowerment theory. This examination of power as applied to empowerment theory then supports our argument that post-structuralist ideas can be of benefit in social work education and practice and not just a slippery theoretical positioning where anything goes. The aim of this paper is to open space to see the way post-structuralist theory unsettles taken-for-granted assumptions when social work students foreground empowerment theory. We are not arguing that empowerment theory nor power are good or bad but that they are dangerous when we fail to reflect on and critique how we apply them in practice.     

Postmodernism and Sociology: From the Epistemological to the Empirical

This article investigates the place of postmodernism in sociology today by making a distinction between its epistemological and empirical forms. During the 1980s and early 1990s, sociologists exposited, appropriated, and normalized an epistemological postmodernism that thematizes the tentative, reflective, and possibly shifting nature of knowledge. More recently, however, sociologists have recognized the potential of a postmodern theory that turns its attention to empirical concerns. Empirical postmodernists challenge classical modern concepts to develop research programs based on new concepts like time-space reorganization, risk society, consumer capitalism, and postmodern ethics. But they do so with an appreciation for the uncertainty of the social world, ourselves, our concepts, and our commitment to our concepts that results from the encounter with postmodern epistemology. Ultimately, this article suggests that understanding postmodernism as a combination of these two moments can lead to a sociology whose epistemological modesty and empirical sensitivity encourage a deeper and broader approach to the contemporary social world.     

POSTMODERN THOUGHT IN SYMBOLIC INTERACTION:

Perspectives in sociology are currently being reassessed in light of postmodernism, which has been associated with the abandonment of faith in the social self and scientific inquiry. As an emergent problematic, postmodernism stands in sharp contrast to a modernist pragmatic (and innocent) conception of symbolic interactionism — which is centered in the Meadian conception of prosocial selves. However, this article identifies some "late-modern" interactionists — Goffman, Stone, Becker, Lemert, and Mills— who, in providing a corrective for an innocent pragmatic inquiry into the self, created a foundation for contemporary inquiry into the social. This corrective entailed a reconceptualization of the self as the focal point of the situated act and, specifically, its changing definition from cooperative and reflective to strategic and imaginary. While we suggest that their work represented a loss of innocence in interactionism, it did not create a loss of faith in scientific inquiry into the self and social action. Rather, the work of the late modernists has inspired a reconstruction of scientific inquiry into the social that encompasses, but is not encompassed by, postmodernism.