How to Debate a Postmodernist: A Christian Approach to Truth, Justice, and Individualism

By Dr. Tim Orr

Imagine sitting across from a fellow student or colleague at a coffee shop, debating topics that feel as expansive as they are polarizing—truth, justice, identity, and the foundations of society. At some point, the discussion veers into postmodernism, and the familiar phrases arise: “Truth is relative,” “Power determines knowledge,” or “Systems are inherently oppressive.” You quickly realize this isn’t just a debate about ideas; it’s a clash of worldviews. On one side, postmodernism critiques power structures and challenges traditional narratives. On the other, you believe in objective truth, the transformative potential of capitalism, and a Christian anthropology that values every human being as created in the image of God.

Postmodernism has profoundly influenced American culture, shaping academic disciplines, political discourse, and individual identity. At its core, postmodernism challenges the Enlightenment ideals of objective truth, reason, and universal values. Instead, it asserts that truth is not discovered but constructed, often shaped by power dynamics, cultural norms, and historical contexts. Postmodernism rejects the so-called "grand narratives"—overarching explanations like capitalism, Christianity, or democracy—as oppressive tools used to maintain dominance by those in power (Hicks, 2020a).

Postmodernism is most visible in social justice and identity politics in contemporary society. Activists and thinkers often adopt postmodern critiques to deconstruct systemic injustices, emphasizing power imbalances in race, gender, and economic inequality. While these critiques have a veneer of moral urgency, they are often rooted in relativism, which denies the possibility of universal moral standards. As a result, postmodernism often leads to paradoxes, such as demanding justice while rejecting the very idea of objective justice. Engaging with postmodernism requires understanding its motivations. At its heart, postmodernism is not merely a philosophical stance but also a response to the failures of modernity. Many adherents are driven by a genuine desire to address inequality and oppression, even if their methods and assumptions are flawed. Recognizing this underlying motivation is key to productive dialogue (Hicks, 2020a).

Exposing the Contradictions of Relativism

One of the most effective ways to engage with postmodernism is to expose its contradictions gently. Postmodernism often undermines its claims. For instance, if the truth is subjective, the assertion that “capitalism is oppressive” is just a subjective opinion, not an objective fact. Similarly, if knowledge is always a function of power, how can postmodern critiques claim to rise above these power dynamics to offer an unbiased critique?

You can encourage your interlocutor to reflect on these inconsistencies by asking thoughtful questions. For example, you might ask, “If all truth is relative, does that include your claim that capitalism is unjust?” or “If power dynamics distort truth, how can we trust the postmodern critique of power?” These questions are not meant to trap or embarrass but to invite deeper reflection on the implications of their worldview.

At the same time, it’s important to approach these conversations with humility. Postmodernism often arises from genuine concerns about injustice and inequality. Acknowledge these concerns and affirm shared values, such as a desire for justice, fairness, and human flourishing (Hicks, 2020a).

Why Postmodernists don’t see their contradictions?

Postmodernists often fail to see their contradictions because their philosophical framework inherently dismisses the need for consistency. By embracing relativism and subjectivism, postmodernists reject the idea of universal truth or objective standards, which makes contradictions appear irrelevant to their worldview. For example, postmodernists may claim that all truth is relative yet simultaneously assert absolute moral stances on issues such as racism or environmentalism. This double standard arises because their commitment to deconstructing "dominant" narratives takes precedence over logical coherence, allowing them to hold conflicting positions without recognizing—or addressing—the inherent contradictions (Hicks, 2020b).

Another reason postmodernists overlook their inconsistencies lies in their use of language as a tool of power rather than a vehicle for truth. Postmodernist theorists, influenced by thinkers like Foucault and Derrida, often argue that words are not neutral conveyors of meaning but instruments of social and political dominance. This perspective enables them to dismiss critiques of their ideas as merely the imposition of another power structure rather than genuine attempts to highlight flaws. Consequently, postmodernists can oscillate between relativism and absolutism depending on what serves their ideological goals, using relativism to deconstruct opposing viewpoints and absolutism to enforce their preferred moral or political agendas (Hicks, 2020b).

Finally, the contradictions within postmodernism can be seen as a deliberate strategy rather than an oversight. By undermining the foundations of reason and evidence, postmodernists create a rhetorical space to challenge traditional hierarchies and dominant ideologies without being held accountable to the same standards. For instance, postmodernists might critique Western culture as uniquely oppressive while asserting that all cultures are equally valid and deserving of respect. These contradictions are not accidental but serve to disrupt conventional logic and empower marginalized perspectives, allowing postmodernists to justify their positions even when they contradict their broader philosophical principles (Hicks, 2020b).

Framing the Case for Capitalism and Individualism

One of the most effective strategies for debating postmodernism is to emphasize the positive aspects of capitalism and individualism. Postmodern critiques of capitalism often stem from deep misunderstandings. Capitalism is frequently caricatured as a system of exploitation and greed, yet its track record tells a different story. Far from being oppressive, capitalism has been a transformative force for good, lifting billions out of poverty and fostering unprecedented human flourishing.

For example, the World Bank (2020) reports that global extreme poverty declined from 35% in 1990 to less than 10% in 2015, largely due to market-driven economic growth. This success was not achieved through centralized control or collectivist ideologies but through systems that reward innovation, hard work, and individual ingenuity. Capitalism creates opportunities for people to improve their lives, not through coercion but through voluntary exchange. It empowers individuals to pursue their goals, set their paths, and reap the rewards of their labor.

Moreover, individualism—often maligned by postmodernists as selfish or disconnected—lies at the heart of human dignity. Individualism recognizes that each person has inherent worth, unique talents, and the capacity for creativity and self-determination. In capitalist systems, this respect for individual autonomy translates into freedom to choose one’s profession, innovate, and live according to one’s values. This respect for the individual starkly contrasts collectivist systems, which often subsume personal aspirations under the weight of the group or the state. By framing capitalism and individualism as systems that promote human dignity, creativity, and opportunity, you can shift the debate away from caricatures and focus on their real-world benefits (Hicks, 2020a).

Highlighting Shared Values and Building Bridges

Despite its challenges, postmodernism often shares common ground with Christian and capitalist worldviews. Most postmodernists are deeply concerned with justice, equality, and the well-being of marginalized communities. These values resonate with the biblical call to care for the oppressed and seek justice (Isaiah 1:17). By framing your arguments with shared values, you can build bridges rather than deepen divisions.

For example, you can highlight how capitalism provides pathways for economic empowerment, especially for marginalized groups. Programs like micro-loans and entrepreneurship initiatives have enabled countless individuals in developing countries to escape poverty. Similarly, you can emphasize how Christian principles of justice and mercy align with the desire to address systemic inequalities.

The Hope of Christian Anthropology

While capitalism and individualism provide practical and philosophical tools for addressing postmodern critiques, Christian anthropology offers a deeper, more transformative vision of humanity. Christianity teaches that every person is created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), endowing them with inherent dignity and worth. This foundational belief provides a universal standard for justice that transcends the subjective relativism of postmodernism.

Christian anthropology asserts that human beings are profoundly broken and infinitely valuable. Postmodernism often focuses on systemic oppression but lacks a framework for hope or redemption. Christianity, by contrast, acknowledges the reality of sin—both personal and systemic—while pointing to the possibility of transformation through Christ. This vision of redemption is not merely individual but communal, offering hope for personal renewal and societal healing.

Furthermore, Christian anthropology balances individual responsibility with a concern for the common good. While postmodernism emphasizes systemic factors, often at the expense of personal agency, Christianity affirms that individuals are moral agents accountable to God. Micah 6:8 encapsulates this balance, calling believers to act justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with their Creator. This framework provides a way to address injustice without falling into the traps of relativism or cynicism. Christian anthropology offers a compelling alternative to postmodernism’s fragmented vision of humanity by grounding human dignity in divine creation. It offers a framework for justice rooted in objective truth and a hope that transcends human brokenness (Hicks, 2020a).

Conclusion

Postmodernism has become dominant in contemporary culture, influencing academia, politics, and social movements. While it claims to empower marginalized voices and dismantle oppression, its relativistic framework often leaves little room for objective standards or hopeful solutions. Engaging with postmodernism is not merely an intellectual exercise—it’s an opportunity to present a better story. By understanding its critiques and thoughtfully presenting the strengths of capitalism, the dignity of individualism, and the hope of a Christian worldview, you can offer a vision of flourishing that resonates deeply, even with those skeptical of traditional narratives.

References

Hicks, S. (2020a, March 25). Why Postmodernists don’t see their own contradictions? Philosophy insights. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYabDlZSWOE

Hicks, S. (2020b, April 15). How to debate postmodernists effectively. Philosophy Insights. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfFWRWCxQrg

The Holy Bible, New International Version. (1978). Zondervan. (Genesis 1:27, Micah 6:8, Isaiah 1:17)

World Bank. (2020). Poverty and shared prosperity 2020: Reversals of fortune. World Bank Group. https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/poverty-and-shared-prosperity-2020

Tim Orr is a scholar of Islam, Evangelical minister, conference speaker, and interfaith consultant with over 30 years of experience in cross-cultural ministry. He holds six degrees, including a master’s in Islamic studies from the Islamic College in London. Tim taught Religious Studies for 15 years at Indiana University Columbus and is now a Congregations and Polarization Project research associate at the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University Indianapolis. He has spoken at universities, including Oxford University, Imperial College London, the University of Tehran, Islamic College London, and mosques throughout the U.K. His research focuses on American Evangelicalism, Islamic antisemitism, and Islamic feminism, and he has published widely, including articles in Islamic peer-reviewed journals and three books.