Who doesn't love to play with Legos? Today I'm going to use legos to explain my thoughts behind metapostmodernism in a more visual way. But if you want the in depth thoughts behind my introduction of what I view as the next big trend in thinking, you can check out this intro post and this post. In order to discuss metapostmodernism, we need to take a look at where we've come from.

Modernism: Modernism arose out of the industrial revolution. People were looking for answers in a war weary era. In modernism, we see the construction of a lot of various ideas, a search for truth. If we are talking about Legos, we would look at it as being a firm and solid construct. I know that this picture is of a Lego backpack, but the reason I chose this picture to represent modernism is because it is one solid piece. You'll notice that as an object, the backpack is one firm and concrete object. As something tangible, it stands on its own and is a solid idea. This gives us an idea of what came out of modernism.

Deconstruction: Most people would jump to postmodernism as the next big trend in thinking, but what led us to postmodernism was deconstruction and poststructuralism. Thanks to major thinkers in the Frankfurt school and others like Derrida, we saw a trend of people wanting to deconstruct ideas. Instead of being content with the ideas that existed in the world, they came to the realization that these ideas needed to be taken apart to examine what it was that made them tick. If you've ever read any of the readings by the first wave of the Frankfurt school, then you'll know that all we see there is a tearing apart of ideas without presenting any ideas of their own. If we're looking at Legos, we're looking at people taking apart our previously mentioned construct. If one were to take apart a structure made of Legos, then we would be left with a pile of blocks with no purpose. This was what came out of deconstruction, a bunch of ideas lying on the floor with no direction as to what to build next. 

Postmodernism: This led us to postmodernism. While postmodernism is built upon the ideas of deconstruction and poststructuralism, there is a unique factor in postmodernism. People are trying to do something with those pieces lying on the floor. And not only are people trying to reconstruct a reality, they are incorporating ideas from other people. Major scholars today would call this process triangulation, or taking the best from different ideas to create one solid idea.  If we're talking about Legos again, we're moving beyond one solid color and incorporating colors and blocks from other places. This gives us structures that are more dynamic, have more variety, and are much more interesting. There are many things we can do with a variety of blocks instead of just working off of the ideas that we have. We can create something much more beautiful.

Metapostmodernism: This is where I think we are going. While postmodernism allows us to create something beautiful, it lacks something entirely. Creating something completely new. Because of our poststructualist roots, it is becoming harder and harder everyday to create something paradigmatic. If you look at the scope of research in the academic world, you will see that this scope is huge. But what is lacking is research in major concepts and ideas. In the world of philosophy and the social sciences, all we do is take bits and pieces from other people and create something "new." There is always the old adage that there is nothing new under the sun, but I do think there is something out there that will revolutionize us. This is where metapostmodernism comes in. In terms of Legos, we've been playing with the same pieces for years. But in order to create something even more complex, we are going to have to invent pieces that have never been thought of before. Instead of working with various colors of blocks, we are going to have to create cylindrical pieces, various types of connectors, and other types of decorations. We need to innovate.

This is of course my ideas on where we are going. But I've been known to be wrong before. So what do you think? Do you see us going down this path or do you see the major trends in thought and philosophy heading another direction? I'd love to hear what you think!

You may be surprised to hear me say such a thing, but this post is most likely not what you're expecting. Republicans have often touted as part of their logic that they are the most patriotic, that they uphold American values the best. And to that I say, they're right.

When we think about American values, we think of a highly individualized culture. You should be able to do whatever you want with your money, what's most important is that you feel good about things. But why do we attach ourselves to such values so readily? If we were to examine other cultures, we would find a much more collective feel to the people. While the individual is important, it is not so important that it forgets about the greater good of the whole.

Let's take a practical example in the news, Universal Health Care (UHC). One proposed idea for UHC is to raise taxes on people but provide health care for everyone in the United States. Immediately the individualistic part of ourselves cry out. We say, "No one should be able to tell me how I can spend my money." It's an interesting argument when you think about it, because you would be spending that same money on health care anyway. The only difference is that you are choosing to spend that money instead of it being spent for you.

Now individual choice and freedom is an important thing. Without individual choice and freedom, we become mindless drones. There is always room for critical thinking. But there is something interesting happening in the collective conscious of the people where perhaps focusing on individual values alone isn't going to cut it. Perhaps there are more noble goals to live for. As the world becomes a smaller place, it becomes harder to ignore the needs of the ones around us.

So I'll make the claim again: Republicans are more American than any other political party. But here's the question. Are those American values really what we should be holding to? It is immediately at this point when someone makes a comment like this that they are branded an anarchist or wanting to take down America. I don't want any part of that. But I have to ask, what are those values?

Freedom? What exactly does freedom mean? Does freedom mean wanting to have a free market economy, but not the freedom to allow people to make their own moral choices about abortion? What about liberty? Is there more than one specific way to choose to display one's patriotism for their country? Is it possible to be pro-America without abusing hegemonic power?

These are but a few critical questions about American values. I do think as a people, we need to do some serious examination about what exactly American values are and if we want them to be the things that we hold as our paradigm. When doing so, we may find that there are other values that are more important that the ones we've been told are true and good.