Living Life in the Third World

In my previous blog I wrote that we are all living in Nietzsche’s world now. A world where God is dead and we live like it.

But what are the characteristics of this world? What does Nietzsche’s world look like?

For that I turn to a pair of very intense thinkers, the American sociologist Philip Rieff (December 15, 1922 - July 1, 2006) and the Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor (born November 5, 1931).

Let me begin with Rieff. He wrote about the shifts he saw taking place in society through the middle of the 1900’s. He believed that society had entered into what he called the “third world.”

The first world was that of primitive (such as we would find in the ancient aboriginals) and pagan societies (such as those who would embrace Plato). What these two seemingly distinct societies had in common was the belief in gods and fate which had a significant effect on the world and thus the way people thought and behaved.

The second world was that of religious belief which would include the three major Abrahamic faiths -- Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. What was common to this world was the belief in a singular transcendent deity who determined faith and practice for people.

The third world Rieff describes, our current society, has lost any sense of authority from above. We live according to no divine law and care nothing for inherited religious beliefs and traditions. We are the society of which the madman was waiting.

What characterizes this society is truly on full display in Western culture. First, there is no sacred order which is allowed to have any say in anything. We are our own decision makers and we follow our individual desires. No outside forces influence us. Second, we are a fully therapeutic culture now. Authenticity, self-fulfillment, and our psychological well-being are what matters most. Submission to vertical authorities has been replaced by a submission only to the self. Rieff refers to us now as “psychological man.” Third, our society is actively seeking the demise of the second world, the vestiges of which still remain. This is done through “deathworks”; works of art, media, and cultural practices that are “an all-out assault upon something vital to the established culture.” Two examples of what Rieff means. First, the opening of the Paris Olympic games in which Leonardo Davinci's painting of the Last Supper was brutally mocked by actors on the world stage. That is a deathwork. More close to home, the hosting of “Messiah Queered” by Grace Mennonite Church, right here in Steinbach, is also a deathwork.

Let us turn our attention now to Charles Taylor for further explanation.

Taylor believes that we live in a secular age (the title of his magnum opus). But this secular age is different from those in history. In the past, secular came to mean two things. In earlier societies, it meant the difference between sacred and secular, but with the affirmation that the sacred underpins society. Secular in this context was what you did -- a farrier, milkmaid, farmer, etc -- if you were not a priest taking care of people’s souls. Later, secular came to mean a distinct separation between the sacred and the secular. The secular was areligous and neutral. This distinction is probably most easily seen in the desire for a separation of church and state or a separation between faith and science. The church had its realm which was faith based, the secular had theirs which was objective. And never the twain should meet.

But our current secular age is different. Today the sacred is not even considered as a part of our cultures plausibility structure. Whereas being an atheist in the first understanding of sacred/secular would have never been considered, and being an atheist in the second understanding of the sacred/secular was an option, being an atheist in our secular age is assumed; it is the foundation for our society. It is our fundamental sitz im leben.

Taylor writes,

This shift in secularity in this sense consists, among other things, of a move from a society where belief in God is unchallenged and indeed, unproblematic, to one in which it is understood to be one option among others, and frequently, not the easiest to embrace.

Along with this change, Taylor continues, comes a focus on the immanent frame (a world without consideration of the transcendent) with the result being the expressive individual (we define ourselves only by what we think/feel about ourselves and desire for ourselves).

Though using different language, Taylor and Rieff describe the same thing -- a post-Christian society which has shut out transcendent authority and replaced it with a full-blown subjectivism. Yes there are places and pockets where the second world (Taylor’s 2nd secular world) continue to exist. Western society has not fully become the madman’s world. At least not yet. So there is some hope. But only if we admit where we are as a culture, what that means for Christians living in the third world, and implement a gospel-centered strategy for what to do about it.

A topic we will explore shortly.

Soli Deo Gloria