Postmodernism began in universities as a critical reflection on power and knowledge but grew into a cuckoo in the second half of the twentieth century. It would radically question and attack the Enlightenment—the nest in which it was raised. The Enlightenment, it claims, was not truly aimed at freedom and equality but was merely a pretext for safeguarding privileges. Instead of striving for shared citizenship, it supposedly perpetuates structural discrimination.
Meanwhile, that cuckoo has flown the nest and influences how many people think about themselves and society. Whether the topic concerns differences between men and women, government neutrality, the desirability of NIPT (Non‑Invasive Prenatal Testing), the handling of colonial history, or the presence of trans women in sports competitions—postmodern ideas often dominate. They form the philosophical core of debates about diversity, science, and justice. In doing so, they cast suspicion on Enlightenment ideals and encourage identitarian escalation.
This negative influence likely explains the international attention Canadian‑American philosopher Stephen Hicks has received in recent years for his book 'Explaining Postmodernism'. In it, Hicks exposes the philosophical roots of postmodernism and explains how they influenced the course of history. More importantly, he shows why Enlightenment ideals remain our strongest assets and how we can respond to postmodernists.
Between 20 and 23 April, Hicks will illuminate various aspects of postmodernism and then engage in conversation with leading academics and intellectuals. For anyone who wants to better understand the negative impact of postmodernism on universities and beyond—and formulate a substantive response—these lectures offer a unique opportunity. Expect clear analysis, sharp insights, and room for dissent.
Why you shouldn’t miss this lecture series:
• A rare opportunity to hear Stephen Hicks live and ask questions
• Four evenings in which Hicks engages with top Flemish thinkers
• For anyone who enjoys philosophy, cultural criticism, and lively debate and wants to better understand the tensions of our time
• A powerful plea for clear thinking, free discussion, and intellectual resilience