Fragmentation is a phenomenon that spread across various spheres of social life at the beginning of the 20th century through art. This phenomenon gave rise to the possibility of representing truth, life, and even objective reality from an individual perspective. This fragmentation would come to define modernity and analyzing it could shed light on many crucial areas influencing modern man and his tendencies. As a spontaneous process, we will analyze what preceded it and why this phenomenon occurred, which has impacted up to our present day, then focusing on its analysis and consequences. For this, we will start from the late 19th century, where a new philosophical current in painting emerged called “Impressionism.”

Francis Schaeffer in his book How Should We Then Live? says: “Impressionism is therefore a renewing and innovative current, not only in technique but in the very essence of pictorial art. According to the impressionists, there is no object of a specific color; the color of an object depends on how it receives light, its intensity, and the refraction of neighboring colors. They painted what struck their eye.” (p. 60). Through this new trend in human thought that relied entirely on the “impression” of the author, a new period emerged that would be called: the modern era.

As we have seen, this modern era was no longer necessarily dependent on the reality of things, but rather on the inclination or viewpoint of the author or individual. Thus, the doors were opened to the redefinition and innovation of the world from an individualistic perspective. Shortly thereafter, this artistic impressionism was displaced due to its own development. What had begun as an impression regarding the light on an object soon became a tool for creating new realities based on each painter’s impression, analysis, or desire, even if the tangible and objective reality of the world was absent. Thus, impressionism moved from reflecting light on an object to a new stage where the impression began in the artist’s mind rather than based on a tangible or real fact.

This new stage was termed Post-Impressionism, where reality could be changed by the individual and their ideas, even reaching the unreal. Therefore, it was no longer necessary to depend on the objective characteristics of reality. In this way, many artists, realizing the consequences of the new trend, attempted to rediscover reality within the individual, thinking that this would be a solution to the loss of absolute values that had been developing in the intellectual world for centuries. However, that Post-Impressionism had penetrated so quickly into all spheres of thought that, as the street saying goes: “The cure was worse than the disease.”

The consequences of turning to particulars or individuals in search of reality resulted in Post-Impressionism extending beyond the boundaries of art to become the guiding line of thought determining reality. This influence has been so profound that we continue to experience it in the 21st century. Thus, constantly and absolutely relying on particulars opened the doors for everything to fragment into an infinity of particulars, including intangible things such as morality and everything that governed man up to that point.

It is also undeniable to note that fragmentation in different spheres of life brought much development. For example, this line of thought would aid in sciences and studies across various fields for a better understanding of all that sparked curiosity in man. From this emerged what is known today as different work teams, where by fragmenting a specific unit, they could take charge of one of those fragmentations more carefully and thus dedicate all the possible energy. And as a result, there has been great progress because each team specialized in an area leading to many conclusions allowing great advancement and development. And that is why we will see that everything from discoveries of substances, medications, diseases, technology, the economy, etc., will arise from there.

But what would be the problem with fragmentation? Because when you start to fragment everything without any limits, not only can you unlink each particular from its original unit or set, creating something completely new, but you also begin to divide the sense of responsibility and influence regarding the result according to the fragmented unit. That’s why, just as beneficial things can be created, new realities and conflicts can also arise from fragmentation. Trying to create a new reality from fragments of a unit does not guarantee that such reality can be achieved, but it could be creating an imminent disaster. For example, thanks to these fragmentations and investigations, man was able to create medicinal or aesthetic products, but if they are not connected to a complexity of structures and functions in which they unfold, they will lack the consequences of such inventions immediately, and their results can be as devastating as cancer or any side effect that only appears in the future when that set in which the particular is found begins to respond to its interconnection and in many occasions there is no solution.

Now, just as we have these types of phenomena in the material aspect, man began to use fragmentation for philosophical studies and analysis. The search for truth and the definition of morality, among other important aspects, began to fragment. In the same way, many advances were made regarding certain complex topics, but often forgetting the unity of such fragmentations began to create “realities” that contradicted the objective reality of the unit. Much more so if we consider that Post-Impressionism, due to that “impression of each author,” opened the doors so that reality did not necessarily have to be tangible, and this affected morality already weakened by the strong impact of humanism that had been on the rise since centuries earlier after the French Revolution. That’s why it led each individual to see himself as the center of everything and began to feed his egocentrism and individualism, and sadly, not only in the arts, but also in his daily life. Thus, a completely influenced individual and educated in an increasingly fragmented system began to emerge.

The consequences would be seen in practical social life, as each individual would bring that fragmentation to their morals and character, thus also fragmenting reasoning and decisions to be made. If each person is inclined to create their own reality apart from all objectivity, and furthermore creates the ability to fragment processes and decisions, then they will also be able to manipulate any situation and even avoid responsibilities for their actions and decisions, ultimately forming a society full of inconsistent individuals. This inconsistency would in turn become the common moral pattern in 21st-century Postmodernism, where we can already perceive that what we call inconsistency here is now common. In fact, today what is socially accepted inconsistency for the majority is called the “new man.” And when something becomes a common norm and is accepted by the majority, everything will be measured under that moral standard, especially when each person can create their own reality. It is the pinnacle of relativity and chaos. And in the world of relativity, it is better for inconsistency regarding objectivity to be accepted as “objective” so that everyone can do as they please without being judged.

Obviously, this would only point to chaos, because from the moment that individualism based solely on someone’s opinion is fostered, in their fragmentation of truth and the “reality” that depends on their own moral standard, then this individual will have no brakes when manipulating their “reality,” even when contradictions arise within their analysis. I am reminded of that famous quote by Machiavelli: “the end justifies the means.” For this character, fragmenting the process regarding a specific goal gave him the possibility to focus on the outcome even if the process went against his own moral standards in order to obtain the desired result. Thus showing a double standard, or rather one that is adaptable to circumstances. This is known as the essential part of what is called Moral Relativism.

It can be concluded that this fragmentation causes unthinkable harm because it creates a “new man” capable of forming a unique reality based on their perspective, needs, and personal goals, where each stage of their process can be justified through the fragmentation of morality that they can constantly manipulate as their own desires. With no moral absolute as a standard, man is free to fragment his reality and truth, therefore, the level of manipulation and cynicism will have no limits as long as that man has a determined interest.

Today, we are experiencing the consequences of this moral fragmentation. We live among men who no longer have integrity, who no longer know what is good or bad beyond their own interests, men without any discernment to call things by their name when necessary, men who can betray at any moment even when it is not understood as betrayal by them. Fragmentation opens the door to justify anything if there is no absolute guiding and moral standard. Modern Christianity has greatly fallen into this same moral fragmentation, and the double standard of life is evident among many “Christians.” Romanticism and the idea of a God determined by the perspective and impression of each individual are increasing. There is nothing more dangerous than believing in a God who accommodates you alone because it suits you. The 21st-century Christian must understand that God is real, and as real, He does not accommodate anyone, but we must know Him and approach Him as He is. Otherwise, we are creating a God who does not exist, and that has spiritual and material consequences.

The Christian must pause and reflect on the need to rid oneself of all influence from our increasingly fragmented humanistic society when it comes to moral matters. This distances us from God and His absolute morality. It is the task of every believer and lover of God to have clarity on this matter and to make others understand this reality that affects the modern church. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and that is more than clear in His Word. The only reality that exists is the unchangeable reality of our God and Creator who created us to live and enjoy that reality with Him.

Author: Hr. William Salazar