1) If one is inclined to appreciate some of the goods associated with “modernity,” it’s unlikely that all of the theoretical aspects of modernity are misguided.

2) Against Undifferentiated Modernity: Patrick is attached to Strauss’ “juggernaut” view of modernity, which distinguishes among different “waves” of what is ultimately a single tendency that can be described as the “modern project,” the aim of which is the mastery and conquest of nature. Strauss’ presentation is clearly rhetorical on many levels, but that’s a different post. In any event, while there’s something to the notion that many of the early, middle, and late-modern thinkers have much in common, investigating their differences seems worthwhile (assuming you think there’s something good about modern politics).

3) If one thinks that modernity is fundamentally atheistic and/or discounts the influence of Christianity on “the moderns’” anthropology and philosophy, it’s going to be more difficult to redeem some parts of modern thought. Again, however, I think the story is more complex than this.