Modern thought can’t make sense of man. Science wants to treats him as part of single system of cause and effect, and liberalism also takes that approach when considering social policy. The problem though is that science and liberalism need scientists and liberals as they understand them—that is, they need thinkers, observers and agents who are autonomous and therefore outside the system of material causation.
Science can avoid the issue for the most part, since scientists deal with particular problems and can allow those they can’t solve to remain problems. Liberalism cannot do so, at least not to the same extent, since for liberals liberalism is the supreme principle of politics and morality and must therefore provide and justify an overall way of life.
The practical solution for liberals is to make man as thinker, observer, and agent, who cannot be part of the rationally knowable system of material causation, an inscrutable transcendent being in place of God.
The result is that individual man acquires God’s traditional attributes, with the attributes emphasized determining the kind of liberalism. Thus, classical liberalism emphasizes the creative reason through which the godlike individual devises and calls into being his own intellectual and moral world. In contrast, contemporary politically-correct liberalism emphasizes the identity of essence and attribute in the divine being, and infers that to comment negatively on any quality of the divinized individual is a blasphemous attack on his essence and very existence. If you don’t accept him and praise him just as he is, you are his absolute existential enemy.
Neither of course makes sense as a way of understanding men. We are neither divine nor machines, and we are part of a world we do not make. We must understand ourselves that way to make sense of human life, and liberal modernity does not allow us to do so. It is radically divorced from reality, and therefore doomed.