quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Darling you have been caught red-handed pontificating royally about things you either misunderstand completely or know nothing about. In layperson's terms you have been caught wanking intellectually about things you know nothing about. You have been exposed as a loud-mouthed pretentious ignorant poseur, the kind of person who gets thrown out of Skid Row bars for being too objectionable for the rest of the clientele to stomach.

While I would never put myself in that position, and so don't really know what the appropriate course of action you should adopt is, I suspect a little humility, a lot of silence and perhaps an apology and plea for forgiveness would be a much better pose for you to adopt than sour grapes.

He is right and you are wrong about post-modernism.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Darling you have been caught red-handed pontificating royally about things you either misunderstand completely or know nothing about. In layperson's terms you have been caught wanking intellectually about things you know nothing about. You have been exposed as a loud-mouthed pretentious ignorant poseur, the kind of person who gets thrown out of Skid Row bars for being too objectionable for the rest of the clientele to stomach.

While I would never put myself in that position, and so don't really know what the appropriate course of action you should adopt is, I suspect a little humility, a lot of silence and perhaps an apology and plea for forgiveness would be a much better pose for you to adopt than sour grapes.

He is right and you are wrong about post-modernism.

Haven't you grasped the fact that he is claiming that post modernism was implemented in a big way in the US a whole decade before any of the leading lights of post modernism were published ie a decade before post-modernism was conceived of (or 'invented') in Europe?

He cannot possibly be right.

quote:


I have selected only those most commonly cited in discussions of philosophical postmodernism, five French and two Italian, although individually they may resist common affiliation. Ordering them by nationality might duplicate a modernist schema they would question, but there are strong differences among them, and these tend to divide along linguistic and cultural lines. The French, for example, work with concepts developed during the structuralist revolution in Paris in the 1950s and early 1960s, including structuralist readings of Marx and Freud. For this reason they are often called “poststructuralists.” They also cite the events of May 1968 as a watershed moment for modern thought and its institutions, especially the universities. The Italians, by contrast, draw upon a tradition of aesthetics and rhetoric including figures such as Giambattista Vico and Benedetto Croce. Their emphasis is strongly historical, and they exhibit no fascination with a revolutionary moment. Instead, they emphasize continuity, narrative, and difference within continuity, rather than counter-strategies and discursive gaps. Neither side, however, suggests that postmodernism is an attack upon modernity or a complete departure from it. Rather, its differences lie within modernity itself, and postmodernism is a continuation of modern thinking in another mode.

quote:


A postmodern politics began to take shape during the 1960s with the appearance of numerous new political groups and struggles. The development of a postmodern politics is strongly informed by the vicissitudes of social movements in France, the United States, and elsewhere, as well as by emerging postmodern theories. The utopian visions of modern politics proved, in this context, difficult to sustain and were either rejected in favor of cynicism, nihilism, and, in some cases, a turn to the right, or were dramatically recast and scaled down to more "modest" (non-systemic, non-revolutionary) proportions. The modern emphasis on collective struggle, solidarity, and alliance politics gave way to extreme fragmentation, as the "movement" of the 1960s splintered into various competing struggles for rights and liberties. The previous emphasis on transforming the public sphere and institutions of domination gave way to new emphases on culture, personal identity, and everyday life, as macropolitics were replaced by the micropolitics of local transformation and changes in subjectivity.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

http://nypost.com/2015/05/12/the-latest-lunatic-postmodern-target-motherhood/

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

I'm sorry but you really haven't a clue about post-modernism.

If you want a date for the birth of post-modernism, (as a handy reference point, nothing more) you can date it to the publication of the seminal work of post modernism, Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia by Gilles de Leuze and Felix Guatarri in France in 1972.

Many of the core intellectual insights that led to the conception of post modernism were gained as a reaction to the failure of the May 1968 revolt in Paris. So it couldn't have been conceived before this event.

quote:

I don't understand all the intricacies but post modernist thinking is heavily related to critical theory, which sees things in terms of power.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Hunter,

I recognise what I've understood about postmodern thinking from Tweakabelle's posts, here. I don't recognise the way you use the term, though. Would you care to give a synposis of what you believe it to be about?

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Hunter,

I recognise what I've understood about postmodern thinking from Tweakabelle's posts, here. I don't recognise the way you use the term, though. Would you care to give a synposis of what you believe it to be about?

You know what, no. You offer baited questions to which you won't accept any answers. You state what you believe and I'll play that game with you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Where is the whimsy, the pastiche in this line of post-modern thought?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Hunter,

I recognise what I've understood about postmodern thinking from Tweakabelle's posts, here. I don't recognise the way you use the term, though. Would you care to give a synposis of what you believe it to be about?

You know what, no. You offer baited questions to which you won't accept any answers. You state what you believe and I'll play that game with you.

Wow - suspicious indeed!

OK. My understanding is that it's a movement that tries to achieve a thoroughgoing deconstruction of all modes of thought characteristic of modernity, especially high modernity. This was the period most noted for the big scale 'answers' and claims to The Truth with the biggest capital Ts. Conservative thinkers, socialist thinkers, liberal thinkers - they all got shredded in one way or another.

It's only ever been a minority pursuit, however. The vast bulk of thinkers, of all hues, will only deconstruct in order later to construct something that they see as better. Socialists are especially wont to do this: they've often seen postmodern thinking as too pessimistic.

Your turn.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Hunter,

I recognise what I've understood about postmodern thinking from Tweakabelle's posts, here. I don't recognise the way you use the term, though. Would you care to give a synposis of what you believe it to be about?

You know what, no. You offer baited questions to which you won't accept any answers. You state what you believe and I'll play that game with you.

Wow - suspicious indeed!

OK. My understanding is that it's a movement that tries to achieve a thoroughgoing deconstruction of all modes of thought characteristic of modernity, especially high modernity. This was the period most noted for the big scale 'answers' and claims to The Truth with the biggest capital Ts. Conservative thinkers, socialist thinkers, liberal thinkers - they all got shredded in one way or another.

It's only ever been a minority pursuit, however. The vast bulk of thinkers, of all hues, will only deconstruct in order later to construct something that they see as better. Socialists are especially wont to do this: they've often seen postmodern thinking as too pessimistic.

Your turn.

Postmodernism is, to me, a culmination of the Enlightenment. A description of where to go from there. For instance it rejects the old theory, that there is only one answer and it can be found in the Bible, as long as you let the church define that answer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Hunter,

I recognise what I've understood about postmodern thinking from Tweakabelle's posts, here. I don't recognise the way you use the term, though. Would you care to give a synposis of what you believe it to be about?

You know what, no. You offer baited questions to which you won't accept any answers. You state what you believe and I'll play that game with you.

Wow - suspicious indeed!

OK. My understanding is that it's a movement that tries to achieve a thoroughgoing deconstruction of all modes of thought characteristic of modernity, especially high modernity. This was the period most noted for the big scale 'answers' and claims to The Truth with the biggest capital Ts. Conservative thinkers, socialist thinkers, liberal thinkers - they all got shredded in one way or another.

It's only ever been a minority pursuit, however. The vast bulk of thinkers, of all hues, will only deconstruct in order later to construct something that they see as better. Socialists are especially wont to do this: they've often seen postmodern thinking as too pessimistic.

Your turn.

Postmodernism is, to me, a culmination of the Enlightenment. A description of where to go from there. For instance it rejects the old theory, that there is only one answer and it can be found in the Bible, as long as you let the church define that answer.

Actually Nietzsche dealt with that question a century before any one ever thought of post modernism. Most scholars and post modernist thinkers trace the lineage of post modernism back to Nietzsche, and to a far lesser extent Spinoza. I have never heard of any one reputable or otherwise ever suggest that post modernism is a "culmination of the Enlightenment". I suppose there's always a first time for everything no matter how stupid it might be.

The rest of your post is inane waffle, pure drivel that says nothing except the author hasn't got a clue about what post modernism is or isn't but is trying (and failing desperately) to sound as if they do know. If a student of mine presented something of this quality I would recommend they seek an alternate career doing something that might be more suited to their talents eg. road sweeping or taxi driving. As far as I can tell, being a loudmouthed pretentious ignorant poseur is not an impediment to a successful taxi driving or road sweeping career.

Useful for derisory comedy purposes only.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Hunter,

I recognise what I've understood about postmodern thinking from Tweakabelle's posts, here. I don't recognise the way you use the term, though. Would you care to give a synposis of what you believe it to be about?

You know what, no. You offer baited questions to which you won't accept any answers. You state what you believe and I'll play that game with you.

Wow - suspicious indeed!



OK. My understanding is that it's a movement that tries to achieve a thoroughgoing deconstruction of all modes of thought characteristic of modernity, especially high modernity. This was the period most noted for the big scale 'answers' and claims to The Truth with the biggest capital Ts. Conservative thinkers, socialist thinkers, liberal thinkers - they all got shredded in one way or another.

It's only ever been a minority pursuit, however. The vast bulk of thinkers, of all hues, will only deconstruct in order later to construct something that they see as better. Socialists are especially wont to do this: they've often seen postmodern thinking as too pessimistic.

Your turn.

Postmodernism is, to me, a culmination of the Enlightenment. A description of where to go from there. For instance it rejects the old theory, that there is only one answer and it can be found in the Bible, as long as you let the church define that answer.

Actually Nietzsche dealt with that question a century before any one ever thought of post modernism. Most scholars and post modernist thinkers trace the lineage of post modernism back to Nietzsche, and to a far lesser extent Spinoza. I have never heard of any one reputable or otherwise ever suggest that post modernism is a "culmination of the Enlightenment". I suppose there's always a first time for everything no matter how stupid it might be.

The rest of your post is inane waffle, pure drivel that says nothing except the author hasn't got a clue about what post modernism is or isn't but is trying (and failing desperately) to sound as if they do know. If a student of mine presented something of this quality I would recommend they seek an alternate career doing something that might be more suited to their talents eg. road sweeping or taxi driving. As far as I can tell, being a loudmouthed pretentious ignorant poseur is not an impediment to a successful taxi driving or road sweeping career.

Useful for derisory comedy purposes only.

quote:



Postmodernism’s wholesale critique of enlightenment reason, arising from these roots, faces a similar dilemma. It implicates itself in the most virulent performative self-refutation, as Habermas has demonstrated.30 In fact, the whole development from Nietzsche via decisionism to post-structuralism appears to be one colossal performative self-refutation. The postmodern enterprise of enlightenment-bashing from Nietzsche to Foucault and Derrida is predicated on the enlightenment (“the implicit postulation of precisely what it seeks to contest”). Or rather, the postmodern enterprise is itself enlightenment: what has started in Nietzsche’s critical thinking, a

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

It's not hate duckie, it's something between being contemptuous of your pretentions, despising your attempts to pass off ignorance as some kind of understanding and there's a little pity for you as are so inadequate that you feel the need to behave in that manner I am not normally this direct but I have to bear in mind the scurrilous and utterly falso abuse you threw at me not too long ago.

If I had been caught flagrantly BULLSHITTING and INTELLECTUAL WANKING or generally acting like a loudmouthed pretentious ignorant poseur in the manner you have been, I would be too mortified to ever show my face here again. I wouldn't know how to ask any one to believe anything I had to say. Nor would I expect them to believe anything I said if I had been shown to be like you.

Perhaps that's one difference between us.