quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Postmodernism is a deconstructionist approach to art, literature, and architecture, and a reaction to the modernist movement of the early 20th century. It's a movement now 70 years old, i.e., history, not current events. It's primary features are a mixture of architectural styles and a trend in fiction toward meta-fiction (writing about writing).

It has exactly zero to do with feminists or "leftists" or Muslims or Australian politics.

quote:


Michel Foucault has identified the major targets: “All my analyses are against the idea of universal necessities in human existence.”1 Such necessities must be swept aside as baggage from the past: “It is meaningless to speak in the name of—or against— Reason, Truth, or Knowledge.”2
Richard Rorty has elaborated on that theme, explaining that that is not to say that postmodernism is true or that it offers knowledge. Such assertions would be self-contradictory, so post- modernists must use language “ironically.”
The difficulty faced by a philosopher who, like myself, is sympathetic to this suggestion [e.g., Foucault’s]—one who thinks of himself as auxiliary to the poet rather than to the physicist—is to avoid hinting that this suggestion gets something right, that my sort of philosophy corresponds to the way things really are. For this talk of correspondence brings back just the idea my sort of philosopher wants to get rid of, the idea that the world or the self has an intrinsic nature.3
If there is no world or self to understand and get right on their terms, then what is the purpose of thought or action? Having deconstructed reason, truth, and the idea of the correspondence of thought to reality, and then set them aside—“reason,” writes Foucault, “is the ultimate language of madness”4—there is nothing to guide or constrain our thoughts and feelings. So we can do or say whatever we feel like.

quote:

Postmodernism then becomes an activist strategy against the coalition of reason and power. Postmodernism, Frank Lentricchia explains, “seeks not to find the foundation and the conditions of truth but to exercise power for the purpose of social change.” The task of postmodern professors is to help students “spot, confront, and work against the political horrors of one’s time”7
Those horrors, according to postmodernism, are most prominent in the West, Western civilization being where reason and power have been the most developed. But the pain of those horrors is neither inflicted nor suffered equally. Males, whites, and the rich have their hands on the whip of power, and they use it cruelly at the expense of women, racial minorities, and the poor.
The conflict between men and women is brutal. “The normal fuck,” writes Andrea Dworkin, “by a normal man is taken to be an act of invasion and ownership undertaken in a mode of predation.” This special insight into the sexual psychology of males is matched and confirmed by the sexual experience of women:

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Sounds to me that it is an abstract concept and one not founded at all in the very logic and science it necessarily disregards to form a basis for the obviously abstract notion that..no objective truth exists. That's ridiculous on its face.

The idea that there is no objective notion of truth is utterly consistent with science

Yes, this.

Peterson wants us to regard our current society as some sort of magnificent achievement for which we must all be grateful-- as if anyone who isn't happy should just STFU and admit that they're actually very lucky.
If only he could get rid of all the liberals, then everything would be perfect.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump is president.
Nope, nothing wrong here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Sounds to me that it is an abstract concept and one not founded at all in the very logic and science it necessarily disregards to form a basis for the obviously abstract notion that..no objective truth exists. That's ridiculous on its face.

The idea that there is no objective notion of truth is utterly consistent with science

Yes, this.

Peterson wants us to regard our current society as some sort of magnificent achievement for which we must all be grateful-- as if anyone who isn't happy should just STFU and admit that they're actually very lucky.
If only he could get rid of all the liberals, then everything would be perfect.

Meanwhile, Donald Trump is president.
Nope, nothing wrong here.

Donald Trump is president to restore balance. The USA having to constantly be the world's heavy weight is not balance. Whether you like it or not, Russia still exists and to pretend it doesn't, doesn't make it so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Anyone who quotes Andrea Dworkin as an exponent of post modernism either :
a: has no idea what post modernism is; or
b; is unfamiliar with Andrea Dworkin's work or thought;'or
c: both a: and b: above.
The idea that anything from Dworkin's body of work, such as it is, can be used as an example of post modernist thought is utterly hilarious. No one familiar with postmodernism and Dworkin's work would advance such a nonsensical claim.

But hey it's NNanji and it's possible that in his looney Right worldview PM and Dworkin are all part of the same thing. To Nnanji anyone or anything to left of Genghiz Khan, from US Democrats to Chairman Mao are all much of a muchness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

So is the reason you never post the sources you quote because you know that if you did, it would reveal to everyone that they're just people expressing lame opinions on pissant blogs?

I refuse to accept that any legitimate source would say something like 'Those horrors, according to postmodernism, are most prominent in the West, Western civilization being where reason and power have been the most developed.'

Postmodernism does not have an opinion on things.
It is not a person.

The writing is too clumsy for it to be anything except some random asshole expressing a stupid opinion based on a less than superficial understanding of these things.
Did you get it from the comments section of a Jordan Peterson YouTube video?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

So is the reason you never post the sources you quote because you know that if you did, it would reveal to everyone that they're just people expressing lame opinions on pissant blogs?

I refuse to accept that any legitimate source would say something like 'Those horrors, according to postmodernism, are most prominent in the West, Western civilization being where reason and power have been the most developed.'

Postmodernism does not have an opinion on things.
It is not a person.

The writing is too clumsy for it to be anything except some random asshole expressing a stupid opinion based on a less than superficial understanding of these things.
Did you get it from the comments section of a Jordan Peterson YouTube video?

I always post sources, you just never read because you can't be bothered by contrary views. Look at the little tweak, she pulled a source I quoted and told me what an idiot I was for using it. Your insane dribble lasted one post...well it didn't even as that long since it wa insane dribble.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

Since when is postmodernism a leftist thing?

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

So is the reason you never post the sources you quote because you know that if you did, it would reveal to everyone that they're just people expressing lame opinions on pissant blogs?

I refuse to accept that any legitimate source would say something like 'Those horrors, according to postmodernism, are most prominent in the West, Western civilization being where reason and power have been the most developed.'

Postmodernism does not have an opinion on things.
It is not a person.

The writing is too clumsy for it to be anything except some random asshole expressing a stupid opinion based on a less than superficial understanding of these things.
Did you get it from the comments section of a Jordan Peterson YouTube video?

I always post sources, you just never read because you can't be bothered by contrary views. Look at the little tweak, she pulled a source I quoted and told me what an idiot I was for using it. Your insane dribble lasted one post...well it didn't even as that long since it wa insane dribble.

There are no links to any sources in either of your posts.
We are just supposed to trust that you're posting something reliable?
LOL.

Stop lying to yourself-- it's embarrassing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
Well, it's going to be difficult to explain to you, but I'll try. You see, inside my quotes some very prominent philosophers are mentioned and statements are attributed to them. Now I understand you've never read anything above a comic book level, but that thy are attributed is the same as saying Einstein proposed relativity. I don't need to quote one book that references that, it's common knowledge...well common knowledge above comic book cartoon level thinking. Again, I point out that tweak, who considers herself a big girl philosopher was able to deal with it. That you can't is indicative of your comic cartoon life.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

5% of global population with 20% of GDP isn't balanced either, and Trump may well "restore balance " there too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Postmodernism is a deconstructionist approach to art, literature, and architecture, and a reaction to the modernist movement of the early 20th century. It's a movement now 70 years old, i.e., history, not current events. It's primary features are a mixture of architectural styles and a trend in fiction toward meta-fiction (writing about writing).

It has exactly zero to do with feminists or "leftists" or Muslims or Australian politics.

You should read a little and get out more. Just hanging around your useful idiot friend really makes you shallow.

"

quote:


Michel Foucault has identified the major targets: “All my analyses are against the idea of universal necessities in human existence.”1 Such necessities must be swept aside as baggage from the past: “It is meaningless to speak in the name of—or against— Reason, Truth, or Knowledge.”2
Richard Rorty has elaborated on that theme, explaining that that is not to say that postmodernism is true or that it offers knowledge. Such assertions would be self-contradictory, so post- modernists must use language “ironically.”
The difficulty faced by a philosopher who, like myself, is sympathetic to this suggestion [e.g., Foucault’s]—one who thinks of himself as auxiliary to the poet rather than to the physicist—is to avoid hinting that this suggestion gets something right, that my sort of philosophy corresponds to the way things really are. For this talk of correspondence brings back just the idea my sort of philosopher wants to get rid of, the idea that the world or the self has an intrinsic nature.3
If there is no world or self to understand and get right on their terms, then what is the purpose of thought or action? Having deconstructed reason, truth, and the idea of the correspondence of thought to reality, and then set them aside—“reason,” writes Foucault, “is the ultimate language of madness”4—there is nothing to guide or constrain our thoughts and feelings. So we can do or say whatever we feel like.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

Since when is postmodernism a leftist thing?

It isn't. One of the things it got into trouble over was questioning the objective reality of the Holocaust. Unfortunately, RM's use of the term is about as accurate as his use of 'feminism' and 'left wing'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
Well, it's going to be difficult to explain to you, but I'll try. You see, inside my quotes some very prominent philosophers are mentioned and statements are attributed to them. Now I understand you've never read anything above a comic book level, but that thy are attributed is the same as saying Einstein proposed relativity. I don't need to quote one book that references that, it's common knowledge...well common knowledge above comic book cartoon level thinking. Again, I point out that tweak, who considers herself a big girl philosopher was able to deal with it. That you can't is indicative of your comic cartoon life.

I'm not taking issue with the direct quotes, I'm taking issue with the stupidity surrounding them.
Apparently you didn't notice-- you have also posted whole paragraphs full of clumsily worded bullshit that talks about what is real 'according to postmodernism'.
For these, you have failed to provide any links.. and yet still saw fit to include them in your post, as if they have any credibility whatsoever.

For fuck's sakes, why is it so hard to provide a link to your source??
What's the big deal?
Everyone else does it... why not you?
Is it your personal blog or something?

Maybe if you provided links and I saw that they were from reputable sources, your jabs at my intellect wouldn't fall so flat.
No, actually-- they probably still would, as it wouldn't change the fact that you're a fucking moron... but they would at least make you seem like a moron who believes what he's saying.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
Pull up your big boy pants and stop whining.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji
Well, it's going to be difficult to explain to you, but I'll try. You see, inside my quotes some very prominent philosophers are mentioned and statements are attributed to them. Now I understand you've never read anything above a comic book level, but that thy are attributed is the same as saying Einstein proposed relativity. I don't need to quote one book that references that, it's common knowledge...well common knowledge above comic book cartoon level thinking. Again, I point out that tweak, who considers herself a big girl philosopher was able to deal with it. That you can't is indicative of your comic cartoon life.

I'm not taking issue with the direct quotes, I'm taking issue with the stupidity surrounding them.
Apparently you didn't notice-- you have also posted whole paragraphs full of clumsily worded bullshit that talks about what is real 'according to postmodernism'.
For these, you have failed to provide any links.. and yet still saw fit to include them in your post, as if they have any credibility whatsoever.

For fuck's sakes, why is it so hard to provide a link to your source??
What's the big deal?
Everyone else does it... why not you?
Is it your personal blog or something?

Maybe if you provided links and I saw that they were from reputable sources, your jabs at my intellect wouldn't fall so flat.
No, actually-- they probably still would, as it wouldn't change the fact that you're a fucking moron... but they would at least make you seem like a moron who believes what he's saying.

Pull up your big boy pants and stop whining.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Postmodernism is a deconstructionist approach to art, literature, and architecture, and a reaction to the modernist movement of the early 20th century. It's a movement now 70 years old, i.e., history, not current events. It's primary features are a mixture of architectural styles and a trend in fiction toward meta-fiction (writing about writing).

It has exactly zero to do with feminists or "leftists" or Muslims or Australian politics.

You should read a little and get out more. Just hanging around your useful idiot friend really makes you shallow.

"

quote:


Michel Foucault has identified the major targets: “All my analyses are against the idea of universal necessities in human existence.”1 Such necessities must be swept aside as baggage from the past: “It is meaningless to speak in the name of—or against— Reason, Truth, or Knowledge.”2
Richard Rorty has elaborated on that theme, explaining that that is not to say that postmodernism is true or that it offers knowledge. Such assertions would be self-contradictory, so post- modernists must use language “ironically.”
The difficulty faced by a philosopher who, like myself, is sympathetic to this suggestion [e.g., Foucault’s]—one who thinks of himself as auxiliary to the poet rather than to the physicist—is to avoid hinting that this suggestion gets something right, that my sort of philosophy corresponds to the way things really are. For this talk of correspondence brings back just the idea my sort of philosopher wants to get rid of, the idea that the world or the self has an intrinsic nature.3
If there is no world or self to understand and get right on their terms, then what is the purpose of thought or action? Having deconstructed reason, truth, and the idea of the correspondence of thought to reality, and then set them aside—“reason,” writes Foucault, “is the ultimate language of madness”4—there is nothing to guide or constrain our thoughts and feelings. So we can do or say whatever we feel like.

The left leaning nihilist Michel Foucalt?
Yeah, if he has it in for postmodernism, it's obviously all about the leftist agenda, innit?