Postmodernism and Critical Theory. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Simple Minded

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Simple Minded »

Parodite wrote:The Postmodernism Generator web page (generates a random postmodernist article each time loaded)

:D
Brilliant!

Intellectual proselytizing at it's finest. Just keep clicking, till you get the version that resonates with your deeply cherished core beliefs.

The long standing practice of "If you think my ranting doesn't make any sense it's cause you're so stupid you can't understand my superior mode of thinking!" has been automated.

"I'm so smart, only the best AI minds understand me!"

Religion as science, and science as religion was only a futile last ditch effort by humanity to remain relevant. It's over, the robots won. Killed off by the better mousetrap we all wanted...... :?

Our only hope is if the self-aware, self-creating AI entities fracture into two factions and consume all their electrons in fighting each other.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5642
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Parodite »

Indeed. Word Salad Industries Inc.!
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Miss_Faucie_Fishtits
Posts: 2152
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Miss_Faucie_Fishtits »

Once it was bananas...... now it's an eight-foot beach ball:

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2017/09/28/ ... kes-541580
She irons her jeans, she's evil.........
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

The Wilfred Laurier Affair

Post by Typhoon »

May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Simple Minded

Re: The Wilfred Laurier Affair

Post by Simple Minded »

Excellent. Thanks for posting!

As I recall, 1984 was a pretty good year. The novel, not so much.

Mark Steyn has written extensively for years about this phenomena in Canada..... and elsewhere. Hilarious, yet terrifying.

Human Rights Commission.... Thought Correction Session..... Free Speech...... one of those phrases doesn't fit in with our plans.

Wait until the young Intellectual Brown Shirts they are creating start policing their professors........ The ante will be upped from Thought Correction to Behavior Correction quite quickly.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Typhoon »

Victor Hanson | Let down at the Top
Since the Trojan War, generations have always trashed their own age in comparison to ages past. The idea of fated decadence and decline was a specialty of 19th-century German philosophy.

So we have to be careful in calibrating generations, especially when our own has reached a level of technology and science never before dreamed of (and it is not a given that material or ethical progress is always linear).

Nonetheless, the so-called Baby Boomers have a lot to account for — given the sorry state of entertainment, sports, the media, and universities.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5642
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Parodite »

ytu5Kz6Y0CQ

Post-modernism as the leftover of Marxist fascism.
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27242
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Typhoon »

Quite. Post modernism is Marxism with a new shade of lipstick.

As typical of intellectuals in the humanities, Foucault, Marcuse, and many other of the motley Continentals were hardcore Marxists.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Post-modernism is a tool and it asks good questions. The problem is it defies firm answers, but people try to use it as an academic method when it is only suitable for inspiration.

I don't think it is inherently Marxist. Marxim is much closer to Hegel than post-modernism.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by noddy »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:Post-modernism is a tool and it asks good questions. The problem is it defies firm answers, but people try to use it as an academic method when it is only suitable for inspiration.

I don't think it is inherently Marxist. Marxim is much closer to Hegel than post-modernism.
I think I mostly agree with that.

its not an absolute worldview by definition, it nibbles at the areas of grey as an intellectual excercise.

of course, some ? many ? lots ? of folks seem to have made a lifestyle out of that.. as always.
ultracrepidarian
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5642
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Parodite »

"Now here's the thing." (I like that line, hear it a lot as an alternative to: "Yes, OK...but...")


Do we really believe, and accept, that our behavior, thinking included, is mostly driven by biology? I for one do. There can be zillion cultural differences, expressions and not to mention an indefinite amount of different things to think about.. but it is fed, and the degrees of freedom being constrained, by hard core biology, environment etc.

Jordan B Peterson said same such somewhere and many will agree with it. But if biology (nature) is doing (say) 90% of the stuff we are doing, included thinking, while culture (nurture/environment) accounts for only 10%.. then why would any type of philosophy bother us that much? It would not make sense to waste much time on philosophy by either doing it, or considering what impact certain ideas or famous philosophers had. Better look for the biological ovens, components that bake these types of cakes in general.

So there is a bit of a contradiction. To point out how wrong and dangerously-dirty some ideologies/philosophies are (marxism, neo-marxism, post-modernism) and yet claim at the same time that biology is doing most of the work... then why bother? Not only Postmodernism has no cloths, but so has any philosophy trying to oppose/debunk it. Maybe only a modest undi, but not much more.

Always when some great philosopher is mentioned or quoted I wonder why he is so famous and considered of such great consequence. Especially the phrase "One of the most influential thinkers of time X" makes me wonder.. influencing who/what exactly, and how. But there never is much science there, apart from how much somebody is read, quoted.. as if being remembered is a measure of that influence.

Most of philosophy is like a nudist gathering where the subject matter is fashion and style. :)
Deep down I'm very superficial
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by noddy »

all philosophy is mental masturbation - its reactive to the things that came before and the things that are in vogue at the time, only philosophy students wax lyrical about it.

ive never really seen it as being "right" its more about poking sticks at the fundamentals of the day.

philosophers tend to be depressed nutcases - the wine comes from the fruit, so im not convinced their fertilizer is particularly safe.. maybe small sprinkles only.
ultracrepidarian
User avatar
kmich
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:46 am

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by kmich »

I suppose if people are sufficiently self-assured with their world views, the critical evaluation of the basic assumptions, values, or prejudices upon which these all rest would seem unnecessary or frivolous. Proudly extolling the value and “practicality” of the unexamined life certainly does seem to be deep in the current Zeitgeist. Perhaps I am too old and out of step with the times, and the φιλόσοφος (lover of wisdom) has become something of an anachronism.

There still remain other perspectives:

A Harvard Medical School professor makes the case for the liberal arts and philosophy
noddy
Posts: 11318
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by noddy »

Introspection and self examination are absolutely critical, i would hope i hadnt expressed otherwise, with the caveat that those that spend too much time doing it, or make a career of it, do seem to suffer from depression and tend toward self obsession.

... atleast i certainly have and need to be very wary of such things.

as for what is being taught (and what is being believed) in modern universities, its hard to seperate grumpy ole man from reality - certainly alot of it seems unhealthy!
ultracrepidarian
Simple Minded

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Simple Minded »

Parodite wrote:"Now here's the thing." (I like that line, hear it a lot as an alternative to: "Yes, OK...but...")

Always when some great philosopher is mentioned or quoted I wonder why he is so famous and considered of such great consequence. Especially the phrase "One of the most influential thinkers of time X" makes me wonder.. influencing who/what exactly, and how. But there never is much science there, apart from how much somebody is read, quoted.. as if being remembered is a measure of that influence.

Most of philosophy is like a nudist gathering where the subject matter is fashion and style. :)
noddy wrote:all philosophy is mental masturbation - its reactive to the things that came before and the things that are in vogue at the time, only philosophy students wax lyrical about it.

ive never really seen it as being "right" its more about poking sticks at the fundamentals of the day.

philosophers tend to be depressed nutcases - the wine comes from the fruit, so im not convinced their fertilizer is particularly safe.. maybe small sprinkles only.
"The thing about it is........" that is often the case.

In my young life, when I was deep in the pursuit of "truth" and "practical wisdom," I spent several years looking for such in philosophy, religious, psychology, and psychiatry texts. Self-conscious ignorance is a gift! Glad I did it. It made me the man I is today! :)

Encountering philosophy Ph.D's at college, was not the experience I'd hoped for. Mostly they seemed like snooty NPR hosts, who loved to argue and parse words endlessly. Much later, Bill Clinton reminded me of this trait with his famous treatise "It {all} depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is."

Looking for answers and solutions, it occurred to me I stumbled into a den of long winded people, who like priests or teachers with an audience and a schedule to fill...., could fill it with not much of anything at all.

It always amazed me that if ten philosophy Ph.D were in the room, during a Friday afternoon Philosophy social hour free for all bull session, the name "Nietzsche" had eight different pronunciations...... :?

Meeting the same philosophy professors after school hours for a few beers was a much better learning experience. Blunt, direct, blue collar communication without all the intellectual window dressing lexicons. The definition of the word "distilled."

Hence forth, I decided to read whatever source material I wanted, and to not value the opinions of the "masters" as much as I may have previously.

Now can we all agree, that anyone (including us OTNOTers), who has more than a half hour to spare to discuss the difference between Kant and Sartre' or Kierkegaard and Nietzsche is incredibly privileged?
Last edited by Simple Minded on Thu Feb 08, 2018 4:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Simple Minded

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Simple Minded »

kmich wrote:I suppose if people are sufficiently self-assured with their world views, the critical evaluation of the basic assumptions, values, or prejudices upon which these all rest would seem unnecessary or frivolous. Proudly extolling the value and “practicality” of the unexamined life certainly does seem to be deep in the current Zeitgeist. Perhaps I am too old and out of step with the times, and the φιλόσοφος (lover of wisdom) has become something of an anachronism.

There still remain other perspectives:

A Harvard Medical School professor makes the case for the liberal arts and philosophy
thanks for posting kmich! I loved this part:

"In the chit-chat of the checkup, as I lay back in the chair with the suction tube in my mouth, he asked: “What are you majoring in at college?” When I replied that I was majoring in philosophy, he said: “What are you going to do with that?”

“Think,” I replied."

If only I could imitate Diane Rehm's voice by typing......
Last edited by Simple Minded on Thu Feb 08, 2018 4:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
Simple Minded

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Simple Minded »

noddy wrote:Introspection and self examination are absolutely critical, i would hope i hadnt expressed otherwise, with the caveat that those that spend too much time doing it, or make a career of it, do seem to suffer from depression and tend toward self obsession.

... atleast i certainly have and need to be very wary of such things.

as for what is being taught (and what is being believed) in modern universities, its hard to seperate grumpy ole man from reality - certainly alot of it seems unhealthy!

Yep! Marcus Aurelius is the Jackie Gleason of philosophers! :P

Samuel Johnson is also quite good!
User avatar
kmich
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:46 am

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by kmich »

Simple Minded wrote: thanks for posting kmich! I loved this part:

"In the chit-chat of the checkup, as I lay back in the chair with the suction tube in my mouth, he asked: “What are you majoring in at college?” When I replied that I was majoring in philosophy, he said: “What are you going to do with that?”

“Think,” I replied."
Oddly enough, that statement reminded me of Arendt’s “Eichmann in Jerusalem” where she writes after hearing hours of his interrogation:
The longer one listened to him, the more obvious it became that his inability to speak was closely connected to an inability to think, namely, to think from the standpoint of someone else. No communication was possible with him, not because he lied but because he was surrounded by the most reliable of all safeguards against the words and the presence of others, and hence against reality as such.
Eichmann was not unintelligent in the conventional sense, but was so limited by his unreflective, self-centered frame that he was unable and unwilling to come to terms with the horrors he perpetuated and collaborated with. Instead, he would whine and make excuses about a variety of matters such as why he did not advance further in the SS. He was essentially a boring, narcissistic, brainless functionary, not the embodiment of some dark malevolence people expected. He would claim he had nothing against the Jews. In fact some helped him find work in a vacuum cleaner company as a young man. He said he admired the Zionists seeking a homeland in Palestine, since they were “idealists” like him. Everything was considered in reference to his own frame.

The lesson perhaps is this. Don’t look for evil as some kind of Hannibal Lecter character; you more likely to find it developing in that familiar, boring character to whom a narrow perspective and identification makes the thoughtful, examined life a completely foreign exercise.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5642
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Parodite »

I'm not against philosophy of any sort, how could I. I'm doing it myself on a regular basis. :)

Even the most freely waxing expositions can be interesting, or at least enjoyable, if they sound like good music.
Zizek for instance makes little sense but it is like listening to an improvising jazz musician. A lot of chaos, unpredictability but it still hangs together with a few desperate lines that connect it with reality. He might be considered a post-modernist oiled with some socialist nostalgia. Still good music!

Somebody like Jordan B Peterson is more anchored in the known, using science and facts but seems at the same time addicted to flirting with the unknown and its chaos while desperately trying to create order from it with archetype and stories told in old literature. The dragon and snake to be killed or outwitted, or just unknown territory to be explored by the truly courageous heros who voluntarily expose themselves to the dangers, overcome fear and even sometimes return victorious and with a prize and something valuable for society. I find this an interesting way of talking about things, but in terms of music there is less to enjoy because he is playing the same piece over and over again.
Deep down I'm very superficial
Simple Minded

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Simple Minded »

Parodite wrote:I'm not against philosophy of any sort, how could I. I'm doing it myself on a regular basis. :)
But of course you do Parodite. Paraphrasing from the Opus Magnus Philosophy: Who Needs It? by Ayn Rand "Yer human, you have no choice but to generate a personal philosophy. Yer only choice is to adopt/create a philosophy that allows you to function as your own creator or your own destroyer."

Parodite wrote:Even the most freely waxing expositions can be interesting, or at least enjoyable, if they sound like good music.
Agree completely. There is philosophy that one's uses for practical purposes, and then philosophy one uses for entertainment/discussion/intellectual pecker measuring/one-up-manship (misogynist!). Similar to wine that tastes good (or art that is appealing), and wine that tastes like crap but impresses your snobby friends when you serve it (or setting a pair of eyeglasses on the floor of an art gallery to f**k with people, and watching the self-identifying elites try to decipher the deep, profound intent of the artist).

"The wine you are drinking has a very distinctive, unique taste because the grapes are picked by left-handed virgins during a full moon, between the hours of midnight and 3 am."
"Really? I just can't taste it."
"Yes.... I'm not surprised..... but don't you wish you could.""
"Picking grapes between midnight and 3 am huh? No wonder they are virgins."
" :o :shock: "
Parodite wrote:Somebody like Jordan B Peterson is more anchored in the known, using science and facts but seems at the same time addicted to flirting with the unknown and its chaos while desperately trying to create order from it with archetype and stories told in old literature. The dragon and snake to be killed or outwitted, or just unknown territory to be explored by the truly courageous heros who voluntarily expose themselves to the dangers, overcome fear and even sometimes return victorious and with a prize and something valuable for society. I find this an interesting way of talking about things, but in terms of music there is less to enjoy because he is playing the same piece over and over again.
I'm currently reading his book 12 Rules for Life. IMSMO, it is an excellent collection of practical wisdom. Much like what I had hoped to find from my early exposure to philosophy professors. You'd think Ph.D.'s would know better than to cast their pearls before swine like me.

Although in more than a few places, Peterson's book reads as if he had one computer playing his recorded lectures from youtube, and other computer with voice recognition software listening to the recorded lecture and typing the manuscript.

Wisdom, like beauty, and offense, seems subjective. One bloke reads the Bible and thinks it's crap, another finds it to be profoundly life enhancing. Is it due to book content or reader content/preparation?

Mustard seeds and concrete parking lots? Me credit, book blame in either case seems appealing.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5642
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Parodite »

SM, not much to add or disagree. So it must be good stuff. ;)

Just came across this one, a good exhibition of our Zeitgeist with the why and how of JB Peterson somehow being a signifier, or as someone in the documentary calls his interview on Channel 4 with Cathy Newman being a glitch in the matrix.

Highly recommended:

zQCTeGKHsVc
Deep down I'm very superficial
Simple Minded

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Simple Minded »

Thanks Parodite. Looking forward to watching.

Reading Peterson's book, he strikes me as a very competent adult. Verbose enough to have a Ph.D. But more like the Ph.D.s who are comfortable enough in their own knowledge, to come out from behind the lectern, leave the high-brow lexicon in the classroom, and meet you for a few beers after hours. Which, of course, is when the real challenging questions will be asked of the expert.

Much of the book is timeless good advice, similar to what one would have heard from one's Grandparents or Parents during childhood. I think the disintegration of the nuclear family and widespread illegitimacy explains why the yutes are so hungry for his message. They weren't raised in a similar environment (single parents and working moms), and many did not hear much in the line of "common sense wisdom" for life during their childhoods.

good book for teenagers or new parents.

I guess what goes around, comes around, or, in ORZ, "If you want a new idea, read an old book (or talk to an old fart)."
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5642
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Parodite »

Yes. I think it is not so much what he says which indeed boils down to good ol' common sense but the moment in space and time that make it a hit.

A nut that still needs to be cracked is the discussion on free will. JBP discussed truth and free will be Sam Harris. If SH is right and free will an illusion (albeit a useful one) than the whole idea of individual responsibility becomes problematic, to say the least. SH thinks of consciousness as a passive observer, a witness, without being involved in any of the choices we make. The conscious self has no control over anything much so its agency is extremely limited of not entirely absent. If true.. then what about the "divine individual" vis-a-vis the raw powers in nature, and the post-modernist/marxist claim that all is a power struggle between groups and classes of people? The latter would be more realistic in a world where free will and individual agency are illusory.

I'm still itching to throw in my views on consciousness and free will. It would give JBP some ammunition against the views of SH and others, help prevent the whole project of the divine and responsible individual be aborted because free will ain't real and consciuousness a totally mysterious "epiphenomenon", an "emergent property" for which no scientific explanation exists to date. A rabbit out of a magic hat. Maybe I should put some effort in it and send something to Quillette. :|
Deep down I'm very superficial
Simple Minded

Re: Postmodernism. Or why the Empress has no clothes.

Post by Simple Minded »

Parodite wrote:Yes. I think it is not so much what he says which indeed boils down to good ol' common sense but the moment in space and time that make it a hit.

A nut that still needs to be cracked is the discussion on free will. JBP discussed truth and free will be Sam Harris. If SH is right and free will an illusion (albeit a useful one) than the whole idea of individual responsibility becomes problematic, to say the least. SH thinks of consciousness as a passive observer, a witness, without being involved in any of the choices we make. The conscious self has no control over anything much so its agency is extremely limited of not entirely absent......

I'm still itching to throw in my views on consciousness and free will. It would give JBP some ammunition against the views of SH and others, help prevent the whole project of the divine and responsible individual be aborted because free will ain't real and consciuousness a totally mysterious "epiphenomenon", an "emergent property" for which no scientific explanation exists to date. A rabbit out of a magic hat. Maybe I should put some effort in it and send something to Quillette. :|
Write it Bro! Just do it! Be all the you can be! Be all that I imagine you can be also! ;)

I agree completely, even though I am completely ignorant of Sam Harris' views. This is exactly what I mean when I say there are useful philosophies, and philosophies that have entertainment (in noddy's terms: intellectual masturbation) purposes only.

If a parent (SH for example), believes free will does not exist, and decides to teach this to their children, what good could come of it? If SH caught his kid stealing, or murders his own mother, would SH absolve his child of any wrong doing immediately? Logic would dictate that he must, because if "free will" does not exist, so neither can personal responsibility.

Once more cue Flip Wilson saying "the devil made me do it." People thought that was funny in the 1970's because the absurdity was "obvious." I'm not so sure today SJW's and Snowflakes would see the humor.

The ORZ line of "If only people would preach what they practice." comes to mind.

The endless question of are people basically good or basically bad? Regardless of which is true, I know I would prefer to live in the community of adults who were taught the former as children, rather than the later. The viewpoint of True Believers regarding those they consider to be infidels would be good example.

The search for truth vs. the pursuit of useful information.......
Last edited by Simple Minded on Sun Feb 18, 2018 5:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Post Reply