Postmodernism...

[Matthew_Z]

"An intellectual mode of thought that attempts to critically examine and transcend the prevailing paradigms of modernity."

Given the position only exists relative to the prevailing paradigms of modernity, what are these paradigms?

 

[Haphazard]

"Post-postmodernism" - and no I'm not making this up.

DEAR GOD WHY

 

[Matthew_Z]

DEAR GOD WHY

If one could define Postmodernism as a critical position, then could one not create a position critical of postmodernism?

Also, an idea:

Modernism --> Alpha Postmodernism(postmodernism) --> Beta Postmodernism (Post-postmodernism) --> Gamma Postmodernism

 

[Sniffles]

Given the position only exists relative to the prevailing paradigms of modernity, what are these paradigms?

This might help: Defining characteristics of modernity.

 

[Haphazard]

If one could define Postmodernism as a critical position, then could one not create a position critical of postmodernism?

Also, an idea:

Modernism --> Alpha Postmodernism(postmodernism) --> Beta Postmodernism (Post-postmodernism) --> Gamma Postmodernism

One is being critical of the idea of being critical?

 

[Ginkgo]

Given the position only exists relative to the prevailing paradigms of modernity, what are these paradigms?

There are none because they were forged in pre-modernism, which used to be post-modernism. The paradigm is a paradox.

The primary intent behind this thread is to illustrate why the onslaught of unappreciative intelligence is harmful because it undoes humane purpose. (Or at least, that's how I see it).

 

[Matthew_Z]

One is being critical of the idea of being critical?

And that's where we get Gamma Postmodernism, which finds that criticism to be preposterous.

 

[Haphazard]

And that's where we get Gamma Postmodernism, which finds that criticism to be preposterous.

I think we should call the new movement "fuckyouimmahaveasammichism."

 

[Athenian200]

That's untrue. Sometimes I wonder if you object for the sake of objection.

I do like postmodernism, though...

And I don't think a trite statement like "blah, blah untrue, you object for sake of objection" is a very good reason for me not to like it.


For instance, you could tell me what the alternatives are.

Salient features of postmodernism are normally thought to include the ironic play with styles, citations and narrative levels,[6] a metaphysical skepticism or nihilism towards a “grand narrative” of Western culture,a preference for the virtual at the expense of the real, and a “waning of affect” on the part of the subject

So of course I like it.

 

[Litvyak]

Skepticism is good, but building societies and belief systems on skepticism and nihilism will lead to total chaos, destroying its own fundaments. It is only sustainable by the elite, so it's kind of an elitist worldview. It fails to grasp the social necessity of moving towards a "grand narrative", while constantly emphasizing that it doesn't exist (how do you know? even then, who cares?). I could go on forever.

Alternative: integrating the rationality and the anthropological optimism of the Enlightenment with the sentimentality and surreality of romanticism into the experiences and the skepticism of modernity, creating a new worldview.

 

[Ginkgo]

I do like postmodernism, though...

And I don't think a trite statement like "blah, blah untrue, you object for sake of objection" is a very good reason for me not to like it.


For instance, you could tell me what the alternatives are.



So of course I like it.

Older modes of intelligence do not require blind faith in what you believe. That is entirely up to the individual learning and the individual teaching.

If anything, our current/future systems bombard us with trivial information with unyielding zeal. If you live in a city, you cannot find refuge.

The war escalates in the streets, on TV, and even on the net. It infests the corners for the sake of corporate enterprise and economic integration.

Would you rather use a tangible dictionary, or an online dictionary that spews advertisements, pop-ups, and faceted bits of irrelevancies? This is one difference between pre-modernism and post-modernism.

 

[Athenian200]

Skepticism is good, but building societies and belief systems on skepticism and nihilism will lead to total chaos, destroying its own fundaments. It is only sustainable by the elite, so it's kind of an elitist worldview. It fails to grasp the social necessity of moving towards a "grand narrative", while constantly emphasizing that it doesn't exist (how do you know? even then, who cares?). I could go on forever.

I just can't find it in me to accept any "grand narratives" without decontructing them and making ironic comments about them. I just... don't know how to do it. I don't feel it.

I wish I could be an elitist. I don't like dealing with people who strongly believe in some kind of narrative, because their way of thinking about things is too simplistic for me to feel as though their words have any meaning.

Alternative: integrating the rationality and the anthropological optimism of the Enlightenment with the sentimentality and surreality of romanticism into the experiences and the skepticism of modernity, creating a new worldview.

But can those things be integrated? And I honestly hate romanticism... though I do like the Enlightenment and modernity.

 

[Litvyak]

I just can't find it in me to accept any "grand narratives" without decontructing them and making ironic comments about them.

There has to be room for non-mainstream material and subcultures in every system. Problem is if skepticism and detachment becomes a role model for intellectuals, and if the praise of entropy overrides civilization. The entropy may grow outside of a system, but it has to be constant inside for us to allow to challenge the system.

I don't like dealing with people who strongly believe in some kind of narrative, because their way of thinking about things is too simplistic for me to feel as though their words have any meaning.

A worldview that is complex enough more or less incorporates the opposition. Your standpoint is also a response to its core values, so if it is supported by a vast majority, your rejection is reconed with. Negations are also affirmations in a way, which can be integrated.

Once again: problem is if disorder overwhelmes order.
Order is able to control chaos, but if chaos takes over, it can't control anything, including itself.

But can those things be integrated? And I honestly hate romanticism... though I do like the Enlightenment and modernity.

I definitely hope so. Our means to convince people are stronger than ever before, e.g. mass media. I believe that rationality and feelings, global and local, western and eastern thinking is all part of a whole, and disregarding this because of it's complexity or the difficulty of its comprehension is not beneficial.

To be a little more specific: everything is easier to take in when individuals are bound together for a reason. Humanity needs yet another "great goal" to coalesce, a positive one (I'm thinking of space exploration, which had great effects on culture and technology in the 60's and 70's).

 

[sofmarhof]

I've heard House of Leaves described as very, very postmodern--if that is true, it is the one postmodern anything I ever liked.

 

[Ginkgo]

To be a little more specific: everything is easier to take in when individuals are bound together for a reason. Humanity needs yet another "great goal" to coalesce, a positive one (I'm thinking of space exploration, which had great effects on culture and technology in the 60's and 70's).

Yes! Though cooperation between parties is not necessarily vital. Iron sharpens iron.

 

[Tiltyred]

It killed my favorite contemporary author, David Foster Wallace. He thought about it so much he lost his mind and hanged himself. If I think about it too long, I have the same impulse. Once you achieve that mindset, you're sunk. There's no going back and there's no going forward.

 

[Mad Hatter]

Skepticism is good, but building societies and belief systems on skepticism and nihilism will lead to total chaos, destroying its own fundaments. It is only sustainable by the elite, so it's kind of an elitist worldview. It fails to grasp the social necessity of moving towards a "grand narrative", while constantly emphasizing that it doesn't exist (how do you know? even then, who cares?). I could go on forever.

Alternative: integrating the rationality and the anthropological optimism of the Enlightenment with the sentimentality and surreality of romanticism into the experiences and the skepticism of modernity, creating a new worldview.

It's not about abandoning 'grand narratives', it's about contextualizing them.
And I don't see why it should be called elitist.

 

[JAVO]

Postmodernism addresses some of the deficiencies of Modernism by coming up with something much worse.

Well said.

Postmodernism is contradictory and abandons reason. It attempts to define meaning as the lack of meaning, and states that the only absolute is that there are no absolutes.

Oh lookie at the colorful, cuddly, and hip nihilism!

 

[Alwar]

I suspected that someone had to have come up with a post-modern essay generator, and sure enough someone did, and 13 years ago at that. It's much funnier than chomskybot I think.

 

[Mad Hatter]

Well said.

Postmodernism is contradictory and abandons reason. It attempts to define meaning as the lack of meaning, and states that the only absolute is that there are no absolutes.

Not quite
It's not about abandoning reason. It's simply about seeing its limits and recognizing that reason alone sometimes just doesn't cut it.

The lack of meaning as the new meaning? Not quite. As I've said before, it's about contextualizing (maybe this explains it better; I'm sorry that it's quite a long read) . Nothing has meaning in and of itself, but only gains it via interpretation (and I think that's quite obvious).

Regarding your last assumption: "There is no Truth, only truths." That captures it quite well. It doesn't state that nothing is certain at all - it's simply a principled scepticism towards metaphysical explanations of the world. A decisive "I couldn't tell."

Well said.Oh lookie at the colorful, cuddly,

Look at my picture. I'm not cuddly and only consist of greyscales.

and hip nihilism!

I'm not nihilistic. Never. No way.