nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Postmodernism

irishguitarlad

So I have an exam on Monday about Feminist Literature. Now the things is I would consider myself a feminist yet I have severe doubt about the theory on which the majority of their theory is based on ie.Postmodernism. Now Postmodernism itself got it's idea from the father of linguistics Ferdinand de Sausurre who's theory on language has since been debunked by Chomsky. Also it goes against one of the fathers of modern science and modern philosophy, Renee Descartes who said " I think therefore I am" ths comfirming it as an absolute truth and beginning from there to establish other truths. However, postmodernist theorists believe that there are no absolute truths. I think this is a dangerous way of thinking as it goes against science who's practice is to search for the absolute truth of something, find it and use it to make our lives better and the lives of further generations.

Anyways, am I wrong AH? Should I not question it at all?Also, is this postmodernist theory only accepted as "fact" in literature courses or is it like that in philosophy and psychology ones as well? I have to say, it's in other modules as well in my literature course.By the way I am not some crazy Jordan Peterson fanboy, I do however like some of his psychology.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Mr. Incognito

Its all theory.

There is no such thing as fact.

Certainly not in literature

sk8erboii

irishguitarlad wrote: »

So I have an exam on Monday about Feminist Literature. Now the things is I would consider myself a feminist yet I have severe doubt about the theory on which the majority of their theory is based on ie.Postmodernism. Now Postmodernism itself got it's idea from the father of linguistics Ferdinand de Sausurre who's theory on language has since been debunked by Chomsky. Also it goes against one of the fathers of modern science and modern philosophy, Renee Descartes who said " I think therefore I am" ths comfirming it as an absolute truth and beginning from there to establish other truths. However, postmodernist theorists believe that there are no absolute truths. I think this is a dangerous way of thinking as it goes against science who's practice is to search for the absolute truth of something, find it and use it to make our lives better and the lives of further generations.

Anyways, am I wrong AH? Should I not question it at all?Also, is this postmodernist theory only accepted as "fact" in literature courses or is it like that in philosophy and psychology ones as well? I have to say, it's in other modules as well in my literature course.By the way I am not some crazy Jordan Peterson fanboy, I do however like some of his psychology.

Lol youre not getting it. PM challenges truths, not that nothing is ‘true’ Ever heard of the flying spaghetti monster? Its an satirical PM movement mocking religion. PM gestated as a response to modernist thought relapsing to pre-modernist thought. (E.g ‘Someone told me the earth is round even though i have not done any critical thinking or experiment to prove that theory, i will believe this governmenf/person/religion). As we all know solipsist thought is much more dangerous. Some farmer saw his cow die when the lady next door walk past. Therefore she is a witch. Therefore lets burn her at the stake.

In the early modern era sailors circumnavigated the world to prove that it is round. Today, the vast majority of people have not done so, or proven that it is, yet accept the fact. Flat earth movement is a post modernist movemenf, thats unfortunately attracted some really stupid people.

Its not that nothing is true, its that you should question everything.

But theres a real scientific argument for PM In the form of metaphysics. When you get down to quarks and photons really nothing becomes certain and mathematics makes no sense

Roger Hassenforder

irishguitarlad wrote: »

So I have an exam on Monday about Feminist Literature. Now the things is I would consider myself a feminist yet I have severe doubt about the theory on which the majority of their theory is based on ie.Postmodernism. Now Postmodernism itself got it's idea from the father of linguistics Ferdinand de Sausurre who's theory on language has since been debunked by Chomsky. Also it goes against one of the fathers of modern science and modern philosophy, Renee Descartes who said " I think therefore I am" ths comfirming it as an absolute truth and beginning from there to establish other truths. However, postmodernist theorists believe that there are no absolute truths. I think this is a dangerous way of thinking as it goes against science who's practice is to search for the absolute truth of something, find it and use it to make our lives better and the lives of further generations.

Anyways, am I wrong AH? Should I not question it at all?Also, is this postmodernist theory only accepted as "fact" in literature courses or is it like that in philosophy and psychology ones as well? I have to say, it's in other modules as well in my literature course.By the way I am not some crazy Jordan Peterson fanboy, I do however like some of his psychology.

Could you not have done engineering?

biko

Say this in class - "Feminist Literature = Chick Lit"

Renegade Mechanic

Third level educayshun needs an almighty kick in the teeth tbh.

irishguitarlad

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

Could you not have done engineering?

Yeah probably should have.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

An ice cap splits into two, with a pink polar bear sitting on one floe, and an Eskimo midget on the other. The polar bear asks, "does your cheese have soap?", to which the midget replies, "No radio!"

irishguitarlad

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Its all theory.

There is no such thing as fact.

Certainly not in literature

Yes I agree, but people believe this as fact on the course's whatsapp group.

sk8erboii

irishguitarlad wrote: »

Yes I agree, but people believe this as fact on the course's whatsapp group.

There are idiots everywhere unfortunately. Accepting post modernism as the truth is antithesis to its meaning

Roger Hassenforder

What are the job prospects like on this course, and how many of ye are there?

Chips Lovell

All I can say is that you've definitely come to the right place for advice.

irishguitarlad

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

What are the job prospects like on this course, and how many of ye are there?

To be honest Roger I'm only doing it to get a degree as I live in a foreign country and it was the only one that was in English. You need a degree to do majority of things these days, sadly.

Roger Hassenforder

irishguitarlad wrote: »

To be honest Roger I'm only doing it to get a degree as I live in a foreign country and it was the only one that was in English. You need a degree to do majority of things these days, sadly.

Sounds like a french college!
I wish i was a carpenter or electrician sometimes.

johnnyskeleton

irishguitarlad wrote: »

So I have an exam on Monday about Feminist Literature. Now the things is I would consider myself a feminist yet I have severe doubt about the theory on which the majority of their theory is based on ie.Postmodernism. Now Postmodernism itself got it's idea from the father of linguistics Ferdinand de Sausurre who's theory on language has since been debunked by Chomsky.

Well exams are designed to see how well you can absorb and repeat the stuff you've been given during term. If you want to be intellectually honest and say that everything you've been taught in the term is garbage and spend 3 hours talking about something else that would be a brave move, and maybe your lecturer will admire it.

However, if you want to pass the course, you are better off mindlessly regurgitating what you have been told to say.

That said, if its just on feminist literature, why not pick a non postmodernist feminist like Simone de Beauvoir or, more contemporaneously, Camille Paglia.

Also it goes against one of the fathers of modern science and modern philosophy, Renee Descartes who said " I think therefore I am" ths comfirming it as an absolute truth and beginning from there to establish other truths.

I wouldn't agree that he is one of the fathers of modern science and philosophy. He was very influential, but his premise of innate truth being capable of ascertained relies upon a belief in God, which isn't universally accepted.

However, postmodernist theorists believe that there are no absolute truths. I think this is a dangerous way of thinking as it goes against science who's practice is to search for the absolute truth of something, find it and use it to make our lives better and the lives of further generations.

I don't think absolute truth is a scientific term. Scientists look for provable theories and they test hypotheses.

Anyways, am I wrong AH? Should I not question it at all?Also, is this postmodernist theory only accepted as "fact" in literature courses or is it like that in philosophy and psychology ones as well? I have to say, it's in other modules as well in my literature course.By the way I am not some crazy Jordan Peterson fanboy, I do however like some of his psychology.

It's entirely in keeping with postmodernism to question postmodernism so I'd say by all means plough ahead. I wouldn't mention Jordan Peterson in a Feminist Literature exam though.

BeerWolf

Roger Hassenforder wrote: »

What are the job prospects like on this course, and how many of ye are there?

There's no shortage in joining protests over any little thing be in person or over a b/v-log.

super_furry

Still can't believe that Sting was the Ace Face and the Bellboy myself.

Grayson

irishguitarlad wrote: »

So I have an exam on Monday about Feminist Literature. Now the things is I would consider myself a feminist yet I have severe doubt about the theory on which the majority of their theory is based on ie.Postmodernism. Now Postmodernism itself got it's idea from the father of linguistics Ferdinand de Sausurre who's theory on language has since been debunked by Chomsky. Also it goes against one of the fathers of modern science and modern philosophy, Renee Descartes who said " I think therefore I am" ths comfirming it as an absolute truth and beginning from there to establish other truths. However, postmodernist theorists believe that there are no absolute truths. I think this is a dangerous way of thinking as it goes against science who's practice is to search for the absolute truth of something, find it and use it to make our lives better and the lives of further generations.

Anyways, am I wrong AH? Should I not question it at all?Also, is this postmodernist theory only accepted as "fact" in literature courses or is it like that in philosophy and psychology ones as well? I have to say, it's in other modules as well in my literature course.By the way I am not some crazy Jordan Peterson fanboy, I do however like some of his psychology.

Actually no. Descartes ideas have been disproved many times. The reason he's studied is because he's an amazing step between early western philosophy and now. And even though his arguments are wrong, they are still lovely arguments that have a certain beauty to them.

And if you want to be really pedantic a persian, Avicenna, got there first.

btw, in philosophy, nothing is considered as fact. Anyone who brings in a priori knowledge or states something without proving it is just considered wrong.

Edit: except for his maths of course. Cartesian planes are of course incredibly useful

Pherekydes

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

There is no such thing as fact.

Is that a fact?

Roger Hassenforder

Keatsian wrote: »

If you actually have an exam on Monday, get off Boards and start studying, because it doesn't sound like you have a firm grasp of this topic, or how to use capital letters and punctuation (which I wouldn't normally comment on, but you will also be marked on it in an English exam!) A thread called "Postmodernism" will just be a magnet for a bunch of Peterson/Dawkins fans who won't have a clue what they are on about.

You'd have failed punctuation there bud!
Smartarse.

#andaDawkinsfan

[Deleted User]

You will be grand here on AH its full of people who if they think/believe it, it must be true no evidence required.

Roger Hassenforder

Keatsian wrote: »

Enlighten me.

Keatsian wrote: »

....a bunch of Peterson/Dawkins fans who won't have a clue what they are on about.

Tho...

Capt'n Midnight

https://xkcd.com/451/

realitykeeper

irishguitarlad wrote: »

So I have an exam on Monday about Feminist Literature. Now the things is I would consider myself a feminist yet I have severe doubt about the theory on which the majority of their theory is based on ie.Postmodernism. Now Postmodernism itself got it's idea from the father of linguistics Ferdinand de Sausurre who's theory on language has since been debunked by Chomsky. Also it goes against one of the fathers of modern science and modern philosophy, Renee Descartes who said " I think therefore I am" ths comfirming it as an absolute truth and beginning from there to establish other truths. However, postmodernist theorists believe that there are no absolute truths. I think this is a dangerous way of thinking as it goes against science who's practice is to search for the absolute truth of something, find it and use it to make our lives better and the lives of further generations.

Anyways, am I wrong AH? Should I not question it at all?Also, is this postmodernist theory only accepted as "fact" in literature courses or is it like that in philosophy and psychology ones as well? I have to say, it's in other modules as well in my literature course.By the way I am not some crazy Jordan Peterson fanboy, I do however like some of his psychology.

I disagree with postmodernism because it goes against God. It is absolutely true that Marxism failed, otherwise postmodernists would admit to being Marxist. As a Catholic, I have incorporated the philosophy of the Zoroastrians into my faith. Zoroastrianism separates and parses good from evil. Does there have to be a right and a wrong? Absolutely, in my opinion. If you do a maths problem and get it wrong, then you are wrong regardless of the fact that you had a thought process in deriving the wrong answer.

Bertie Ahern demonstrated postmodernism in a remark he made about a tribunal which found that he had told untruths. Ahern said the tribunal (which had established the facts) had its opinion and he had his. As a society, I fear we will soon discover this blanket denial of truth is unbecoming, and in a very literal way.

endacl

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Its all theory.

There is no such thing as fact.

Certainly not in literature

While this may be true, an unfortunate extrapolation is that all opinions have become equal and valid, simply by virtue of somebody holding them.

riclad

Science is built on absolute truth,
experiments can be tested and repeated and will give the same result.
Postmodernism is a way of looking at the world,
so reality may be different for every person, each person,s point of view is valid as the next.There is no ultimate truth or objective reality .
Its not meant to be applied in real life ,also it can be useful when making art
or writing fiction .
If it was true then real life would be chaotic or dangerous.
it,s like people who commit a crime and say ah sure it,s ok,
it was an artistic performance .I,m postmodern, if i say its ok to rob a car and dump it in the river ,than it,s fine.
Do not punish me .
In my reality its fine, i am creating art.
If all opinions become equal and valid than the opinions of neo nazi,s and extreme climate change denier,s are just as good as liberal,s or scientist,s .
So for instance some people sayall government regulation is bad,
reduce regulation, allow companys to sell guns to anyone ,or dump nuclear waste anywhere they want,
even if it pose,s a danger to public health.

[Deleted User]

riclad wrote: »

Science is built on absolute truth,
experiments can be tested and repeated and will give the same result.
Postmodernism is a way of looking at the world,
so reality may be different for every person, each person,s point of view is valid as the next.There is no ultimate truth or objective reality .
Its not meant to be applied in real life ,also it can be useful when making art
or writing fiction .
If it was true then real life would be chaotic or dangerous.
it,s like people who commit a crime and say ah sure it,s ok,
it was an artistic performance .I,m postmodern, if i say its ok to rob a car and dump it in the river ,than it,s fine.
Do not punish me .
In my reality its fine, i am creating art.
If all opinions become equal and valid than the opinions of neo nazi,s and extreme climate change denier,s are just as good as liberal,s or scientist,s .
So for instance some people sayall government regulation is bad,
reduce regulation, allow companys to sell guns to anyone ,or dump nuclear waste anywhere they want,
even if it pose,s a danger to public health.

That's not totally true. You'll get the same result within some error or tolerance level, maybe depending on the experiment design.

sabat

realitykeeper wrote: »

As a Catholic, I have incorporated the philosophy of the Zoroastrians into my faith.

That's orientalist syncretism. I should report you to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Wibbs

I have found that in some ways Post Modernism is rather like quantum physics; both are complex ideas, but hijacked by the lazy of mind, or the charlatans as a clever sounding shorthand for ignorance and/or spoofery.

sk8erboii wrote: »

In the early modern era sailors circumnavigated the world to prove that it is round.

Actually not quite. It was known to be a globe and this had been known for millennia, certainly in areas considered even vaguely civilised. Indeed it had been measured and quite accurately too. By either a Greek or Egyptian or Ptolemaic Egyptian, can't recall. Where it went a little wrong was yet another Greek lad living in Egypt by the name of Ptolemy*. A true polymath of learning and general brilliance, which he was wont to inform everyone. Anyway he also measured it, but got it wrong by a couple of thousand miles and him having the better rep and publicists, that was the measurement that took hold. Using that measurement Columbus would have actually bumped into Asia, the "Indies", so his confusion is understandable. The heliocentric view of the cosmos was also posited by yet again a few Greeks, one in particular whose name escapes me, Aris something, but not totle(he also worked out the size of the moon(and sun IIRC) and possible distances between them and that stars were further away too. Which makes it worse that I can't recall his name). Anyway even there our old mate Ptolemy also poo poo'd that as he thought it too complex, though he wasn't alone and until Copernicous stuck his oar in, though a few brainiacs considered other possibilities that more reflected reality. A fair few Arab dudes considered it. Leo DaVinci being another. Not a shock with that lad to be fair. But I digress...

Ptolemy, his name and also the name of the Greek installed by Alex the only Bleedin Deadly, dynastic rulers of Egypt. Cleopatra being the last of the line.

Nermal

All you need to know is that it has dominated our intellectual life for half a century while producing no technology and no worthwhile art. It’s a dead end. As the man said, you should have done engineering.

riclad

Ant vaxxers are sort of postmodern in that they ignore science and say
vaccination is bad or dangerous,
meanwhile they want their children to go to school even if they put other
peoples children at risk of getting measle,s or other disease,s .
I think postmodernism has produced some valuable art, you could make a film where something happens, but the people involved have different reactions , because they have their own opinion on did this happen,
what exactly happened .
Post modernism is dangerous in that it could be used by extremists or scam artists, to hide the truth ,or simply make up so called facts
to protect their status or defend extreme belief,s .
Trump is a post modern president in that he seems to change his opinion on a daily basis depending on the reaction of people around him or what he see,s tv.
he do,es not care if the kurds get wiped out by the turkish army even though they had a large role in helping america defeat isis .