Postmodernism.

Sarky · 14-08-2013 02:39AM #1

Postmodernism and its subjective reality bollocks have a lot to f*cking answer for.

nagirrac · 14-08-2013 06:11AM

Sarky wrote: »

Postmodernism and its subjective reality bollocks have a lot to f*cking answer for.

Subjective reality makes up most of human reality, otherwise we would be zombies. The fact that we have subjective consciousness is what encouraged us to leave the trees and later the cave and explore. Without subjective reality there would be no creative expression; so no language, no literature, no poetry, no music, no painting, no cinema, no dancing, no fantasy, no adventurous sex:(. No science as science came from creative ideas, long before the scientific method.

There would also be no opinions, as only that which has been empirically determined to be the "truth" would be allowed, ignoring the fact that most "truths" are likely to proven wrong or at least modified at some future date.

There would be no boards as there would be nothing to discuss:eek:.

The world is a much better place due to postmodernism, we learned that the hard way in the 20th century. Humans are dreamers and efforts to try and make us conform to a standard way of thinking have been disastrous.

Sarky · 14-08-2013 02:02PM

nagirrac wrote: »

Subjective reality makes up most of human reality, otherwise we would be zombies. The fact that we have subjective consciousness is what encouraged us to leave the trees and later the cave and explore. Without subjective reality there would be no creative expression; so no language, no literature, no poetry, no music, no painting, no cinema, no dancing, no fantasy, no adventurous sex:(. No science as science came from creative ideas, long before the scientific method.

There would also be no opinions, as only that which has been empirically determined to be the "truth" would be allowed, ignoring the fact that most "truths" are likely to proven wrong or at least modified at some future date.

There would be no boards as there would be nothing to discuss:eek:.

The world is a much better place due to postmodernism, we learned that the hard way in the 20th century. Humans are dreamers and efforts to try and make us conform to a standard way of thinking have been disastrous.

Uh, you do realise your hellish vision of a world without postmodernism doesn't match up with the world as it was before postmodernism was a thing, right? People are misinformed enough having their own opinions without thinking they're also entitled to their own facts.

nagirrac · 14-08-2013 02:53PM

Sarky wrote: »

Uh, you do realise your hellish vision of a world without postmodernism doesn't match up with the world as it was before postmodernism was a thing, right? People are misinformed enough having their own opinions without thinking they're also entitled to their own facts.

Although the term postmodernism was around since the 19th century, there is general agreement that the postmodernism age, which I assume is what you are referring to, began in the 1960s.

Do you think in broad terms, and looking at the facts and not opinion, that western society was better or worse before the cultural changes in the 1960s?. The era that came before the 1960s (modernism), was defined by colonialism, world wars, deference to authority figures including political and religious, racism, narrow viewpoints on sexuality, art, etc. The freedoms we enjoy today to pursue individual happiness, regardless of race, sexual orientation, religious or non religious, broadly did not exist in western culture before the postmodernist cultural revolutions in the 1960s.

endacl · 14-08-2013 02:56PM

Remember, postmodernism also gave us the phenomenon of facts being a matter of opinion, which must be respected, because the right to an opinion is importantanstuffdontchaknow. It also gave us the comical scenario of a 'debate' between evolutionary theory and 'intelligent design'.

If postmodernism is to be condemned for anything though, it has to be hipsters...

Sarky · 14-08-2013 02:57PM

Colonialism, world wars, deference to authority figures political and religious, racism and narrow viewpoints still exist, in a very big way. Some of them are worse, after a fashion. And it certainly wasn't postmodernism that reduced them in the last 60 years.

nagirrac · 14-08-2013 03:00PM

Sarky wrote: »

Colonialism, world wars, deference to authority figures political and religious, racism and narrow viewpoints still exist, in a very big way.

Compared to pre 1960s? Are you actually being serious?
Keep it simple, compare Ireland of today to Ireland say of the 1950s.

Sarky · 14-08-2013 03:04PM

What exactly has this got to do with people thinking they're entitled to their own facts? Ugh, are you going to mention the word 'quantum' again? Because that never ends well.

nagirrac · 14-08-2013 03:13PM

Sarky wrote: »

What exactly has this got to do with people thinking they're entitled to their own facts? Ugh, are you going to mention the word 'quantum' again? Because that never ends well.

You were the one who defined postmodernism as "bollocks".
Back up your claim with facts and leave the personal attacks out of it.

Define how and why postmodernism is "bollocks".

Sarky · 14-08-2013 03:21PM

nagirrac wrote: »

You were the one who defined postmodernism as "bollocks".
Back up your claim with facts and leave the personal attacks out of it.

Define how and why postmodernism is "bollocks".

I already did. Then endacl came along and put it better:

endacl wrote: »

Remember, postmodernism also gave us the phenomenon of facts being a matter of opinion, which must be respected, because the right to an opinion is importantanstuffdontchaknow. It also gave us the comical scenario of a 'debate' between evolutionary theory and 'intelligent design'.

The idea that facts could be a matter of opinion is ludicrous. But I suppose that's just my opinion, isn't it?

nagirrac · 14-08-2013 03:28PM

Sarky wrote: »

I already did. Then endacl came along and put it better:

The idea that facts could be a matter of opinion is ludicrous. But I suppose that's just my opinion, isn't it?

Both of you are narrowly defining postmodernism in terms of the one aspect you do not like, questioning established facts, specifically in science I assume.

"Facts" are strange and elusive things, from a societal standpoint they tend to change all the time. For example in the Ireland of the pre 60s, there were no homosexuals.. and that was a fact.

Bannasidhe · 14-08-2013 03:30PM

nagirrac wrote: »

Both of you are narrowly defining postmodernism in terms of the one aspect you do not like, questioning established facts, specifically in science I assume.

"Facts" are strange and elusive things, from a societal standpoint they tend to change all the time. For example in the Ireland of the pre 60s, there were no homosexuals.. and that was a fact.

Both of whom?

As far as I am concerned 'postmodern' is an art movement...

nagirrac · 14-08-2013 03:30PM

endacl wrote: »

Remember, postmodernism also gave us the phenomenon of facts being a matter of opinion, which must be respected, because the right to an opinion is importantanstuffdontchaknow. It also gave us the comical scenario of a 'debate' between evolutionary theory and 'intelligent design'.

If postmodernism is to be condemned for anything though, it has to be hipsters...

Do you think creationism started in the 1960s? In America at least it was after the 1960s that separation of church and state was truly implemented. The debate between evolutionary design and ID would probably not have happened pre 1960s, as it would have been too offensive to the dominant religious view.

Sarky · 14-08-2013 03:32PM

There's nothing wrong with questioning established facts. That's how progress is made. How the hell did you get that from either of our posts?

Declaring any old sh*t to be the truth in the face of evidence because it makes you feel better and it's "your" reality, that's the kind of bollocks that I was decrying. If you're just looking for an argument, why don't you say so?

nagirrac · 14-08-2013 05:00PM

Sarky wrote: »

Declaring any old sh*t to be the truth in the face of evidence because it makes you feel better and it's "your" reality, that's the kind of bollocks that I was decrying. If you're just looking for an argument, why don't you say so?

Then you are not talking about postmodernism, you are talking about the urban dictionary depiction of postmodernism. No question that in a postmodern society people are free to declare any old kind of sh*t, but it beats a society where declaring anything but establishment sh*t got you ostracized or worse.

It is somewhat ironic that on a thread that attempts to distinguish "fact" from "fiction" in Judea 2,000 years ago (something historians greatly differ on), what occurred in our own society 50 years ago seems elusive as time goes by. Tying postmodernism to "new age woo" thinking is utter bollocks, and intellectually lazy.

What's wrong with an argument? Postmodernism is well worth defending on its merits. We live in a society that has benefitted enormously from postmodernism and where diversity and freedom of expression is cherished. Remember its largest critics are cultural conservatives who believe it has led to moral decay and sexual deviancy.

Sycopat · 14-08-2013 06:36PM

nagirrac wrote: »

Then you are not talking about postmodernism, you are talking about the urban dictionary depiction of postmodernism. No question that in a postmodern society people are free to declare any old kind of sh*t, but it beats a society where declaring anything but establishment sh*t got you ostracized or worse.

It is somewhat ironic that on a thread that attempts to distinguish "fact" from "fiction" in Judea 2,000 years ago (something historians greatly differ on), what occurred in our own society 50 years ago seems elusive as time goes by. Tying postmodernism to "new age woo" thinking is utter bollocks, and intellectually lazy.

What's wrong with an argument? Postmodernism is well worth defending on its merits. We live in a society that has benefitted enormously from postmodernism and where diversity and freedom of expression is cherished. Remember its largest critics are cultural conservatives who believe it has led to moral decay and sexual deviancy.

The only one mentioned on the wiki page is Chomsky, who's arguments against post-modernism (A term I detest myself, on the grounds it is linguistically non-sensical.) in philosophy appear to be against it's critiques of logic and reason. The rejection of which seems to be the same thing which seems to be annoying sarky. I personally find it ironic that the post-modernist attempt to "be-more-in-the-world" consists seemingly of navel gazing about objectivity and subjectivity, but I'd need to do a lot more reading to form a full opinion.

Also, ireland of the now and the 1950's are vastly different places, undeniably true, but as far as I am aware, from my discussions with people who were born in the sixties, the massive social changes of the sixties in the rest of the world simply didn't happen in ireland, and the social changes that synthesized modern irish society didn't occur until the late eighties/nineties. I do think you'll have to argue for why or how those social changes were the product of a movement which originated, by your estimate, 20 to 30 years beforehand.

nagirrac · 14-08-2013 07:25PM

Sycopat wrote: »

Also, ireland of the now and the 1950's are vastly different places, undeniably true, but as far as I am aware, from my discussions with people who were born in the sixties, the massive social changes of the sixties in the rest of the world simply didn't happen in ireland, and the social changes that synthesized modern irish society didn't occur until the late eighties/nineties. I do think you'll have to argue for why or how those social changes were the product of a movement which originated, by your estimate, 20 to 30 years beforehand.

Ireland was massively impacted by what happened elsewhere in the 1960s, by Irish standards. You have to remember how reactionary and Catholic controlled Ireland was prior to the 60s. I was born in the late 50s and the 60s was a decade of tremendous change in Ireland. By the early 70s the freefall into moral decay and sexual deviancy was well underway, at least in the circles I hung out in:). We had student strikes, Neil Young records, mixed dances with no clerical supervision, even sex with illegally imported condoms, all kinds of mad stuff. Our parents thought the world was ending.

Mardy Bum · 15-08-2013 04:35PM

Postmodern is a catch all term that does very little justice to all of the concepts and methodologies that are caught up in it. it is an extremely disparate field and many of those involved in it did not label themselves as postmodern. To generalise the field would be to say postmodernism concerns itself with ontological matters whereas modernism was more concerned with epistemological matters.

Most people seem to associate it with deconstruction only which is foolish. Deconstruction in and of itself was a major break through in continental philosophy and I wouldn't decry it wholly. There are a number of other areas which postmodern methods are used such as pedagogy, social issues, art, entertainment etc.

Postmodern art has some wonderful works.

Here's a good video about postmodernism and the show Community

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YanhEVEgkYI

tommy2bad · 15-08-2013 04:44PM

http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/
All that needs to be said really!

nagirrac · 15-08-2013 05:01PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Both of whom?

As far as I am concerned 'postmodern' is an art movement...

Apologies, had missed this. Sarky/endacl

It is and has been historically an art movement (assuming you are including all art, music, literature, etc), and a philosophy movement, and a cultural movement, etc. The word has been around quite a while, but in the modern context I would argue it is most strongly associated with the cultural revolution of the 1960s and the re-evaluation of Western values. That is the context I am using the word in anyway.

I would agree with sarky and endacl that less adherence to authority "facts" and opinion, and emphasis on free expression, has led to lots of disparate and sometimes wacky opinion, but I see that as a natural offshoot. The broad benefits in individual freedoms gained by the 60s cultural revolution far outweigh the negatives in my opinion. I also think as time passes the enormity of the cultural changes in that era are being forgotten and taken for granted. Taking on the "man" in those days, whether it was political or religious authority figures, was quite different to the freedoms we enjoy today in terms of free expression, whether opinion or lifestyle choice.

Just my opinion, we could do with a bit of the spirit of the 1960s currently. I don't think the banking crisis and the aftermath to it would have passed off so passively in 1968, and the political classes would be having a little harder time of it.

gaynorvader · 15-08-2013 05:44PM

oxford dictionaries wrote:

postmodernism
Pronunciation: /pəʊstˈmɒdəˌnɪz(ə)m/
noun
[mass noun]
a late 20th-century style and concept in the arts, architecture, and criticism, which represents a departure from modernism and is characterized by the self-conscious use of earlier styles and conventions, a mixing of different artistic styles and media, and a general distrust of theories.

Sounds like a load of tripe to me, doesn't really seem to mean anything useful.

Bannasidhe · 15-08-2013 06:08PM

nagirrac wrote: »

Apologies, had missed this. Sarky/endacl

It is and has been historically an art movement (assuming you are including all art, music, literature, etc), and a philosophy movement, and a cultural movement, etc. The word has been around quite a while, but in the modern context I would argue it is most strongly associated with the cultural revolution of the 1960s and the re-evaluation of Western values. That is the context I am using the word in anyway.

I would agree with sarky and endacl that less adherence to authority "facts" and opinion, and emphasis on free expression, has led to lots of disparate and sometimes wacky opinion, but I see that as a natural offshoot. The broad benefits in individual freedoms gained by the 60s cultural revolution far outweigh the negatives in my opinion. I also think as time passes the enormity of the cultural changes in that era are being forgotten and taken for granted. Taking on the "man" in those days, whether it was political or religious authority figures, was quite different to the freedoms we enjoy today in terms of free expression, whether opinion or lifestyle choice.

Just my opinion, we could do with a bit of the spirit of the 1960s currently. I don't think the banking crisis and the aftermath to it would have passed off so passively in 1968, and the political classes would be having a little harder time of it.

I should clarify and say that I have attempted (just a little, but I did at least make an effort) to get a definition of postmodern from a close friend while she was writing her thesis which she kept telling me was terribly postmodern with lashings of queer theory. She hauled me up to her place one night to watch a load of films so she could include my (early modern?) perspective - so I asked her to define post-modern...you know, she still hasn't managed to but given she is now Dr **** and lecturing and funded her PhD with a scholarship of Ireland grant the fault may lie with me as what I was hearing sounded a load of bollix.

nagirrac · 15-08-2013 06:51PM

gaynorvader wrote: »

Sounds like a load of tripe to me, doesn't really seem to mean anything useful.

Once you start asking for specifics, it does sound like made up bs as bannasidhe described. It is a bit like trying to describe time to someone, it starts out easy and then gets bogged down quickly. If you think of it in broad terms of what societal attitudes were towards "acceptable" opinion and lifestyle on a whole variety of topics such as art, music, authority, religion, politics, sex, etc. pre and post sixties it becomes more clear. Put simply prior to the early sixties in Western culture young people were meant to be seen and not heard, this was reversed in the sixties to where young people exerted their influence, and the era from the early sixties to the early seventies saw tremendous upheaval of "traditional" values. By young people in the context of the time I mean teens to mid 20s.

It is very difficult for someone born in the 70s/80s/90s to appreciate how much of an influence the 60s cultural revolution had on broad Western society.

gaynorvader · 15-08-2013 07:16PM

nagirrac wrote: »

Once you start asking for specifics, it does sound like made up bs as bannasidhe described. It is a bit like trying to describe time to someone, it starts out easy and then gets bogged down quickly. If you think of it in broad terms of what societal attitudes were towards "acceptable" opinion and lifestyle on a whole variety of topics such as art, music, authority, religion, politics, sex, etc. pre and post sixties it becomes more clear. Put simply prior to the early sixties in Western culture young people were meant to be seen and not heard, this was reversed in the sixties to where young people exerted their influence, and the era from the early sixties to the early seventies saw tremendous upheaval of "traditional" values. By young people in the context of the time I mean teens to mid 20s.

It is very difficult for someone born in the 70s/80s/90s to appreciate how much of an influence the 60s cultural revolution had on broad Western society.

Sounds to me like we should just leave postmodernism as an empty term and just refer to the 60s cultural revolution as the 60s cultural revolution when we want to talk about it.

Mardy Bum · 15-08-2013 07:23PM

gaynorvader wrote: »

Sounds to me like we should just leave postmodernism as an empty term and just refer to the 60s cultural revolution as the 60s cultural revolution when we want to talk about it.

Unintentional postmodern (poststructuralist) reference.:D

KyussBishop · 16-08-2013 02:04AM

I'm certainly not much of a philosophy nerd; I'm wary of delving into it much, considering how easy it seems, while reading centuries-old texts of (now partially outdated) philosophy, to (in among wasting a lot of time) get tripped up intellectually, and accidentally land with your head up your arse.

However, from what I can tell about postmodernism (which isn't hugely easy to read up on), it's useful for questioning norms culturally/socially and in the social sciences in general (where evidence isn't always easily available/applied) - just keep it far faaar away from any of the hard sciences, and don't use it to do any silly crap like deny evidence (which just holds back fields that could become more evidence-based and scientific).

When it starts getting used to deny basic evidence, that's just more approaching nihilism, and the idea that "we can't really be certain about anything so why bother", which is just...not very smart.
Both of these things, are the kind of anti-science ideological black-holes, that are usually backed with heavily obfuscatory text, which make me wary of reading much philosophy.

There's an 'ok' RationalWiki page on it here as well:
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Postmodernism

Akrasia · 16-08-2013 12:01PM

Philosophy and Science are two disciplines whose primary purpose is to enlighten, to help us make sense of the world around us

Postmodernism does the opposite. It seems like the point of postmodernism is to take clear ideas and make them inpenetrable. In challenging 'perceptions' it is throwing away any basis for rational enquiry and it is overly permissive, so (within a postmodernist debate) there is no way to demonstrate that one opinion is more or less valid than the other.

Truth is not independent of reality. Where there is room for multiple, contradictory truths to be 'true' at the same time, then the problem is that the question was too vague.

Q) Is the earth round
A1) Yes, the earth is a sphere
A2) No, the earth is an oblique spheroid but the surface has many topographical features that make it bumpy, while the atmosphere and magnetic field is affected by the solar wind which could imply that the 'earth' including the magnetic field is more of an egg shape

Both of these answers are true, even though they are contradictory, however, they are true on different levels of explanation.
This is acceptable because at the heart is an appreciation for the explanatory powers of science and communication.

However, Postmodernism doesn't value rationality, instead it challenges rationality and 'assumptions' and thus it becomes a cesspool filled with intellectually vacuous discussion between people who know all the academic jargon but have no understanding of how to string a coherent thought together.

Listening to two postmodern theorists debate each other is like listening to two theologens arguing about the theological meaning of a passage in the bible. They'll be experts in the field that they're arguing in, but the field itself has nothing interesting worth being an expert in.

gaynorvader · 16-08-2013 12:12PM

Akrasia wrote: »

...

Q) Is the earth round
A1) Yes, the earth is a sphere
A2) No, the earth is an oblique spheroid but the surface has many topographical features that make it bumpy, while the atmosphere and magnetic field is affected by the solar wind which could imply that the 'earth' including the magnetic field is more of an egg shape

...

A3) If you were to blow a billiard ball up to the size of the earth it would have much bigger bumps and troughs.

No direct answer given, but perhaps more informative than the other two as it uses a reference we are familiar with. It's interesting how different answers can still be correct.

Sarky · 16-08-2013 02:05PM

It's not about being right, it's about being less wrong.

18AD · 18-08-2013 05:47PM

Postmodernism as a term covers a lot of diverse ground. To say that all postmodernism is wrong is very un-postmodern. And if you agree with that then you're already getting into the spirit of postmodernism. Attaboy.

I'm surprised that there is such disregard for it here in this thread. One of the primary motives of postmodernism was to dispell the idea of the absolute, which obviously covers things like God, metaphysics etc... but controversially also absolute facts or knowledge.

"The 'absolute' is humanity's laziest thought." - Nick Land (Not a postmodernist)

While some may veer in the direction of an outright denial of facts a lot of it doesn't.

I'd say that two primary concerns for postmodernism are meaning and power and how these effect our understanding of the world.

So you have to be weary of the use of power behind all claims to facts. Untruths will be presented as facts because it might benefit someone and it does well to be aware of this. It ties in with the work of Thomas Kuhn. Facts exist within human power relations.

In relation to meaning you have to be aware that meaning is constantly in flux. So granted something may be absolutely true it's meaning will drastically change over time due to the constant flux of existence. Meaning is socially constructed. In some cases something could be true but meaningless etc...

If anything postmodernism is about always thinking on your feet and not slipping into dogmatism.

The modern condition of thinking that it's alright to believe whatever you please is a bizarre consequence of postmodernism but also, I'd say, of a tolerant secular society.

nagirrac · 18-08-2013 06:46PM

Good post 18AD. If you define postmodernism purely in terms of philosophy the it's all over the map, but then again philosophy is all over the map anyway. In terms of the cultural, political and societal impact, the most significant change compared to modernism, which predated it, is the rejection of the notion of an utopian society based on ideology. In that sense it was a natural response to the excesses of the 20th century, which were driven by ideology. Lots of babies were thrown out with the bathwater, but modernism is by and large no loss. We live in a global multicultural world and Western elitism is now largely irrelevant.

Postmodernism.

Comments