Postmodernism hate

Pretty sure that it's not hypocritical to want a thing but not the thing taken to its utmost extreme.

>>3139741
Imagine you're walking down the sidewalk to a happy life and somebody rips the sidewalk from in front of you, and you're now spiraling aimlessly in null grav while everything is being shat upon by atheists and feminists are flocking to Islam for the structure it provides.

>>3139741
>I really don't understand how you can think modernism and the abandoning of certain traditions is fine, but postmodernism which does the same thing but goes further is not. Isn't that pure hypocrisy?
Are you retarded, by any chance?

>>3139741
Many postmodernists want to break away from things for no other reason that because it can be broken away from.

>>3139758
pretty much this. postmodernism just tears things down, it cannot create. its entirely hollow.

>>3139775
>it cannot create.
>what is 4chan

>>3139758
but they have perfectly valid reasons (via their interpretation). e.g., science cannot be trusted because it is made by white males, and the white male patriarchy is the fault for all the world's problem. Even the most basic feminist theory agrees with the founding principle, so I find it completely rational to go even further. What reason is there to stop?

it's like the guys who says 3rd wave feminism is wrong, but the first 2 were great. What is that based on? They're all the same shit and are natural extensions of each other.

>>3139810
A post-post modernist irony

>>3139816
>science cannot be trusted because it is made by white males,
Who the fuck even says this? It's certainly not a normal position within academic forms of postmodernism. The typical point about science not being the only valid point of view (not that it can't be trusted) is that science being absolute truth is a certain cultural point of view. Anyone that isn't a psuedointellectual tunblerite will acknowledge that science is a perfectly valid way to decide on factual matters where it can be applied. The difference with postmodernism is that is also contends that not everything is a matter of logical positivism.

>>3139816
perhaps because they don't think it's the "logical extension" of it. you are correct that it evolved from earlier thought but this does not mean that it's neccisarily a conclusion you must accept if you reached the earlier conclusion

File: 1496003606698.jpg (49KB, 403x403px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 403x403px

>>3139741
They hate sjws, but they realize if they say sjw, they sound like one of AnitaSarcuckian1488's youtube rants, so they say say postmodernist instead. It's similar to when people complain about the Frankfurt School. They aren't dumb enough to think that Pynchon is orchestrating white genocide, and they're not smart enough to have a well thought out critique of Baudrillard, they literally just use the word without really knowing what it means.

Postmodernism is Nihilism on steroids.

If only Peterson would post hours of material explaining his understanding of post-modernism and why he is opposed to it

>>3139741
>I really don't understand how you can think modernism and the abandoning of certain traditions is fine, but postmodernism which does the same thing but goes further is not.

Where do you think all these neo-reactionaries and anti-republican monarchists have been coming from lately bro?
We know.
We screwed up.
It's time to go back

>Could someone explain to me the hate-boner everyone including guys like Jordan Peterson have for postmodernism?

They don't understand it. That's literally it.

People are too attached to their values and when they see people using post modernist views to attack those values they go REEEEEE. But they don't recognize that post modernism is inherently neutral and can be used to attack SJW and radical leftist view points as well.

It's also telling that one of the main criticisms is

>>3139775
>>3139758

They attack it not because of any logical failings of this worldview but because their grasping for meaning, no matter how true their own perception of reality is. There's an inherent biological need to believe in any worldview, not to believe in a logically correct one that argues that all sorts of social constructs are inherently hollow

>>3140467
from what I've seen he just points how why postmodernist people and specific beliefs sound absurd and ridiculous. I've never seen him philosophy tear it down or point out the reason it's wrong, though.

>>3139752
>feminists are flocking to Islam for the structure it provides.
Except this isn't happening on anything close to a large scale, except in the overheated fever dreams of /pol/tards.

>>3140308
That's modernism

>>3140549
>People are too attached to their values
Go fuck yourself.

>But they don't recognize that post modernism is inherently neutral and can be used to attack SJW and radical leftist view points as well.
How the fuck can it be used to attack leftism when leftists will just ignore it? Leftists either know it's bullshit themselves or are driven by ideology and not logic, they're not going to suddenly stop and realize the error of their ways because you deconstructed their ideology. The only reason it works against mainstream cultural values is because people are naive and think these critiques are genuine and constructive criticism that lead somewhere not just a meaningless buzzsaw of nihilism used to bulldoze culture so that it can replaced.

>There's an inherent biological need to believe in any worldview, not to believe in a logically correct one that argues that all sorts of social constructs are inherently hollow
How can it be "logically correct" if it too is a social construct and therefore inherently hollow as well? Logic is meaningless, it only attains value through human utility. Any "logical" construct that undermines human utility is the philosophical equivalent of bad code.

>>3141118
I think he tries to argue that most of the postmodernist beliefs that are being pushed are incoherent, contradictory, and not feasible. This can clearly be seen in his argument at the senate hearing about Bill C-16. He mentions how the legislation and policies in one place say that gender identity, expression, and sexual orientation are biological and then further down the same page will then say they vary independently. "You can't have A and not A".

The simplest way that he seems to describe his problem with post modernism, in my view, is the idea that there are an infinite number of interpretations and thus meaning. This is most clearly seen in the interpretation of texts an literature. Peterson would argue that while there may be infinite interpretations there are actually very few that are either feasible or useful, and that is how he defines "truth". Certain things narrow down these possible interpretations such as logic and coherence however Peterson argues, and has used examples of, how post modernists seem to either ignore or dismiss these kinds of filters.

File: white people.webm (322KB, 400x420px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 400x420px

>>3141364
>ad hominem
Opinion discarded

>>3141387
Oh Lord, deliver me from brainlets that throw around logical fallacies without fully comprehending what they mean.
Amen.

>>3141365
that seems to be more of dismissal of individual postmodernists rather than postmodernism as a whole. like those dudes who say they'd don't hate Islam, but they hate radical Muslims.

>>3139868
Stop sucking STEM cock. Science is absolute trash that rapes creation for its own gain. It is not valid. Facts are nonexistent.

>>3141365
>applying logic to something that denies logic
Now This Is Autism

>>3141364
>logic is good because leddit sed it
>utility is good becuz leddit sed it

>>3141919
I'm not the one arguing that logic is good in and of itself and if you don't think usefulness is inherently good there's no further point in talking with you.

>inb4 you autistically attempt to deconstruct "good"

>>3141950
IF YOU DONT SUBMIT TO MY IDEOLOGY THAN UR FUCKIN DUMB IM GOING BACK TO DEDDIT LMAO
So this is the power of pragmatism...

>>3139741
Look into MetaModernism.

tl;dr Postmodernism is 'All narratives are problematic, we must wash our hands of them wholesale!'

The problem is, narratives are so useful they are almost essential to remain competitive.

>>3142024
>useful
See: >>3141962

>trying to critique postmodernism without understanding the evolution of philosophical thought from Kant to Heidegger
ISHYGDDT

>>3139758
That's modernism. Postmodernism includes that kind of reassessment from the past where we can talk about academic art on legitimate grounds rather than a past mistake because it's not modern

>>3139775
You're describing the workings of capitalism. Postmodernism is a response to postmodernity, unless you think linguistics controls the foundations of civilization

>>3139816
No postmodernist has ever said this. You'll probably notice they're all white males themselves

>>3140467
Too bad he never uses any textual evidence only muh SJWs, citing Derrida and Foucault but never offering any quotes or anything. A most basic reading of either shows JBP is misinformed

File: image.jpg (114KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 960x960px

Postmodernism is just European and American intellectual snobbery. Just guve up on your degenerate post enlightenment philosophical trends and come back into the fold of traditional conceptions of the world you eurocucks.

>>3141364
Postmodernity is 'advanced capitalism' which destroys all value outside of what can be sold. Postmodernists are a response to this condition, which includes the alt-right, since they share the same view of the postmodern condition as the conventional 'leftist' critiques.

You're right that the leftists ignore it, but so does anyone when they're confronted with an alternate world view.

The critiques are constructive in themselves but people often use them in a way that isn't. Irony, for example, is a shorthand manner of critique that is not constructive, but at its foundation it is the acceptance that each person with a viewpoint may be just as well-informed as the next, so the point is to construct something out of open conversation. It's an extension of classical liberalism honestly, and pointing out how institutions like politics and the media complicate this intellectual project through 'fake news' and whatever is just figuring how to attain that ideal.

Something being constructed doesn't mean it isn't real. Key postmodernists like Derrida and Foucault are well-read and their practice involves a genealogical look at ideas (which they inherit from Nietzsche). This too is a form of constructive 'conversation' which is in itself a 'solution' to the postmodern condition: read a book, talk to others.

You'll see the avant-garde of postmodern thought currently doing this, like Land or Deleuze.

>>3141914
mathematically verifiable facts exist

>>3139741
>Postmodernism hate

Define postmodernism, brainlet.

>>3142177
False. Mathematics is built upon false axioms.

>>3142185
wrong, mathematical axioms can be verified through intellectual contemplation of the forms

t. plato

>>3139741

The "hate" comes from people who think those who believe in everything are connected all although together. To think that is very stupid. One postmodernism philosopher claims the laws of aviation is affected by men because, it was men who was flying first and not women.

>>3142221
*The "hate" comes from people who think those who believe in everything are connected all although together are stupid. One postmodernism philosopher claims the laws of aviation is affected by men because, it was men who was flying first and not women.

>>3139741
>Could someone explain to me the hate-boner everyone including guys like Jordan Peterson have for postmodernism?

Just go look for any echo chamber of Holocaust denial, flat earth or other conspiracy theory, if you want to see postmodernistic thinking in action. Media cannot be trusted, academia of the whole world is controlled, everything that doesn't fit the narrative you want is made up by evil gods and you can only trust your feelings.

>>3142244
>everything that doesn't fit the narrative you want is made up by evil gods and you can only trust your feelings.
that's 100% correct though

>>3139741
Modernism started as an art movement post WW1 which rejected many social conventions due to the trauma of the war. The attack on "traditional values" began with them. It later developed into a philosophy of its own criticizing the products of the enlightenment, positivism, industrialism, etc.

Postmodernism is the continuation of that trend, starting also as an art movement post 1950s, and it was critical of the maim over-arching western metanarratives like marxism, capitalism, democratic obsession, consumer culture, etc - which rule our daily lives. Postmodernism is actually getting pretty old and on its way out already as an art form and style. Philosophically speaking, it's essentially a revamped modernism with more emphasis on deconstructivism to better critic what modernism had a problem with. I'm not a philosophy major so I can't dwelve too deep into its intricacies but a lot of people seem to believe modernism dindu nuffin and that postmodern thought arose from nowhere.

>>3139741
What you see now as postmodern isn't really postmodern, but a reaction to the original postmodern.
Postmodern is beatnik, is ironic and sceptical and deconstructive. Which is great and creates the building blocks for creation later on, but now you have people attaching on the name without the proper scepticism, making it a political power play.

>>3142249
that's also 100% postmodernist

>>3142287
it's actually shamanist-fetishist

>>3142288
Fetishism still proposes a divine metanarrative. A postmodernist would also be critical of that, whether the object being fetishized is a person or an idea.

>>3142281
Postmodernism definitely has precedence in some early 20th c art (Duchamp of course is the obvious example) but following WW1 there was the 'return to order' movement where artists abandoned experimental art in favour of classical, figurative art. After the war though you get movements like Futurism and Surrealism but they are still modernist (Surrealism for example has a notable relationship to Marxism), even though Surrealism influences French intellectual thinking as well as 'unconscious' and 'marvelous' ways of making art. Precedence aside it's really in the 40s and 50s that postmodernism can be said to begin, and that's mostly in the US (e.g. Black Mountain College in arts, cybernetics in thought).

It seems a lot on the right read into postmodernism a justification of the left side of the culture wars' narcissistic excesses. The belief that "I can be anything" derives more from the empty and illusory false consciousness created by consumerism and the media - it effects the right just as much. "I can be anything, I want to live in a country without the enemies that the press has been scaring me about, so I will lend a vote to an egregious shit-head who attacks those who tell me that I can't have it."
Postmodernism is, on the whole, blameless of this and actually critiques the left side of this as well (Baudrillard and Giddens) but it certainly makes a you sound less of a brain-let to say "postmodernism is cancer" than say "modern life leaves me confused and fearful, I've been living under illusions for years- fuck the SJWs!"

>>3142154
>postmodernism is advanced capitalism
lmao postmodernism is highly critical of capitalism and its consumer culture. Wtf are you on about?

It's the same thing /pol% always does. They identify symptoms of a problem and lay they down to the wrong target. Their poor use of terminology is why nobody takes them seriously, even if there are indeed symptoms to notice and treat. They hate jews when they should hate neoliberalism, they hate cultural marxism when they should hate critical theory and cultural studies, they hate postmodernism when they should hate modernism, they hate liberalism when they should hate progressivism.

>>3140206

I like you. But what does Pynch have to do with anything? Idg the 2nd half of ur post

>>3140549
>There's an inherent biological need to believe in any worldview
>MUH HYMEN NATURE
logical fallacies 101

>>3142444
>denying the existence of a state of nature
lmaoing @ ur lyf

>>3139741
>From what I could tell demolishing your home is a completely natural and logical extension to renovation work, when you do renovations you break some of the old walls to redesign. I really don't understand how you can think that clearing some old furniture and making your house more comfy is fine, but totally demolishing your house while you are inside which goes a bit further is not. Isn't that pure hypocrisy?
Here, fixed it up for you

>>3139741
Saying that "truth doesn't exist" is an excellent way to make people hate you.

>>3142129
these are the kind of postmodernists Peterson talks about in his lectures, though. But I imagine most of them don't actually know of that term.

>>3142408
If you actually copied the quote correctly you'd see where you went wrong.

>>3142439
Pynchon is considered a postmodern writer.

>>3139741
his main gripe with postmodernism is the variant practiced by critical theorists and social marxists of the frankfurt school and french post structuralists.

The frankfurt school are ideologically devoted to resist positivism in sociology and psychology which means rejecting the scientific method and empirical evidence for biological explanations of sociological and psychological phenomena. This has had a big influence on academic disciplines like sociology and other humanities and social sciences and killed off a lot of their intellectual integrity like a disease eating away at flesh

The french post structuralists were devoted to apologising for the horrific massacres, monstrosities and cruel, repressive, totalitarian regimes carried out by socialist governments and slandering the survivors of torture and genocide as liars.

these are the main reasons why jordan peterson hates postmodernism, because he likes facts and intellectual integrity.

>>3139741
because it's marxism in disguise and will destroy everything the west has created - all your rights and freedoms were not created under marxism

>>3142904
Postmodernism is inherently anti-Marxist.

>>3142816
The Frankfurt School was modernist, not postmodernist.

File: 1418861046060.jpg (60KB, 498x668px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 498x668px

>>3142816
>The frankfurt school are ideologically devoted to resist positivism in sociology and psychology which means rejecting the scientific method and empirical evidence for biological explanations of sociological and psychological phenomena.
Peterson also rejects positivism, no? Isn't his whole thing that the truth is only what is useful for survival?
Rejecting positivism doesn't mean rejecting empirical evidence, it's just the realisation that not everything can be best approached in a purely reductive quantitative manner. Positivism and the scientific method doesn't even strictly go together since most positivists are strict materialists who will reject empirical phenomena if it doesn't fit into their physicalist framework.

>This has had a big influence on academic disciplines like sociology and other humanities and social sciences and killed off a lot of their intellectual integrity like a disease eating away at flesh
Strict quantitative behaviourism ruled for a while in the mid 20th century and it gave us electroshock therapy and wasn't that successful. Disciplines like psychology were on par with parapsychology at the turn of the 20th century and weren't even to concerned about being scientific, as they became more concerned about scientism they degenerated and got really narrow.

>The french post structuralists were devoted to apologising for the horrific massacres, monstrosities and cruel, repressive, totalitarian regimes carried out by socialist governments and slandering the survivors of torture and genocide as liars.
You're just engaging in an ad hominem here. An orthodox Marxist like Althusser might have killed his wife but Foucault became a neoliberal and gave people AIDs.

>facts and intellectual integrity
It's all about epistemological ground works boi, if we can't agree on what a fact is then we can't talk about intellectual integrity.

>>3142464

Can you show evidence of where a postmodernist theorist advocates something like your analogy suggests?

>>3142195
This is unironically what STEMspergs believe, without calling it 'forms'.

>>3142244
Listen brothers.

The earth is not a ball to which we are glued by the mystical force of "gravity", no.

The earth is flat, just as the ancient peoples believed. Heaven is above you, hell is below you.

The devil first spread the idea of a ball earth revolving around a ball sun in the ancient Babylonian and Egyptian mystery schools. These teachings were passed down to Pythagoras. They were handed down the ages to the occult mystery schools of the European Renaissance, who adopted them as their own. Then the occultists Copernicus, Kepler, Bruno, Newton, published the idea and started the "Copernican revolution".

The ancient Hermetic principle is "As Above, So Below". This has many applications. One of them is this: what people believe about the heavens above them, well determine what they believe about the earth below them. In other words, how they interpret the sky will correspond with how they interpret their own lives. Our materialist society would be impossible without a materialist cosmology to justify it. A mechanistic Newtonian cosmology justifies a mechanistic view of human life, a mechanistic politics, sociology, and economics. It sounds like a joke, but the idea that the stars are giant balls of gas reflects the modern obsession with fossil fuels / material goods in general. Copernicus wasn't going for a mechanistic religion, by the way; he was a Pythagorean and Heliolator, and hoped that the belief that the sun was at the center of the universe would usher in a return to a sun-worshipping priesthood like those of ancient societies.

The reason why the Devil spreads the idea of the ball earth is that it totally overturns mans relationship to the world. Instead of man being a spiritual being with heaven above him and hell below him; instead he stands on a ball where there are infinitely many ups and downs, where heaven isn't "above" but only "outside" the earth - moral and epistemological relativism, infinitely many points of view.

>>3142453
2017 not 1720. Don't you have a wig to powder?

>>3142816
Sociology is a social science.
>IF YOU DONT BOW DOWN TO MUH STEM COCK THEN UR LE DUMB
Eat shit, spergo.

>>3144917
A social science based on criticizing everything, including the scientific method...

Not really a science imo.

>>3144922
So, skepticism until that skepticism becomes an inconvenience?
So this is the power of science...

>>3144885
I often wonder if madmen can notice no picture of the earth from the heavens contains all 7 continents.

>>3141247
It absolutely is. Feminism is embracing Islam worldwide. Feminists are fleeing to ISIS to become their wives.

>>3144917
social """science"""
Humanities were a mistake

>>3144966
>>>/pol/

>>3142244
>Media cannot be trusted, academia of the whole world is controlled, everything that doesn't fit the narrative you want is made up by evil gods and you can only trust your feelings.

That doesn't sound like post-modernism because it doesn't reject a grand narrative

What we are currently living in tho, is a period of post-post-modernism, or what others call "Metamodernism". The idea here is that there's no grand narrative but we still manage to created our own images of the future by no other empirical means than animalistic impulses of our emotions.

Trump is the highlight of the post-post-modern era. So many people voted for him without even thinking twice. Everything just went out of sheer emotional outburst. No thinking of the consequences, no thinking in the longterm, or the origin, something which a post-modernist would think.

For now, everything which is truth is defined strictly as something that exists as a matter of personal perception. And that's where post-truth and post-irony come along. Truly interesting times we live in.

>>3141914

Science is literally the only the thing in this universe that matters. If you're not a scientist, your life means pretty much nothing.

it's the world's stupidest ideological belief system to ever gain credence. After dying, the heaped on abuse has rose to such levels that despite PM never doing anything significant ever, it's corpse is still a big and easy target that's safe to rail against

>>3145989
>i don't understand what I'm talking about, but I still feel qualified to air my opinion.
Do you even know what noumenon is?

>>3144959
>picture
Invalid, sorry!
>>3144973
They fit into your disgusting ideology, sorry!
Humanism is a mistake, yes.
>>3145842
Incorrect, science is actually the greatest mistake ever made.

File: ask-the-expert-A-Rubber-Ball-Thrown-On-The-Sea-631.jpg (24KB, 631x300px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 631x300px

>>3139741
Because this is art now

>>3145842
Science is the study of matter. It's not matter itself.

>>3147029
What's the matter? You can't read?

>>3145691
I think the postmodern concern with being stuck in a 'permanent present' also factored into the Trump vote and Brexit too. What better way to create some history by doing something completely insane as a society just for a change.

File: jenctree.png (435KB, 1280x982px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 1280x982px

>>3139741
Postmodernism led to the abandonment of reason in sociology which in turn snowballed into the far left wing politics of today.

It is an irrational force as potent as a religion. It is like the right getting severely triggered 2 guys having fun together in the showers or sharing a bed, fooling around or jacking each other off, maybe suck out each others' loads into a condom, most have done it a couple of times even if they're not actually homosexual, because, you know, men get horny, but apparently we're "bad people" now because they find it icky and are too old and unattractive to enjoy it and have some mixed up feelings. I respect boundaries and I don't want them to feel icky. That being said, I find their mothers icky yet someone still managed to fuck them or they wouldn't be there. It is no reason to oppress anyone. It's wrong. Why can't they see that? Irrationality.

It is the same with leftists who are neurotic because someone was racist, sexist or homophobe to them. They flip out over scientific facts about genetics and biology and its implications in politics, for instance that it is completely morally justified to follow Ayn Rand's ethos and that you have no moral obligation to society or their precious welfare system and should evade taxes and undermine the government whenever possible. For the record not /pol/'s deluded view of the subject, a rational pragmatic view of this topic.

Apply the postmodernist view in your life and you will have lower efficiency, less chances. Would you be more creative? Maybe. You don't need to literally believe postmodernism to implement the creative side though.

I wouldn't say postmodernism is an extremely strong force, it is just 1 belief system like episcopalians or methodists or something. It is wrong though and representative of the bad turn the left is taking.

>>3139816
Alrighty, let's look at the first 2 movements of Feminism and compare it with the 3rd. I'm going to butcher the 2nd one in historical perspective, but I digress.
1st movement
>started by middle/upperclass women in a moral push
>wanted voting rights for women
>assumed that the expanding role of women in society should necessitate her ability to have judgement calls in politics
2nd wave of Feminism
>started by middle/working class women in tandem with other civil rights
>quickly infiltrates colleges and spreads outwards
>wanted fair treatment of women in workplace
>complete legal rights of women in workplace/court/what have you were necessary for a free society
>Was part of the larger civil rights movement that wanted legal equality for all
Well cool, first two complete. Women now have equal rights to men and the equal opportunities of their male counter parts. Legally women and men are on equal footing. Socially there's some minor kinks for those women who want to be single, but the 2nd movement laid the ground work for a very quick change in social mores in respect to the view on marriage and whether it was necessary for women to be in one.
Now contrast with 3rd wave
>started by feminists that were radicals during 2nd wave
>epicenter on college campuses
>began spreading online, mostly through Tumblr, and attracting a possibly high number of autists
>began immediately absorbing radical left groups and really came onto the stage after a success with the gay marriage supreme court case
>Seemed to want a level playing field for men and women.... despite that already having been achieved and started with the assumption of all men being the problem
>wanted fair treatment of women socially and promoted social marxism in a time where most of the western world had forgotten the horrors of the original marxist world.
Basically, they want a women utopia that cannot happen because humans are not perfect, and they picked a fight in the USA.

>>3147103
>It is wrong though
Nothing in your post refuted any tenets of postmodern philosophy. Instead of saying 'its wrong' you should say 'it doesn't align with my own value system'.

Oddly I think the analytic philosopher of art David Bordwell does a good job of dealing with the theories associated with post-modernism in film. These in turn apply to post-modernism in general outside of film or art
>top down reasoning
Post-modernist are concerned first with established theory and then with facts.
>Argument as Bricolage
In addition, they borrow components of multiple incompatible theories and attempt to combine them such as refering to "black bodies" (materialist) as a matter of course when dealing in antimaterialist theories.
>Associative reasoning
Next, bordwell talks about the use of associational reasoning rather than inductive, deductive, or abductive reasoning. e.g., "this idea has an affinity for this idea"
>The Hermeneutic Impulse
Finally, these theories are considered "useful" independent of empirical or logical reasons to disbelieve them. Bordwell calls this the Hermeneutic Impulse: so what if Freud is strictly wrong about child development, it's just so interesting what Freudian psychology says about transgenderism.

This is 30ish pages long but worth reading
http://ncadjarmstrong.com/ma--art-through-a-lens-/grand-theory-david-bordwell.pdf

>>3147352
Lol this. The attack was on what it 'led' to but no links were made. Total projection

>>3147497
Yeah this checks out. Thanks for the article

>>3147352
He's baiting.

>>3142185
Here we see a retarded & Humanities poster in its natural landscape. These creatures have a tendency to autistically screech when confronted with a notion that concrete truths do exist and which can be verified independent of the original discoverer

>>3139741
i always think that this artform uses ridiculous expression and shits on everything just to make us think about the things it tears down in its process of expression

>>3142281
New sincerity when?

>>3139741
Because it is correct
Don't take it too far though, see the Sokal Hoax.

File: 1500756728008.gif (63KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 500x281px

>>3145842
Unironically this.

File: 1403359923017.jpg (48KB, 500x356px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x356px

>>3139741
Jordan Peterson is just using "postmodernist" as a short-hand for what he perceives to be power-hungry political subversives who claim to represent the downtrodden and oppressed but actually just are closet nihilists who want the current social structure to be destroyed.

>>3145842
t. empiricist tard

>>3148243
Postmodernists today arent aware that they are postmodernists. They subscribe to a way philosophy without realizing its been taught to them.

>>3144917
Sociolgy is whatever the current "experts" think.

>>3148427
Physics is whatever the current experts think

See anyone can play that game

File: 57ec103896381cb31968f3eeb37007b5.500x913x1.png (188KB, 500x913px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 500x913px

>>3148426
>They subscribe to a way philosophy without realizing its been taught to them.
*sniffles behind you*

Yes, I also wish people would simply drink the kool-aid of meta-narratives.

File: 2015.jpg (12KB, 299x168px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 299x168px

>>3139741
"I'm thirsty, I shall have a glass of water"
This is logical.
"I'm thirsty, I shall drown myself"
This is absurd.

Thirst, here, is the desire to move forward from the past. Water is the pruning of old traditions.
Modernism is removing unnecessary traditions and customs out of recognition that they serve no purpose or to replace them with better things.
Post-Modernism removes old traditions and customs because they are old. Hence the existence of the "It's 2015/2016/2017" 'argument'.

Modernism would lead to a workforce being 50/50 split between men and women because the most qualified people happened to be a 50/50 split between men and women. Had ten men been less skilled than any ten women who were not selected or vice versa there would have been a 60/40 split, because modernism has led to the belief that we should hire the most qualified people regardless of sex.

Post-Modernism cultivates a 50/50 split, not because it the people they chose are the most qualified, but because it wants a 50/50 split. If the most qualified people were split 60/40 there would be 10 very unhappy people who were told they were dropped in favour of less qualified people to meet the quota.

Post-modernism is modernism taken to absurd lengths.

>>3148145
The Sokal Hoax is such a stupid story that I'm surprised anyone uses it to make a point about postemodernism or academia in general.

>Sokal writes intentionally bullshit paper to publish somewhere and "expose" theoretical trends he doesn't know much about, but is triggered by
>A low-tier university-run literary journal decides to run an issue about both sides of the "science wars" and issues a call for thought-piece papers from STEM people
>Sokal sees his chance and submits his paper
>Even though the journal doesn't practice peer review (again, it's a low-tier literary journal), they think his paper seems like bullshit and send him notes on how to improve it
>Sokal refuses, but no other STEM people sent submissions
>Since it's the only STEM-themed article they got, the journal decided to publish the article (despite thinking it wasn't very good), basically out of goodwill to Sokal, and to follow the goal of their special issue
>The journal gets published, Sokal reveals that he was only pretending to be retarded, and then publishes a book about how he exposed the academic fraud that postmodernism leads to

>>3139775
Postmodernism doesn't tear down or create. It's primarily descriptivist. In the world we live in we can no longer pretend there is good and evil, truth and lies. Think of the Vietnam War. Who was in the right? The murderous communist regime or the murderous, imperialist American forces? Postmodernism did not create this reality, but instead seeks methods of coping with this state of affairs. It is an intellectual paradigm which differs from modernism in that modernism told the individual to create their reality, while postmodern thought maintains reality is created by society.

>>3144966
[Citation Needed]

>>3144966
What?

>>3144917
Did the engineers bully you in college?

>>3148699
Post-modernism is also a meta narrative.

1+1=2
>NO IT'S NOT, THAT'S JUST A NARRATIVE
hehe, good one, we must question the very basis of logic, I see, ok, well here I have 1 apple, and I count one, now we place another apple beside it and count again, 1, 2, yes, that proves it, 1+1=2
>NO IT'S NOT, COUNTING AND ADDING IS SOCIAL CONSTRUCT, THERE IS NO APPLE, THE MOCHAMBO TRIBE OF AFRICA WOULD CALL IT A GUAVA NUT SOTHAT'S WHAT IT COULD BE, LIFE IS ABSURD
well I can't put it any simpler, I don't know what you mean
>LOL THERE IS NO MEANING, NOTHING CAN'T NOT BE REAL
but if we accept 1+1=2 we can form the basis of mathematics, go to the moon and cure cancer, we must assume some things are true, why not those that are thoroughly proven? why do you continue to insist 1+1 does not equal 2?
>LOL HURR IM SO SMART FOR QUESTIONING EVERYTHING, WE MUST LOOK AT ALTERNATE BELIEF SYSTEMS, EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE, I WON'T BE OPPRESSED BY YOUR SINGLE MINDSET PUSHED ON THE MASSES BY BOURGEOIS, I AM GOING TO FORCE MY VIEWS INTO SOCIOLOGY, FUCK FACTS AND LOGIC

^^^
post-modernism

>>3154040
Now this is strawmanning

>>3153971
Is stem a meme?

>>3154490
Define "meme."

>>3154023
No it's not. There's no end-point of the narrative

>>3154040
t. literally hasn't read any philosophy

>>3154060
>>3156125
give 1 (one) example of an original inference from postmodernism that justifies abandoning evidence and reason in sociology

>>3157102
Neither of them can because postmodernism doesn't justify abandoning evidence and reason in sociology.

>>3157102
You don't know what you're talking about. I'm not going to argue a point about postmodernism when you have this retardedly warped understanding of what it is.

post-modernism in education just strips everything down and breaks it down and then spews the students out without giving them any ideological/social/cognitive/whatever structure to cling to. It's a misappropriated tool utilized by idiots to wage destructive power-conflicts for their own gain. It's a tool that can cripple a growing adolescent who simply can't defend themselves or their beliefs against such deconstructionist aggression. It's a tool that is most often used for this. The costs of post-modernism are greatly out-weighing the benefits thus far, therefore you have a large quantity of people who hate post-modernism. Especially after they finally figure it out after years and years, begrudging it for the misery and depression they went through failing to see through the gay tricks.
>>3157181
>>3157190
>post-modernists defending post-modernism when neither of them have the same definition of what post-modernism is.
It's a gay term that's now used to describe cultural marxists and anybody that uses deconstructionist methodologies to reduce/deconstruct targets for their own personal gain. (IE: feminism, SJWs, etc.)

PS: you can't take post-modernism back, especially not the way you're going about it by utilizing ad-hominem and accusations of ignorance when you yourselves fail to address the neo-marxist-slash-post-modernists or whatever the hell you want to call them. Philosophical power gamers I guess.

>>3157443
Post modernism is a logic extension of modernism that addresses the limits of human senses, the mind that processes those stimuli, and the artificial conventions humans use to interpret information through like reason and empiricism.

Reducing the whole of postmodernism to 'its deconstruction run wild' and relating it exclusively to modern political movements shows that everything you've come to know about the philosophy is pretty much limited to your exposure to it on 4chan or other mediated sources like Peterson videos on youtube. You quite literally don't understand how philosophy got from Modernism to Post-modernism or ideas and thinkers responsible for the distinction.

>>3139741
>I really don't understand how you can think modernism and the abandoning of certain traditions is fine, but postmodernism which does the same thing but goes further is not. Isn't that pure hypocrisy?
I really don't understand how people can think that starting a campfire is ok, but burning down a forest is not. Isn't that pure hypocrisy?

>>3157479
good luck trying to tell that to other people. You're not the majority and you don't hold the monopoly on the definitions of words. Syllables and meanings of syllables change over time. Good luck lol

>>3157511
Could you try rephrasing this post in a way that makes sense. I can't even make out what point you're trying to make in regard to my post. What does 'the majority' or a 'monopoly on words' have to do with anything.

>>3157533
I said you're one nigga whose opinion on what post-modernism stands for ain't gonna change anybody else's, especially with the way you're carrying yourself. Groups decide language, not individuals.

>>3157541
I'm trying to relate to you the historical evolution of philosophical thought that has been termed 'postmodernism' you dweeb. Sperging out about semantics doesn't change the ideas the seminal thinkers of the 20th century wrote about.

>>3157541
>opinion on what post-modernism stands for ain't gonna change anybody else's,
It's not his opinion on postmodernism, though, it's what it actually is. I understand being mad at someone telling you that you don't understand the thing you're criticizing, but that's your fault for not understanding it. There's more to it than people on /pol/ assigning the label to everything they disagree with. It's a complex movement that isn't monolithic and that really requires context to understand.

>>3157550
I'm trying to relate to you that the historical evolution of philosophical thought that has been termed 'postmodernism' is irrelevant and useless to actual people who live their lives. A threat has emerged stemming from post-modernism's deconstructionist methodology and the enemies who use these methodologies are being labeled post-modernists, as well as neo-marxists. I don't care if you believe post-modernism can only have one definition or not, what you think when you look at the word post-modernism is not what the majority will think and so what you think is not the most correct definition of what the word is since a more useful definition has arisen. It can still keep the old definition you cling to but it won't be the main one anybody thinks when they hear the word, that's for sure.

>>3157572
>postmodernists are wrong for saying that reality isn't objective
>it's okay for me to redefine words to classify things I disagree with

>>3157587
>The definitions of symbols that people agree upon to communicate with each other are objective reality
???

>>3157479
>Post modernism is a logic extension of modernism that addresses the limits of human senses, the mind that processes those stimuli, and the artificial conventions humans use to interpret information through like reason and empiricism.
Which at the end of the day is just "deconstruction run wild".
I mean lets abandon post-modernism for a moment and look at what you just said rationally.

> the artificial conventions humans use to interpret information through like reason and empiricism.
We have now established that reason and empiricism are artificial and therefore not inherently valid.

If as you just said reason and empiricism are not inherently valid how is...

>LOL HURR IM SO SMART FOR QUESTIONING EVERYTHING, WE MUST LOOK AT ALTERNATE BELIEF SYSTEMS, EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE, I WON'T BE OPPRESSED BY YOUR SINGLE MINDSET PUSHED ON THE MASSES BY BOURGEOIS, I AM GOING TO FORCE MY VIEWS INTO SOCIOLOGY, FUCK FACTS AND LOGIC

...a strawman when it is perfectly consistent with the Post-Modern stance that logic and empiricism are artificial conventions?

>but Post-Modernism doesn't tell us that we need to seek out alternate belief systems.
In other words Post-Modernism tells us nothing and only accomplishes the undermining of other philosophical systems.

>but...
>Post modernism is a logic extension of modernism
>You quite literally don't understand how philosophy got from Modernism to Post-modernism

Falling off a cliff is just a logic extension of walking toward it's edge. That doesn't make walking off a cliff a sensible thing to do, and it doesn't matter what path you took to get there falling off a cliff is a pretty damn foolish position to find yourself, no matter what ivory tower academic justifications you come up with to explain away your plummetous state. Furthermore someone who sees your precipitous descent does not need to know how you wound up falling off that cliff to know that where you are is not a desirable place to be.

>>3144966
The latter statement is retarded, but the former statement is absolutely true, a fucking sharia advocate who has called for "Jihad against Trump" led the women's march.

>>3139741
it's basically saying that since you can't truly know anything, you can "know" anything you want

this is stupid as fuck in of itself

any specific political or normative criticism of it is putting the cart before the horse

File: everything i say is right.png (157KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 800x600px

>>3144876
you should read this book

>>3157644
checks out

>>3157479
so it's basically idealism for retards?

>>3157443
>It's a gay term that's now used to describe cultural marxists

Because you say so? It's a term that has a specific meaning that you are using incorrectly to refer to people you don't like. There is nothing postmodern about their practice

>>3157632
He said they're artificial not that we should abandon them. Try again

>>3157541
That doesn't mean your shit interpretation of postmodern holds weight because you think there are a bunch of similar-minded people out there. You're embarrassing yourself honestly.

>>3157572
>being labeled post-modernists, as well as neo-marxists.

By who? One psychologist?

>>3157599
Nice postmodern argument

>>3157638
By 'basically' you mean 'not at all'

>>3157706
Why do I need to "try again" when I already addressed it

>but Post-Modernism doesn't tell us that we need to seek out alternate belief systems.
"In other words Post-Modernism tells us nothing and only accomplishes the undermining of other philosophical systems."

Post-Modernism does not tell us that we should abandon them but it doesn't tell us that we should maintain them either, it tells us nothing. In fact it not only tells us nothing but also invalidates everything we thought we knew before.

So with that in mind what good is it?

>>3157716
I have yet to see a Post-Modernist use Post-Modernism to say anything else.

>>3157724
It doesn't undermine any system lol it just puts it in a particular context, as should be necessary. That is, they are human constructions that may or may not have a claim to truth so we should treat them accordingly. That and they may be used to manipulate the thinking of others.

>>3157727
Many in this thread are saying something else. Maybe you just look for people who confirm your headcanon

>>3157729
>That is, they are human constructions that may or may not have a claim to truth so we should treat them accordingly.
and "accordingly" means?
:3

>>3157735
No, actually the Post-Modernists in here have yet to actually say anything concrete at all.

>>3157737
That they may or may not have a claim to truth, and their validity depends on context i.e. on variables outside the control of the people who make these claims since systems are not controlled by individuals

>>3157740
Headcanon it is

>>3157741
>That they may or may not have a claim to truth, and their validity depends on context i.e. on variables outside the control of the people who make these claims since systems are not controlled by individuals
That's just repeating the premise.
I'm asking you how we should accordingly from that premise.

>>3157745
Feel free to prove me wrong and do something more than just meme at me.

>>3157753
Treat them as though there may be variables not yet accounted for

>>3157756
I don't know what you mean by 'concrete' since the explanations given by postmodernists in this thread are adequate to me. I can't change the way you receive these arguments, you just have to learn to read and approach opposing viewpoints in an honest manner, like you actually want to learn something instead of dominate the conversation

>>3157759
and this is something other than undermining philosophical systems how exactly?

How do you draw useful information from a system when you a priori decide that any information you draw from it cannot be accurate due to unaccounted variables?

>>3157776
By not being an idiot. Postmodernists haven't hamstrung scientific undertakings in the 21st century by suggesting that empiricism is just people lying to themselves about what they know. Postmodernism has resulted in the idea that preservation of cultures and environment (i.e. contexts) is worthwhile because we don't know the extent of damage disrupting cybernetic systems can cause

>>3157762
>I don't know what you mean by 'concrete'
of course you don't you're a post-modernist.

>>3157794
No I'm just not a mind-reader

>>3157793
>By not being an idiot.
What a fantastic non-statement.

>Postmodernists haven't hamstrung scientific undertakings in the 21st century by suggesting that empiricism is just people lying to themselves about what they know.
but they clearly have anon, otherwise there wouldn't be movement rising up against the philosophy that you see now.

>Postmodernism has resulted in the idea that preservation of cultures and environment (i.e. contexts) is worthwhile because we don't know the extent of damage disrupting cybernetic systems can cause
and yet post-modernists have gone out of their way to destroy the cultures and environments of the Western world.

Please don't degrade /his/ by attempting a "no TRUE post-modernist" argument.

>>3157812
>but they clearly have anon

They clearly have hamstrung scientific undertakings? There really has been limited scientific development since the 40s compared to previous decades?

>and yet post-modernists have gone out of their way to destroy the cultures and environments of the Western world.

They haven't really. Postmodern scholarship has been paramount in the reassessment of Western traditions that had otherwise fallen out of favour with the tunnel-vision of modernists (and capitalism). Also the alt-right are postmodernists since they share literally the exact same arguments.

>>3157836
>Postmodern scholarship has been paramount in the reassessment of Western traditions that had otherwise fallen out of favour with the tunnel-vision of modernists (and capitalism)
HA!
Name a single one.

>Also the alt-right are postmodernists since they share literally the exact same arguments.
The alt-right are not postmodernists anymore than postmodernists are modernists.

>>3157859
>Name a single one.

Academic art.

>The alt-right are not postmodernists anymore than postmodernists are modernists.

Same distrust of institutions like news and politics prone to manipulation of images and events, same system that cycles through different parties with the promise of change that never really changes the constant present, same disenfranchisement with advertising and marketing that takes advantage of desires since all basic needs are met and these products become more important than people, same thought that no genuine or unironic social relationships because people are so concerned with image and technology, technology minimalising the personal and human, same lack of concrete knowledge in the past due to being consumers of ephemeral media always looking for something slightly distinct in an otherwise conservative approach to cultural production, same drawing on various past solution recontextualised to solve the same problem

I fail to see how the alt-right are not postmodernists. They are the true mainstream successors and it should be embraced not fought. It's a rich intellectual tradition

>>3157859
>Name a single one.
Postmodernism has been the dominant mode of thought in philosophy and pop culture for longer than pretty much anyone here has been alive. Regardless of the /pol/ narrative that acts like it's a new and fairly contained phenomena, it's permeated and influenced pretty much every aspect of present-day culture at this point.The culture of this site wouldn't even exist without postmodernism.

>>3157890
>academic art
I genuinely would like to know more about what you mean.

>I fail to see how the alt-right are not postmodernists.
I admit that I am not philosophically qualified to explain how they are not, but considering they are reacting to post-modernism and are clearly influenced by it they certainly seem to be better described as "post-postmodernism'. Whatever that means.
>They are the true mainstream successors and it should be embraced not fought. It's a rich intellectual tradition
I don't deny they are among it's successors.

>>3157836
>They haven't really. Postmodern scholarship has been paramount in the reassessment of Western traditions
Is this reassesment why same postmodernists argue for increased immigration, deconstruction of their country's traditional values and incessant attack on native populations through media?

>>3157906
>Regardless of the /pol/ narrative that acts like it's a new and fairly contained phenomena,
/pol/ doesn't believe that at all.

>>3157906
>Regardless of the /pol/ narrative that acts like it's a new and fairly contained phenomena
Hahahaha what, /pol/ argues exactly the opposite

>>3157929
Academicism has been treated more fairly by recent scholars than previously when it was basically just what caused the avant-garde in this progressive idea of art history. In the mainstream too it is more popular outside of people who claim to value more traditional works, like people who buy art love 19th century stuff as well as 20th century modernism. It's all a part of the same tradition -- actually now that I mention it this is another point of postmodernism: denying how 'revolutionary' the avant-garde were.

>but considering they are reacting to post-modernism

They are and they aren't. They're reacting to postmodernity (as were postmodernists) just that the ruling superstructure has adapted some postmodernist arguments. But we need to separate 'kill all white people' undergrad activists from the 'post-modern' media creators and policy advisers who are forcing multiculturalism; the latter does not necessarily result in the end desire of the former. They may not even be serious.

Also postmodernists are kind of modernists but probably to a lesser degree than alt-right are postmodernists.

>>3157933
I haven't seen any postmodern scholars argue for this, no.

>>3157181
>>3157190
So you are saying the "science wars" never happened. It is beginning to sound like you don't read books, not me.

The irony is I want science to be analyzed inside and out, up and down, left, right and center, however all postmodernists can offer is "dude, everything's a metanarrative! lmao".

>>3158231
You could have just said you're a logical positivist and postmodern ideas about relativism don't align with your personal values.

File: (you).jpg (55KB, 600x752px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 600x752px

>>3144966
is this you?