Post modernism hate thread

>there is no meta-narrative!
>Oh, except oppression. Everything is oppression.

get a blog

>>9483072
>being this reductive

File: garfield_fatter_11_by_naruto3ever.jpg (28KB, 438x311px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 438x311px

>>9483133
you will be hired by bannon if you can deconstruct oppression with stylistic flair desu

>>9483140
reductive, yes, right nevertheless

>>9483140
>You get to say when it's enough
I love this about you vandals.

>>9483175
Nothing means anything so I can't be fucked. Stop shaming me, oppressor.

>>9483072
Idk, I have the feeling Foucault knows much more about science than you know about him, so...

I used to hate them, but then I decided I should read their work before coming to a conclusion.

>>9483175
This has probably been done before.

>>9483140
completely fair when discussing post structuralists.

>>9483288
Why exactly is that the case?

moooooom

this philosophy person is criticizing my worldview :(((((

mooooom :((((

>>9483072
Not an argument.

>>9483175
I am skeptical about this claim to knowledge about who is oppressed. How are we defining oppression? At present it seems that a group can claim oppressed status and also define the terms of their own oppression. Surely a dubious ploy by the already powerful to extent their control! M-maybe /pol/ was right all along !
Pls gib Breitbart job

>>9483462
shut the fuck up post structuralist scum

>>9483518
grrrrRRRR

dude everything is about power!

*dies from BDSM sex-induced AIDS*

>>9483363
their condradictory nonsense and verbose bungling into one fallacy after another deserves only cursory glances at the text.

>>9483275
.. and now you're a pedophile too or what convinced you?

>post-modernism

yay. its 1992 again.

Foucault is actually coherent though, in contrast to people like Derrida.

In fact, I'm pretty sure Foucault hated Derrida, and thought he was a posturing idiot.

>>9483072
This post is very postmodern.

>>9484405
What an interesting way to justify not bothering to read the arguments of what you're critiquing.

>>9484455
>In fact, I'm pretty sure Foucault hated Derrida, and thought he was a posturing idiot.

Yeah. Foucault did seem to like Deleuze though.

>>9483133
>power structures are a meta-narrative

>>9484491
They are the moment you tell a story about them and claim the story is real.

>>9484493
I'm sorry how are things like slavery or colonialism "stories"

>>9484479
Who says I did not? But to make my statement more clear to you - when you start reading a theoretical work and find several fallacies right off the bat and then the author bases further reasoning on those 'arguments', you have every right to summarize the work entire.

Anyway, read Sokal.

>>9484500
Colonialism brought culture to hellholes and when they got industrialized it actually started morphing into globalisation that turned it into a bogeyman to pauperize the countries that used to profit from it.

Slavery is mainly a nigger trait.

>>9484500
>I'm sorry how are things like slavery or colonialism "stories"

Depends? Whose slavery and whose colonialism?

Because I think you have a specific story about slavery and colonialism in your head, and that story doesn't include the Ottomans or the Barbary States.

>>9484481
>Foucault did seem to like Deleuze though.
Which I never understood, Foucault was like the only person in France who didn't think Deleuze was a infiltrator.

>>9484508
le Sokal meme.

>>9484544
>that story doesn't include the Ottomans or the Barbary States.

why wouldn't it? Orientalism is an essential part of nineteenth century european colonialism

>>9484585
>why wouldn't it?

Because the narrative is that only European people are responsible for slavery and colonialism.

Which is false, hence power structures are indeed narratives.

>>9484515
Colonialism was utterly unprofitable for the colonised and it only stunted the growth that could've been achieved with with sovereignty and protectionism. Read a book, you fucking brainlet.

>>9484610
yes, of course, lots of civilizations have practiced and still practice slavery, but that doesn't exclude the fact that the effects of european and american colonialism are still very real and regard most people around the world

>>9484617
>Colonialism was utterly unprofitable for the colonised and it only stunted the growth that could've been achieved with with sovereignty and protectionism
That's a horribly generalized statement, stop trying to out retard each other.

>>9484631
how's that statement wrong?

>>9484628
Well, it is historical. It isn't "real".

Either way, you can frame any power structure with an infinite number of narratives.

>>9484634
Exceptions exist like Hong Kong, and a lot of older Taiwanese would say something similar in regards to the Japanese.

>>9484635
it is still very real. The fact that France can still intervene at any moment into one of her former colonies' political affairs for example.

>>9484639
>exceptions
so you're literally taking a few fishes into a sea of shit. Kinda proved my point, doesn't it?

>>9484645
Any powerful country can intervene into any countries' internal affairs.

Doesn't mean they will.

Nothing is absolute, except for this sentence.

>>9484675
What do you mean by 'intervene' in this case? I'd say there's no other country on earth that can legally invade a former colony

>>9484720
>legally

By whose standard would it be legal?

>>9484805
By the actual pacts made between France and her colonies

>>9483072
>>9483133
White imperialist capitalist Christian men dindu nuffin wrong

If u disagree ur le cuck

>>9484617
Largely so, as the europeans were not really out to civilize but rather to squeeze all the profit out of the colonies, usually from resources, so no human development. However I concur as the mistake of colonialism was often the not weeding out of native institutions, especially in africa. But that was never going to happen as profit driven policy was often necessary as colonies more often than not were not profitable.

>>9484413
>what convinced you?
My hatred towards them was becoming too extreme. I decided I shouldn't feel like that towards authors I've never engaged with.

File: muhlogic.png (436KB, 498x516px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 498x516px

>>9484508
Why should he read Sokal, so he can see how a guy used his credentials (he was a PhD after all) to publish nonsense in a non-peer reviewed publication? Because those degenerate twins /pol/ loves pulled the same stunt with a STEM journal, only this time it was their fucking PhD thesis, but of course you'll just ignore this as usual
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogdanov_affair

STEM people should be denied the status of human beings, Jesus fucking Christ.

File: american tv.png (1MB, 1920x1088px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1088px

>>9485840

>>9484508
Sokal is clueless about the disciplines he criticizes, and he isn't smart enough to understand the authors he criticizes in the first place. Philosophy and the human condition in general are beyond STEMtards.

>>9486117
>Philosophers
>disciplines

>>9484508
>find several fallacies

back to /pol/

>>9484879
>i hate whitey reeeee

>>9486132
back to Logic 101

>>9483140
you realize postmodernists enabled reductionism and scientism? thank your structuralist forefathers when their weapons are used against you, you cuck

>>9486067
Well, at least you're answering now, despite your answer making absolutely non-sense, as usual with you cunts.

>>9486565
>postmodernists enabled reductionism

Are you high son, none of the guys who fall into the postmodernism boogeyman could write anything shorter than 50 pages