Why did the philosophy of modernism fail? Why is everyone okay

>>39008200
What is the philosophy of modernism?
Do most people subscribe to it?

>>39008200
The Jews.
-

File: 1488877763167.png (365KB, 658x720px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 658x720px

This drawing demonstrates how you dont understand postmodern art.

its not to override the philosophy of modern art because if it did it would have nothing to critique or insult. It is to make fun of modern society and the things society produces.

Society isnt stagnating either. just because i sub group appears that likes insulting the way things are doesnt mean "OMG GUIS SOCITEE IS STAGNATING!!!111!!"

There isn't really a philosophy either. Unless you consider "critiquing societal standards" a philosophy

>>39008626
And yet by making fun of modern society they end up making it worse. It's easy to critique, it's another thing entirely to propose something better. The latter is something which no postmodernist has ever done

>>39008626
>Let's put a lightbulb in completely white room and call that postmodern art
I think that a lot of crap is being pushed as art when in reality it's a worthless junk.

File: IMG_6017.jpg (66KB, 656x500px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 656x500px

>>39008567
Modernism--there is an objective grand-narrative see utopianism, utilitarianism
Post-Modernism--there is no grand-narrative and anything that presents itself as a grand narrative should be ridiculed and scrutinized

>>39008741
Wouldn't a society based on post-modernism collapse out of pessimism and lacking a purpose?

>>39008773

Pretty much yeah. A society requires something to head towards and collectively believe in to function well.

>>39008739
It's called money-laundering, anon

>>39008707
by that standard critics will never be able to say they dont like like a certain part of something unless they are able to execute it better.

>>39008739
There is a lot of pretentious garbage that many artists create under the title of "postmodern art" but there are pieces of post modern art where the story behind them is a humorous way of critiquing society

>>39008796
Money-laundering and political agenda pushing at the same time. It's just like art in communism - as you long as you portray politics you're good to go.

File: jhk4jh45jk.png (2MB, 1100x739px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1100x739px

>>39008815
>there are pieces of post modern art where the story behind them is a humorous way of critiquing society
Such as?

>>39008815
>by that standard critics will never be able to say they dont like like a certain part of something unless they are able to execute it better.

A critic of a movie (for example) will point out its flaws in order to show how the movie could have been better if it was made by a more competent director. The ultimate purpose of movie criticism is so directors can learn what and what not to do when making their own films. How do postmodernist critiques of society fulfil the same purpose when they never offer an alternative way of doing things?

File: 107849956958.jpg (99KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 800x600px

>>39008741
>Post-Modernism--there is no grand-narrative and anything that presents itself as a grand narrative should be ridiculed and scrutinized

So nihilism then? Nothing wrong with that. Any intelligent, wealthy society will become nihilistic.

>>39008874
>A critic of a movie (for example) will point out its flaws in order to show how the movie could have been better if it was made by a more competent director.

A critic doesn't need to be able to make a better movie to critque one just like you don't have to be a chef to know why the food tastes bad

>>39008899

If you are ok with living as a hunter gatherer again and having to actively fight and work just to stay alive, then yeah, nihilism is ok. However if you enjoy civilization and its benefits then nihilism is very bad as it will always lead to civilizational collapse

Modernism was the ultimate artistic philosophy, followed closely by romanticism. The best art incorporates the beat parts of modernism and romanticism. Even if it does so unconsciously, it would be 100% possibly to argue that point.

Postmodernism is what happened when shitty artists started taking a lot of drugs and fucked their heads over to the point where "nothing is true," so they started making art about that. When 1967 hit and everyone was dropping acid (and one hit was 20x as strong as a modern day tab) the masses latched onto the idea of subjective truth. It was a perfect storm for the movement, and they've been in control ever since.

Art has utterly stagnated now due to postmodern bullshit. I sorely hope artists return to modern / romantic roots, because that's where the most human / expressive / relatable art exists.

>>39009013
>I sorely hope artists return to modern / romantic roots, because that's where the most human / expressive / relatable art exists.
That makes me wonder is there any signs of neo-modernism?

>>39009013

Well, they probably won't because the postmodern philosophy is more conducive to art gallery business.

>>39008965
Completely missed the point. To say that a movie is bad is to logically imply that a better version of said movie is possible. What version of society is possible that is better than this?

>>39009037
The biggest trend I'm noticing in contemporary art is a focus on the human. It asks the question: what is the shared human experience, and what is important about human connection?

To me this is a reaction to postmodernism because it's focused on the *shared* aspects of the human experience, which implies there is some sort of "grand narrative" to being human.

Imo some of the best recent art focuses on biological imperatives common to all humans (i.e., empathy, sex, suffering, love, brotherhood, etc.), bringing together science and art to "prove a thesis," if you will.

>>39009000
>If you are ok with living as a hunter gatherer again and having to actively fight and work just to stay alive, then yeah, nihilism is ok.

Nihilistic societies end up being the most prosperous as you don't have religotards limiting it. Examples are the thriving eastern countries. If you're talking about birth rates and immigration that would simply be solved violently or through scientific advancements

>>39008200
society cant just indefinitely grow. thats the mentality of a cancer cell

>>39008773
You see what's happening to the West, right?

>>39009133
So basically art is coming to the rather simplistic concepts as virtues and human.

>>39009013
The funny thing is I did acid twice and the post modern conclusion is one I came to both times. It fucked me up and gave me depression for a year and a half.

File: Screen-Shot-2016-12-16-at-5.56.15-PM.png (2MB, 1550x1116px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1550x1116px

>>39009146
First of all, "eastern societies" (I presume you mean Japan, South Korea, etc.) are neither atheistic nor nihilistic. Instead, religion plays a different role in society compared to the west. In the west, religion is seen as a separate body from science, philosophy and society as a whole. That's why we talk of "the Church" as an institution when we talk about Christianity as a whole. Religion in the west is mentally departmentalized within society.

In eastern societies religion plays a more fluid and less institutional role than it does in the west. This is because the animistic beliefs of Shintoism, shamanism, etc. don't demand the rigid adherence to orthodoxy and devoutness that the Abrahamic religions do.

Secondly, societies that are actually atheistic and nihilistic are rapidly going down the pan. Just look at the likes of Canada and Sweden. Their worldview is how you end up with shit like pic related

>>39009146
Better be baiting, because your impression of an edgy 14 year old fedora from Reddit is spot on.

>>39009201
So in other words postmodernism is literally the result of fucking up your brain's ability to reason with drugs?

>>39008626
I don't really think the OP image really applies specifically to art
More philosophy

>>39009313
Not the person who you are responding to btw

But you act like I have a choice in choosing between nihilism (I would rather call it absurdity) and w/e you are advocating (religion or basically underlying rational meaning to life)

I would love for my my world to have some sort of underlying meaning or rational thread of a creator or w/e, and I don't think nihilism (atleast what I think) claims that, it just claims from a single person over a single lifetime, we can't see that shit

>>39008200
Because critical theory and the frankfurt school of cultural marxism did everything it could to kill it. It's making a comeback though. Thank God for that.

>>39009013
The idea of "subjective truth" has been around since Kant, so it's really nothing new, it just takes awhile for idea to propagate and take hold

Also I think people fail to mention the impact of the atom bomb, the idea of that shit is kind of a big deal imo

>>39000000
This mailbox is meeting r9k's shitty quota.

>>39009286
So it's atheism that's causing all these symptoms in the west

and the East isn't actually atheistic

Yet we see the very same symptoms occurring in the east(low birth rates, homosexuality, transgenderism)

Doesn't this contradict your point?
UNLESS you're solely focusing on immigration

>>39008626
Postmodern art is absolute trash

>>39009493
Also feminism, massive rates of plastic surgery. High rates of incels

File: 1491872267300.jpg (57KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 500x375px

David Foster Wallace was highly critical of postmodernism. Would his work be an example of modernism?

>>39009634
>David Foster Wallace
Infinite Jest seems such a pretentious book.

>>39009651
>Infinite Jest seems such a pretentious book.
t. brainlet

>>39009651
What a useless, reddit tier post. You sound like a wannabe "hip" Marxist professor that I know who hates anything intellectual and only likes pop culture.

>>39009666
>>39009697
shoo shoo il/lit/erates. go circle-jerk over books that have actual value.

>>39009651
>>39009722
You said "seems." Did you even read the book that you are flippantly dismissing as pretentious without even providing any substantial criticism?

File: slayd04_0[1].jpg (83KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 720x540px

>>39008200

Because Modernism, Post-modernism, Nationalism and Classical Liberalism are all exactly the same shit.

File: 1.png (196KB, 320x297px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 320x297px

>>39009750
>Modernism, Post-modernism, Nationalism and Classical Liberalism are all exactly the same shit
lmao what a fucking MORON

>>39009750
Can you elaborate on this? What is this epistemological pole of real revolution

>>39009790

Essentially pre-modernism.

http://www.4pt.su/en/content/fourth-political-theory-shortest-presentation

File: IMG_5627.jpg (53KB, 569x506px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 569x506px

>>39009750
You're joking, right?

whomst

Reminder that Capitalism was once a postmodern movement

File: 1501278051278.jpg (20KB, 395x479px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 395x479px

>>39008200
>Why is everyone okay with society stagnating?
Its not because they're "okay with it" its because we're literally slaves and people like Nicola Tesla and people who created none gas powered engines for some reason always get murdered or some other random event of misfortune. There's an obvious force(s) of people(s) using the entire world as a machine to get profit out of for as long as the can possible force because it makes them feel powerful I guess.

I could go on but really its not hard to understand why the world is shit and why we're all doomed

File: jew.png (577KB, 917x607px) Image search: [Google]

577KB, 917x607px

>>39009941
>There's an obvious force(s) of people(s)
Who are they?

File: .jpg (35KB, 500x335px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x335px

>>39009987
>Who are they?
Who indeed.

File: slayd12_0[1].jpg (73KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 720x540px

>>39009869

Continue serving the Atlanticists.

File: 1118729651.jpg (29KB, 640x370px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 640x370px

>>39009941
The Jews killed Tesla now

>>39010017
So basically arts promote whatever they want to promote?

Nihilism is cancer, and so is this thread.

File: 3pt-b-w-3-english[1].jpg (94KB, 1200x1184px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1200x1184px

>>39010136

Atlanticism is cancer.

File: 1488202526426.jpg (14KB, 480x567px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 480x567px

>>39009845
This isn't written very well and I'm still unclear on the details, but I think I get the general idea. Thanks anon

>>39008626
If art is not self apparent and appreciable as art when devoid of context beyond basic human functions like language and sight, it is not art. Plain and simple. See >>39008840 for an example, there is no form, barely any color, and the piece could easily be mistaken for trash.

>>39010236
>>39010236

Basically Modernity is based on the idea of the subject and object.
There is a subject that exists separately from the object and perceives it.
Subjects act, objects are acted upon, etc, etc.

This holds true for all manifestations of modernity, just with different subjects.
In liberalism, it's the individual; in communism, it's class; in fascism/nationalism, it's nation/race.

Post-modern society is essentially under control of the liberal Western world (the Washington consensus). Everything we observe in it is occurring within the confines of liberalism and modernity, with its subject/object dichotomies.
Some people say Marxism is making a return (through so-called "Cultural Marxism"). Doesn't matter; it's all part of the same modernist project based on Cartesian principles.

The way to change things is to start from a completely different ontological framework, where subject and object are not separate and the focus is on being itself (as the case was in pre-modern societies).

>>39010395
I think for the majority the focus in pre-modern socities was to work hard every day to survive.

File: 3rqw.jpg (109KB, 1024x606px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1024x606px

>>39009987
Mostly bankers and people who make here whole lives about money. I mean come on anon the "federal" bank is a private bank owned by one family. That doesn't bother you at all?
>>39010040
kill yourself

File: 1478650072691.jpg (968KB, 1280x1707px) Image search: [Google]

968KB, 1280x1707px

>>39010395
>where subject and object are not separate and the focus is on being itself (as the case was in pre-modern societies).
Could you elaborate on this part? What do you mean being itself?

Thanks anon. Interesting argument. I will think about this some more.

>>39010646

>What do you mean being itself?

Well, if I can correctly recall my very limited and surface knowledge of Heidegger, he posits that the most fundamental ontological distinction is not between subject and object, but between Das Nichts and Dasein (Existence vs Non-existence).

All of existence is allied against non-existence, therefore "being" itself is the celebrated category. All other objects are not thought of as removed from the thinking subject, but as part of one system/mode of being. In pre-modern societies, inanimate objects could be treated as animate ones, for example, and imbued with their own personalities/souls. This is the reason for "spirits" of various kinds (representations of otherwise inanimate things), charms and cursed items (objects which have "wills"), etc.

>>39009877
No it wasn't. That's not what postmodern means.

File: 1483939702432.png (289KB, 500x365px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 500x365px

>>39010976
>therefore "being" itself is the celebrated category. All other objects are not thought of as removed from the thinking subject, but as part of one system/mode of being.
Interesting. I'm not an expert on this stuff, but this kind of reminds me of I think Buddhism or maybe Hinduism. Don't they talk about how we are all pieces of the same whole, being one with the universe, stuff like that? I don't know. Maybe it has a different name.

But anyway, this would also be accurate from a scientific point of view, yes? Everything is just a collection of atoms, which are in turn just quarks and other particles. We are the universe observing itself.

>>39011639

It doesn't outright contradict science if only because science doesn't deal with metaphysical questions.
The scientific method is already based on its own metaphysical suppositions (logical positivism), (or maybe more accurately anti-metaphysical suppositions?)

>>39011858
>It doesn't outright contradict science
Right, I'm saying that, from my understanding, it agrees with science.

Both science and this pre-modern philosophy you're talking about state that we are all one, we're all part of the same whole.

>>39011973

Science creates models for explaining (and predicting) phenomena based on inductive and deductive analysis of empirical data. Scientific models are always incomplete and always subject to change provided either a better model or new evidence comes along.

You can draw a conclusion such as "We are all one" from the currently accepted scientific models of the universe if you like, but that conclusion will be outside the realm of science per se, since although it might be based on a scientific model, the assertion does not make a falsifiable statement about an observable phenomenon.

It doesn't contradict science, but science doesn't state it; in fact, it cannot make any judgment about it because it's not falsifiable.

File: Endtroducingcover.jpg (36KB, 300x295px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 300x295px

>>39008626
>its not to override the philosophy of modern art because if it did it would have nothing to critique or insult. It is to make fun of modern society and the things society produces.

Irony is the bane of sincerity. We can critique things under a sheath of irony but what happens when we run out of things to critique? We stagnate in progress.

Postmodernism creates a cynical thought because of the skeptical nature of its philosophy, deconstructing ideas to their foundation and analyzing them, yet never creating something new because that would be an act of sincerity, which will inevitably be deconstructed eternally as long as the thought exists.

>Society isnt stagnating either. just because i sub group appears that likes insulting the way things are doesnt mean "OMG GUIS SOCITEE IS STAGNATING!!!111!!"

But it is tho, notice how everyone nowadays are paranoid and anxious? Irony causes that because it replaces sincerity.

>here isn't really a philosophy either. Unless you consider "critiquing societal standards" a philosophy

Postmodernism is a movement, a reaction against modernism, not particularly a philosophy as it is a rewiring a cultural zeitgeist

post modernism should be supported simply because it triggers /pol/ cucks

>>39012315

Irony itself is just a psychological self-defense mechanism. You can't have irony without fear. A fear is always a fear of something, in this case, sincerity. The question is: what makes sincerity so frightening?
People are paranoid and anxious because of specific fears and dangers that surround them. These things can't be attributed to a vague abstract "postmodernism boogeyman", which somehow replaces things with irony arbitrarily.

So why are people afraid of sincerity? And since when have people been afraid of sincerity?

I think people are afraid of sincerity because it leaves them vulnerable: vulnerable to criticism and ostracism. It's like using the internet without a firewall, or having a computer without a password.
Irony is just another security feature. People are more paranoid, so people invest in internet security, home security, personal security (weapons, self-defense tools, martial arts), and irony as well as a psychological security tool.
People become more anxious when people feel less secure and stable in their lives and about their future: this is caused by concrete socio-economic concerns.

This is part of a much wider socio-economic trend and not just a narrow agenda to replace sincerity with irony.

bump to get my reply in

>>39008200
What as a society are we even trying to achieve? People have no fucking clue anymore.

>>39010236
It's actually quite informed, albiet full of typos. This would not be the first time someone has suggested that a return to the pastorality of a bygone age is the most fruitfull form of society. The artist who created the series of painting on the rise and fall of society whose name I cannot recall suggested that the pastoral stage of a civilisations evolution is the best stage as well.

A good read is The Decline of the West by Oswald Spengler. In Des Untergang he details how societies are like organisms; they begin, they grow, and they eventually die.

File: discussion.png (34KB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 1800x1200px

>>39012533
>Irony itself is just a psychological self-defense mechanism. You can't have irony without fear. A fear is always a fear of something, in this case, sincerity. The question is: what makes sincerity so frightening?

Irony is also a method of critique. People use irony as a subversive method of critiquing the nature of something but not the actual text.

>These things can't be attributed to a vague abstract "postmodernism boogeyman", which somehow replaces things with irony arbitrarily.
>People become more anxious when people feel less secure and stable in their lives and about their future: this is caused by concrete socio-economic concerns.

I think you might have misconstrued the cultural and existential effects of postmodernism and the physical concerns of society.

Yes, people become anxious when their ego hits peak fragility, caused by natural concerns, and breaks. But we're not talking about that. We're talking about the effects that irony posses over a cultural foundation. It causes detachment and leaves the absolute negative in lieu of sincerity.

Irony itself has the power to dissemble the ontological nature of texts. This is why many philosophers and authors have noted the cataclysmic nature of the use of irony. Because it destroys any progress that society has and lets it stagnate until it dies. The downfall of western society isn't a socio-economic trend, but rather one of an inevitable universal existential crisis.

Note how you said people are afraid of sincerity and use irony as a veil? That shouldn't be happening

>>39011858
I don't think "anti-metaphysical" is the most accurate way of defining logical positivism. Yes, in history, positivism has been the anithesis to rationalist philosophy, but it is not impossible to use positivism as a dialectic to understand the metaphysical. We can make inferences on the nature of the universe based not only on scientific experimentation, such as any multitude of experiments confirming general relativity, and thus the nature of space and time, but by "local" empiricism. How do I percieve the world? Does my neighbour share these perceptions? How can I reconcile these perceptions into a unified epistemic or ontological theory?

As much as I despise post-modernism, I also can't stand new sensationalism. We're stuck between a shitty abandonment of the foundations, traditions, and evolution of society and art, or "muh feels/just b urself" sjw-esque lack of self control.

>>39008773
>Wouldn't a society based on post-modernism collapse out of pessimism and lacking a purpose?

>What is the current state of Western society
You see it all around you every day. We're in that collapse right now.

>>39013249
new sincerity*

>>39008200
I don't understand this
Why the fuck does it matter what some dude wants to draw
If some sucker buys pencil scribbles for $1,000 how does that affect you?
Humans aren't a fucking hive mind

>>39013249
>>39013393
I think I understand what you mean by new sincerity but could you give examples? Do you mean shitty normie shows like How I Met Your Mother and The Big Bang Theory

>>39013457
No, as far as I'm aware, New Sincerity is a movement that attempts to fix Post-Modernism's cold, logical, anti-emotional, constantly-ironic attitude towards everything with a focus on genuine emotions. I think I saw it once discussed as "feeling okay to cry in a movie theater again" or something similar - it's the idea that you don't have to roll your eyes at a maudlin scene in a Nicholas Sparks movie and can just cry/feel emotional even if the scene is cliche or overly dramatic or something. It's a way to once again be okay with not being cold/ironic. It's a refuge from Post-Modernism's detachment.

Which sure, sounds like a good thing. Only, as I see it, it quickly evolved into a very SJW-like movement/attitude where the goal is to feel - but feel only happiness or positivity. As in, entertainment/art should exist only to make one feel good/comfy/safe, and anything that doesn't is "wrong". It's noticeable in so many arguments where "my feels matter more than science/evidence/whatever", or people who won't watch/listen to anything sad just because, or neo-hippy free love bullshit (polyamory is good because it makes me feel good!). It's all based on emotion and on feeling again (after the cold detachment of Post-Modernism) but that makes it subjective and extremely relativistic as well.

>>39013195

>The downfall of western society isn't a socio-economic trend, but rather one of an inevitable universal existential crisis.

The socio-economic stability of Western society as we know it was predicated on the constant expansion of capitalist markets. The existential nature of the West has always been to produce, sell, acquire, repeat.
We ran out of space to do that sometime around the beginning of the 20th century, so we started creating boogeymen to take away markets that already belonged to others (Fascism, Communism, Authoritarianism w/ nukes, Islamic radicalism)
Now we're running out of those and the whole economic paradigm is running out of steam.

Standards of living drop, production of goods slows down, people don't know what to do anymore, hence: anxiety, distrust, fear, irony. There is no corner of the Earth left to expand into, no new markets to acquire.

>>39013698
we still got space doe

>>39013698
>The existential nature of the West has always been to produce, sell, acquire, repeat.
That's the economic ideology of capitalism, which is associated with the west. Existential nature of the West has been always rooted in moral traditionalism, not a cold monotonous nature.

>We ran out of space to do that sometime around the beginning of the 20th century, so we started creating boogeymen to take away markets that already belonged to others

Elaborate because this makes no sense. Each of the examples you've listed are incorrect as boogeyman because they posed significant threats to the West, except for Islamic radicalism, I can agree on the boogeyman nature of that.

>Standards of living drop, production of goods slows down, people don't know what to do anymore, hence: anxiety, distrust, fear, irony. There is no corner of the Earth left to expand into, no new markets to acquire.

You're describing the disillusionment that affects society after a war. During WWII, in particular, post war disillusionment was so prominent in every facet of society because the entire world was just involved in an apocalyptic event. People naturally, had to use Irony to cope with the disillusionment. Moral Rationality was washed for the nature of cynical skepticism. This gave way to postmodern thought, because nothing in the world had purpose and everything that had meaning or purpose was to be criticized and mocked with ironic cynicism.

Every facet of Western society was bound to collapse due to a lack of direction and purpose, until philosophers and authors "attempted" to rectify this issue with the New Sincerity movement.

>>39008815
>>by that standard critics will never be able to say they dont like like a certain part of something unless they are able to execute it better.
If you're critiquing without comparing whatever it is to a higher standard then your critiques are worthless.

>>39014021

>Existential nature of the West has been always rooted in moral traditionalism

If anything, the Orient is far more rooted in traditionalism than the West. Western notions of morality have shown themselves to be extremely fluid ever since the adoption of Christianity. Western values have changed from "community/harmony" (Germanic/Latin pagan tribes and Greek city-states) to 'Christ" to "Individual" (Humanism), to "reason" (Platonism and Enlightenment).

>Elaborate because this makes no sense.

I'm not saying they weren't threats, but they were also used as pretexts to take over new markets.
The 1990s Gulf War is a good example of this. Saddam Hussein got State Department permission to invade Kuweit, which the US denied immediately afterwards in order to legitimise US invasion of the energy reserves.
Hussein wasn't a great guy, but the US weren't honest here either.

>>39014242
>Western values have changed from "community/harmony" (Germanic/Latin pagan tribes and Greek city-states) to 'Christ" to "Individual" (Humanism), to "reason" (Platonism and Enlightenment).

You are correct, but this is also what modernism is. The inquiry about the nature of objects, their functions, and their meaning.

You could also state that the Enlightenment era was kind of like a mini-postmodernism except less destructive. People found out that logic is the counterpoint to emotional expression and reacted against it with romanticism. Still, Enlightenment is still considered apart of modernism because it was an uproot trend in achieving or solving issues with a sense of purpose.

>I'm not saying they weren't threats, but they were also used as pretexts to take over new markets.

Fascism, Communism, and authoritarianism were threats towards Western values. They promoted opposing ideals, those that were the antithesis of Western ideals. They were also Imperialist in their own right as the U.S was in theirs.

>The 1990s Gulf War is a good example of this. Saddam Hussein got State Department permission to invade Kuwait, which the US denied immediately afterwards in order to legitimize US invasion of the energy reserves.

I said I agreed with Islamic radicalism being a unjustifiable pretext to invade the middle east. Now we're are facing the consequences by creating the power vacuum in the middle east and creating terror cells like ISIS.

>>39008741
Skepticism has always been a part of philosophy, was it not Socrates who asked what is piety? Do the gods love something because it is pious or is it pious because the gods love it. Is piety something above the gods or is piety just whatever the gods feel like?

>>39014484

>I said I agreed with Islamic radicalism

Except Saddam Hussein was not a representative of Islamic radicalism. He was a Ba'athist: a secularist.
It was only after his fall that we started having problems with radical Islam in Iraq.
He was part of the *alleged* "authoritarian with dangerous weapons" kind.

>Fascism, Communism, and authoritarianism were threats towards Western values. They promoted opposing ideals, those that were the antithesis of Western ideals

Well, Communism was based on the same reason-driven, Humanist Enlightenment values as Liberalism and Capitalism. Communism was part of the Western system of thought. (Marx's main influences were Hegel, Feuerbach, Rousseau and Locke)

As for Fascism, it's kind of iffy. Some people would say nationalism is a modernist concept (in terms of the time period that it sprung up in), but it was more a part of the romantic era, which, as you said, was a reaction to the rationalism of the Enlightenment.
On the other hand, Fascism is also based on the theories of German Continentalist Political Geographers (Ritter, Ratzel, Humboldt, Haushofer), who espoused a return to Pre-Modern values .

However, all of these movements belong to the Western tradition of thought.
You could say the main reason these are seen as contrary to "Western ideals" now is precisely because Western ideals are so fluid and subject to change that what was considered "Western" 150 years ago is considered anti-Western now.

Modernism fell apart in the wake of the world wars. It's probably difficult for us to understand today how devastating their impact was. Tens of millions of people from two generations wiped out, Europe physically destroyed, the new threat of nuclear annihilation, the knowledge of industrial genocide, the collapse of all of the colonial powers that had existed for centuries. It seemed to put the lie to all of the optimism that undergirded modernism. It was proof that progress wasn't assured or inevitable.

>>39015193
>Postmodernists, the Frankfurt School and anti-positivists looked at the Holocaust and thought "how could something like this happen?"
The rest is history

>>39015193
>>39015212
There was also the sense that modernity was to blame for everything that went wrong. That humanity turned its progress and its technology against itself.

>>39009286
So what youre saying is. Abrahamic religions are dogshit, and religious freedom should be culled. YES. I totally agree.

>>39008741
>utilitarianism
Yeah, no.

>>39008626
>thinks postmodernism only applies to art
>then proceeds to argue against a philosophical criticism to postmodernism
>backs it up with "you just don't understand!!!"

the philosophy of postmodernism is that there is no objective truth and the only true experience is entirely subjective.

This will be my last post cause i got stuff to do tomorrow. Thank you very much for the intellectual debate fellow anon

>>39015153

>He was part of the *alleged* "authoritarian with dangerous weapons" kind.
Ok I can agree with this. I was confused, you should stated that it was just Saddam instead of authoritarianism/w nukes. Authoritarianism itself isn't a ideological threat as it is a foundation of government systems. The party in control could be culled as a threat but not the ideology itself.

Everything you've said is perceived as correct so I am just going to focus on:

>You could say the main reason these are seen as contrary to "Western ideals" now is precisely because Western ideals are so fluid and subject to change that what was considered "Western" 150 years ago is considered anti-Western now.

Possibly the creation of the boogeyman against those ideals(Fascism and communism) were the influences and proctors of the ideologue themselves, like Lenin and Mussolini, rather than the ideology itself since they have somehow warped the once previous western thought into something that threatens Western society. Yet, the fluidity of western ideals is what modernism is, or the effects of it.

Back to the original point tho, I don't believe that the lack of boogeyman is leading to the stagnation of society, War will come by once again, its inevitable, yet the huge political and societal repercussions of perusing war is far too great. Until another war comes around to give us a sense of purpose and sincere meaning again. Postmodern thought and irony is secretly destroy the fabric and text of western society

>>39015782

Thank you for the discussion, anon.

>>39008626
art is a message
if it takes you to explain to me what the message of a piece is the piece has failed as a medium of the message because you could just tell me the story the piece signifies in the first place and skip the whole art part

File: 1476606546122.gif (826KB, 320x213px) Image search: [Google]

826KB, 320x213px

>>39008200
>Why did the philosophy of modernism fail?
Because after the 50's many white families could afford to pretend to be Fitzgerald's Buccanan's (or however it's spelled) and the government destroyed the black community around the 80's with the introduction of drugs and other things leading up to it. No one but immigrants are in their right minds about progress yet they are disempowered.

>>39016749
Right because everything is about money
Just shit up and watch Rick and morty

File: 1493403461797.gif (243KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 640x360px

>>39009013
>Modernism was the ultimate artistic philosophy, followed closely by romanticism.
My first instinct is to ridicule this assertion, but for the sake of intellectual integrity, I'll humor any justificatory expansion you have regarding this

>>39016792
people act that way

>>39009013
I don't understand why do you tie the deterioration of art to sixties, where major turning points like Dada and Second Viennese School happened in the beginning of the last century along with successful art experiments of people like Malevich and Kandinsky.

>>39016749
>failure of modernism
>fifties and eighties
Nigga what

>>39016826
Not him but posting a smug anime girl, talking shit, and asking somebody to type more for you to "ridicule" does not an argument make.

File: 1493224372241.gif (972KB, 500x555px) Image search: [Google]

972KB, 500x555px

>>39017074
it's clear that you can't read above a fifth grade level so you didn't understand what I wrote; so I won't bother seriously responding to you

File: 1495921096958.gif (875KB, 250x231px) Image search: [Google]

875KB, 250x231px

>>39017036
>baby doesn't understand time periods
>baby doesn't think about declines and rises
pulling up Wikipedia is not hard anon; Firefox has the search engine built-in for your edification

File: 1418597241424.jpg (95KB, 960x1280px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 960x1280px

>>39008200
Onwards and upwards mean lots of people (the weak, the disabled, the infirm, the non-whites and non-jews) get left behind.
Liberal compassion would prefer to drag us all down to a similar level rather than let anyone get left behind and humanity progresses higher.

>>39017264
>saying literally nothing

>>39016076
Art doesn't need to have a message or a meaning. Modern art instead tries to have an "effect" on the consumer. If it is at all possible to summarize your art with words then your art was pointless and you should have written a chronicle instead.

Read "The figure in the carpet"

The subjective realm is really just the competition of concepts and expression in a marketplace of other concepts and degrees of expression. So Picasso's work is excellent because that's what the people want it to be, and Rembrandt's work is not excellent because the people don't like it anymore (used to, but replaced by Picasso and his ilk). It says more about the critiques than the work itself.

>>39008741
Seems to me like most people today are subscribed to modernism as opposed to postmodernism. Even SJW types think they're moving society forward in the direction of progress.

File: image.png (66KB, 657x778px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 657x778px

someone explain this in a way I'll understan dbexause it sounds very pretentious

>>39019461
Philosophy is just circlejerking over big words, producing nothing of value and being pretentious when others call you out on your bullshit.

It's just throwing buzzwords around like they mean something.

Modernism: Shitposting
Postmodernism: Ironic shitposting

>>39008815
You say that like it's a bad thing. Criticism without a point or providing an alternative is just bitching, and nobody likes a bitch.

>>39008965
If you can't produce or identify good food because you reject the concept, then your criticism is again, just bitching. Nobody likes a whiny bitch.

>>39019653
Used to be different, though. At least the useful things like arguing over concepts to build upon them and to point out proper critical thinking was useful. Now, it's just "dude do we even exist what even is truth lol this vomit paint is now art because i want it to be".