|
andrewss
precariously aggrandized
Registered: 08/17/07
Posts: 8,725
Loc: ohio
Last seen: 3 months, 12 days
|
a cursory look at postmodernism....
#13784304 - 01/14/11 01:50 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
one could say postmodernism has become a considerable psychological/sociological force insofar as it has come to represent an expanding paradigm shift which affects culture in a myriad of ways, perhaps most ostensibly in the arts - it is marked by (according to a number of philosophers and sociologists) a general disr.............. ehhhhhhhhhhhh... fuck it
-------------------- Jesus loves you.
Edited by andrewss (01/14/11 01:55 AM)
|
the bizzle
the joke that no one spoke
Registered: 04/14/09
Posts: 11,870
Loc: :seriousbusiness:
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
|
Re: a cursory look at postmodernism.... [Re: andrewss]
#13784465 - 01/14/11 02:47 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
wouldn't you need a time machine to look at something post-modern?
-------------------- MY HAIR IS A BIRD YOUR ARGUMENT IS INVALID
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: a cursory look at postmodernism.... [Re: andrewss]
#13785214 - 01/14/11 09:37 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
andrewss said: one could say postmodernism has become a considerable psychological/sociological force insofar as it has come to represent an expanding paradigm shift which affects culture in a myriad of ways, perhaps most ostensibly in the arts - it is marked by (according to a number of philosophers and sociologists) a general disr.............. ehhhhhhhhhhhh... fuck it
See, It's not easy being a Daytripper.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
andrewss
precariously aggrandized
Registered: 08/17/07
Posts: 8,725
Loc: ohio
Last seen: 3 months, 12 days
|
Re: a cursory look at postmodernism.... [Re: Icelander]
#13786185 - 01/14/11 01:16 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
ur a meany!
-------------------- Jesus loves you.
|
illadescent
Registered: 01/14/11
Posts: 8
Last seen: 13 years, 2 months
|
Re: a cursory look at postmodernism.... [Re: andrewss]
#13788810 - 01/14/11 10:21 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Post-modern is not referring to modern as the present day (although today is modern). Modern is referring to the 1950's and 60's, etc. when a lot of new inventions like tv's, cars, phones, radios, etc. were invented with the industrial revolution. These times were seen as modern, as opposed to the old days. However, if you look at the mess things are right now, with the economy and environment, you can see that modernity was not exactly a progressing line of human evolution. I mean, despite all the technologies, we still work more than ever, are in a bad recession, have polluted the environment drastically, and are constantly fighting. Just look at the politics in the US for example: We have the extreme Right-wing, that has capitalistic and supposedly christian ideals, and on the other hand, we have the Left-wing, which claims is supposed to be more for the people, but really is just a bureaucracy, an extension of the Right-wing... so we actually have no political party in the US other than the corporate-capitalist-politician party. The Left-wing is just a mockery of what a true working class party would be. The Right-Wingers have been for the most part duped into thinking they will be richer by voting Republican, when in fact, Republicans take away social programs and invest in companies that export jobs. Guess I got a little side-tracked into politics but I think it's relevant.
--------------------
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: a cursory look at postmodernism.... [Re: andrewss]
#13789546 - 01/15/11 02:02 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
This reminds me of the Sokal affair:
Quote:
For some years I've been troubled by an apparent decline in the standards of intellectual rigor in certain precincts of the American academic humanities. But I'm a mere physicist: if I find myself unable to make head or tail of jouissance and différance, perhaps that just reflects my own inadequacy.
So, to test the prevailing intellectual standards, I decided to try a modest (though admittedly uncontrolled) experiment: Would a leading North American journal of cultural studies -- whose editorial collective includes such luminaries as Fredric Jameson and Andrew Ross -- publish an article liberally salted with nonsense if (a) it sounded good and (b) it flattered the editors' ideological preconceptions?
The answer, unfortunately, is yes. Interested readers can find my article, ``Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity,'' in the Spring/Summer 1996 issue of Social Text. It appears in a special number of the magazine devoted to the ``Science Wars.''
What's going on here? Could the editors reallynot have realized that my article was written as a parody?
In the first paragraph I deride ``the dogma imposed by the long post-Enlightenment hegemony over the Western intellectual outlook'':
that there exists an external world, whose properties are independent of any individual human being and indeed of humanity as a whole; that these properties are encoded in ``eternal'' physical laws; and that human beings can obtain reliable, albeit imperfect and tentative, knowledge of these laws by hewing to the ``objective'' procedures and epistemological strictures prescribed by the (so-called) scientific method. Is it now dogma in Cultural Studies that there exists no external world? Or that there exists an external world but science obtains no knowledge of it? In the second paragraph I declare, without the slightest evidence or argument, that ``physical `reality' [note the scare quotes] ... is at bottom a social and linguistic construct.'' Not our theoriesof physical reality, mind you, but the reality itself. Fair enough: anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.)
Throughout the article, I employ scientific and mathematical concepts in ways that few scientists or mathematicians could possibly take seriously. For example, I suggest that the ``morphogenetic field'' -- a bizarre New Age idea due to Rupert Sheldrake -- constitutes a cutting-edge theory of quantum gravity. This connection is pure invention; even Sheldrake makes no such claim. I assert that Lacan's psychoanalytic speculations have been confirmed by recent work in quantum field theory. Even nonscientist readers might well wonder what in heavens' name quantum field theory has to do with psychoanalysis; certainly my article gives no reasoned argument to support such a link.
Later in the article I propose that the axiom of equality in mathematical set theory is somehow analogous to the homonymous concept in feminist politics. In reality, all the axiom of equality states is that two sets are identical if and only if they have the same elements. Even readers without mathematical training might well be suspicious of the claim that the axiom of equality reflects set theory's ``nineteenth-century liberal origins.''
In sum, I intentionally wrote the article so that any competent physicist or mathematician (or undergraduate physics or math major) would realize that it is a spoof. Evidently the editors of Social Text felt comfortable publishing an article on quantum physics without bothering to consult anyone knowledgeable in the subject.
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/lingua_franca_v4/lingua_franca_v4.html
The actual paper: http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/transgress_v2/transgress_v2_singlefile.html
-------------------- We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
andrewss
precariously aggrandized
Registered: 08/17/07
Posts: 8,725
Loc: ohio
Last seen: 3 months, 12 days
|
Re: a cursory look at postmodernism.... [Re: illadescent]
#13789571 - 01/15/11 02:15 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
illadescent said: Post-modern is not referring to modern as the present day (although today is modern). Modern is referring to the 1950's and 60's, etc. when a lot of new inventions like tv's, cars, phones, radios, etc. were invented with the industrial revolution. These times were seen as modern, as opposed to the old days. However, if you look at the mess things are right now, with the economy and environment, you can see that modernity was not exactly a progressing line of human evolution. I mean, despite all the technologies, we still work more than ever, are in a bad recession, have polluted the environment drastically, and are constantly fighting. Just look at the politics in the US for example: We have the extreme Right-wing, that has capitalistic and supposedly christian ideals, and on the other hand, we have the Left-wing, which claims is supposed to be more for the people, but really is just a bureaucracy, an extension of the Right-wing... so we actually have no political party in the US other than the corporate-capitalist-politician party. The Left-wing is just a mockery of what a true working class party would be. The Right-Wingers have been for the most part duped into thinking they will be richer by voting Republican, when in fact, Republicans take away social programs and invest in companies that export jobs. Guess I got a little side-tracked into politics but I think it's relevant.
-------------------- Jesus loves you.
|
|