Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 03 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Grantaire, Moderator

As I understand it at this point, it was the reaction to the twentieth century ideas of structuralism- so it went against those ideas.

But it's odd, sometimes I see every day things, and have the thought that it looks rather postmodernist. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 04 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

'Post-modernism' is a big term to define! I think the simplest way to look at it is in terms of norms. Norms are the little rules, the procedural repetitions that characterize everything we do, and make it possible to determine whether we're doing it poorly or well. Now at some point toward the end of the 19th century, thinkers and artists began to become very self-conscious of the norms that govern representation. They took Kant's point that genius remakes the rules seriously. Suddenly the rules that implicitly govern, say, perspective in painting, began to seem 'tyrannical.' Why have a consistent vanishing point? Why have a consistent perspective at all? Why not take multiple perspectives on a face and combine them in a single image? Why use canvas? Why use paint? Why compose anything at all? Why not just find something and slap it on a pedestal?

When the rules become explicit, you suddenly realize that you're following them, and you can decide to do something different. So long as the rule remain implicit, it doesn't seem like you're following at all. You're just doing things how they're done.

Post-modernism arises out of this self-consciousness, this making explicit, of representational norms. The rule of thumb is that a work is post-modern to the degree to which it follows or defects from the norms of representation.

Post-structuralism, which eventually gave post-modernism its primary philosophical rationale, is closely related. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 05 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Grantaire, Moderator

Aren't they then by following the post-modernist ideas, subtly following those rules that go against following the traditional representational norms?

Also, are writers such as Foucault and Derrida post-modernists or post-structuralists? view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 05 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

Aren't they then by following the post-modernist ideas, subtly following those rules that go against following the traditional representational norms?


You bet. Personally, I think post-modernism hit the end of its road sometime ago. Defecting from received norms is all well and fine, but there's certainly nothing innately original about it, and it's as prone to following into implicit patterns of repetition as any other approach - especially if it's taken up without any real understanding.

There's also the problem you find in fine art, where the defection from received norms has gone so far that the resulting works are largely incomprehensible to the vast majority. Postmodernism has literally succeeded in removing art from the community, and leaving only ornament and commodities in its wake.

Then there's the 'practice/standard' problem. Without clear norms, there can be no clear standards, and without clear standards, there is no way to define a practice as a practice.

Also, are writers such as Foucault and Derrida post-modernists or post-structuralists?


Post-structuralists, so-called because they succeeded the structuralisms of Saussure, Levi-Strauss, Althusser, and others, which were so modish in French academia in the early 60's. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 05 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Grantaire, Moderator

Okay, I get what you're saying now.

You bet. Personally, I think post-modernism hit the end of its road sometime ago. Defecting from received norms is all well and fine, but there's certainly nothing innately original about it, and it's as prone to following into implicit patterns of repetition as any other approach - especially if it's taken up without any real understanding.


So, if you think the post-modernist era ended sometime ago, what do you think is the philosophical wave of the present, or the one that will likely be next?

I see nothing wrong with post-modernism, at least in the sense that by going along with long-held assumptions, there are many things to overlook- at least in the sense of deconstructionism, looking into the multiple meanings and interpretations. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 06 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Faelcind Il Danach, Peralogue

I haven't studied the philosophical history of it much but within anthropology its basically boils down to the idea that their is no objective truth and all hypothesis's are equally valid. The funny thing is this usually only applies as long as you subscribe to the same liberal social agenda of most post modernist. Keep in mind I saw this as uber liberals its just the intellectual dishonesty I find really irratating. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 06 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

That's typically how the post-modern finds expression, Faelcind: in varying forms of relativism, usually with some ersatz emancipatory interpretation attached. The bottomline, though, is that it suits the facist as well as the liberal. I could go on and on about the corrosive effects of this...

I don't think anything has come along to replace post-modernism yet, Grantaire. I don't have a clue as to what the 'next big thing' will be.

I see nothing wrong with post-modernism, at least in the sense that by going along with long-held assumptions, there are many things to overlook- at least in the sense of deconstructionism, looking into the multiple meanings and interpretations.


I'm not sure what you mean here... view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 06 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Grantaire, Moderator

I'm not sure what you mean here...


I mean that, although you see post-modernism as something that's going to go, it did have its good aspects too. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 06 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

Ah, but that is for history to decide! It certainly exploded the boundaries of what was possible in the beginning, but I think it quickly developed into a blind alley, both philosophically and artistically. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 07 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Faelcind Il Danach, Peralogue

With in anthropology I think Post modernism did encourage people to consider the power of ideas in shaping human behavior which was important but it took that idea far to far. The power of ideas is the least powerfull explanation of human behavior behind biology and economics. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 07 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

Do you mean French post-structuralism, Faelcind?

The single biggest problem with this family of philosophies is that they have no way of accounting for the obvious cognitive differences between claims. Even worse, when misunderstood (which is easy to do) they lend the impression that cognitive differences are at best, apparent, and at worst, the expression of some oppressive social apparatus.

Since our ability to arbitrate between competing claims is - to put it mildly - crucial, I'd say this makes them disastrous. And I say this as someone who spent almost ten years as a 'Branch Derridean.' view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 09 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by Faelcind Il Danach, Peralogue

That may be its philosophical root within athropology I have usually seen it refered to as Post moderism or Post proccesualism.
One of my best friends is Philosophy major he stated the problem with that perspective as single statement "Nothing is true." The statement invalidates itself. view post


Can someone clarify Postmodernism for me? posted 09 March 2005 in Philosophy DiscussionCan someone clarify Postmodernism for me? by RevCasy, Candidate

I've always associated post-modernism (in the wider sense) with self-consciousness. It seems to me that this is the defining characteristic of post-modern art, literature, ect.

I also think that the obsessive concern with self-awarness or self-analysis, with second-guessing in other words, largely destroyed the ability of the post-modernist to function intuitively or spontaneously. Thus the common sense that post-modernism is dry, or is pure, dead intellectualism, without feeling or only with the feelings arising from self-consciousness (i.e. angst). view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown