Humanism

[DavisModerator]

This is not limited to philosophy but it is extremely common in this field:

How many people who talk with confidence about topics they’ve never read a book on (or at the very least a detailed summary)…but at best skimmed the intro of the wikipedia page or saw a short youtube video about it.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

Lol.  But the “post-modern neo-marxists” don’t do themselves any favours by acting crazy.  Some of their ideas, like Western society being institutionally racist, and intersectionality, are just starting to filter through to me, after having been put off the whole thing for so long.  On the other hand, I can’t help thinking that identity politics, while it has some logical appeal, is racist and divisive in itself.  I think it’s more a vehicle for narcissists to cause trouble and bully people.

[DavisModerator]

Simon…post-modern neo-marxists don’t exists. There is not such thing. I don’t know how you can be criticizing people who logically could not exist even if they wanted to. You are critiquing a fantasy. It’s not even a strawman…it’s some ghostly figures. It would be like complaining about pork eating vegans. Did you not read the actual cartoon? The only person who complains about post-modern neo-marxists is one of the Earths stupidest false intellectuals who was complaining about such people, despite the fact they cannot exist, he never defined them and just pointed to some people, none of whom claimed (or even could claim) to be post-modern neo-marxists. They are literally incompatible categories. It was your hero by the way, the racist, homophobic, sexist pseudo-intellectual you keep pretending isn’t any of those things. He also has never read a book on any of the topics he critiques.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

That’s why I put it in quotes.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

I was once in a debate with two students of theology. When one of them introduced the term “Postmodern Hermeneutics” into the conversation I replied, “Any exegesis of the Bible brings about the modernist conception of “Exit Jesus”.

I was drinking a “Grande Latte” at the time, which was then a new thing. Not a simulacrum of a regular cup of coffee, just a modern take on one, as if new life had been breathed into the theater of coffee consumption and elevated it to a state of hyperreality. As the two students sipped their regular coffees, I thought to myself that they were but mere effigies of the dearth of our cultural past. As we departed, I could not help but wonder if all knowledge is nothing but information and if this question in itself is but irreducibly problematic in a dialectical sense. When I got home, I stared at my new coffee spoon for a time (how long I don’t recall) before adding it to my collection in the “Prufrock” drawer.

[UnseenParticipant]

The problem with a lot of the postmodernist narrative is the same as the problem with other aspects of the avant garde, and that was once expressed this way: “The problem with the avant garde is that there is no distinguishable difference between the avant garde and a parody of the avant garde.”

Cases in point: the music of Frank Zappa and the painting of Salvador Dali. Both artists were hugely accomplished and neither one gave us much confidence that we could ever know for sure when they were pulling our leg and when they were not.

I have much the same reaction when I (try to) read postmodernist polemics.

Here’s a sample from the Post-Modern (Bullshit) Generator:

“Reality is impossible,” says Sontag; however, according to Drucker, it is not so much reality that is impossible, but rather the paradigm, and some would say the defining characteristic, of reality. Lacan suggests the use of the structuralist paradigm of narrative to read class. However, Sartre’s analysis of postdialectic libertarianism implies that consciousness is capable of significance.

Foucault promotes the use of precapitalist socialism to challenge class divisions. In a sense, the subject is interpolated into a postdialectic libertarianism that includes art as a reality.

Debord uses the term ‘precapitalist socialism’ to denote not discourse per se, but prediscourse. Therefore, Pickett[4] holds that we have to choose between subtextual desublimation and cultural rationalism.

Baudrillard uses the term ‘the cultural paradigm of expression’ to denote the role of the poet as reader. It could be said that the main theme of the works of Eco is the rubicon, and subsequent collapse, of neocapitalist society.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by  Unseen.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Did you spot Drucker or Baudrillard from my “hyperreality” reference above? I once saw Frank Zappa in concert and have been to the little Dali museum in Barcelona. I enjoyed both as experiences within themselves, like most things in life. I seldom read reviews after the event. I have no great impulse to completely deconstruct any work of art because I am not artistic enough to reach their heights. When someone asks me “What do I think the artist is trying to say”, I reply “The artist is saying it loud and clear. You should try to figure it out in your own way. When you have an opinion, we can compare notes”.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

These days, I prefer to be creative, rather than follow a particular “paradigm”.  I can’t keep up with what is going on now.  I like watching classic movies though.

[_Robert_Participant]

Whatever happen to moderation? Everything is so extreme. We have legions of full blown nationalist, racist, sexist, science denying, Jesus loving, homophobic right-wingnuts….. and…. anarchistic, gender political, guilt assuming and speech limiting, Islam coddling leftists.

If you are moderate they all hate you. Many friends actually regurgitate vile Pro-Trump memes. I avoid FB, Twitter, Fox and CNN. It’s crap.

 

[UnseenParticipant]

_Robert_ wrote:

Whatever happen to moderation? Everything is so extreme. We have legions of full blown nationalist, racist, sexist, science denying, Jesus loving, homophobic right-wingnuts….. and…. anarchistic, gender political, guilt assuming and speech limiting, Islam coddling leftists.

If you are moderate they all hate you. Many friends actually regurgitate vile Pro-Trump memes. I avoid FB, Twitter, Fox and CNN. It’s crap.

All extremists should DIAF.

[Jody LeeParticipant]

All extremists should DIAF.
@unseen

What should they do? I’m not familiar with that acronym… lol

• This reply was modified 4 years, 3 months ago by  Jody Lee.

[_Robert_Participant]

Jody Lee wrote:

All extremists should DIAF. @unseen What should they do? I’m not familiar with that acronym… lol

Die In A Fire…I think Unseen is just being extreme.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

DIAF is a postmodern term.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

Whatever happen to moderation?

Can we afford the luxury of being moderates when extremists on both sides are making so much noise?

[_Robert_Participant]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:

Whatever happen to moderation? Can we afford the luxury of being moderates when extremists on both sides are making so much noise?

Perhaps the moderate and rational people can make some noise as well.

[Author]

Posts