Postmodernism

[volatile]

Just before we go any further, could the OP please cite some examples of where postmodernists 'den[ied] the existence of an external reality'?

Baudrillard and his followers implied something of the sort, inasmuch as this may have been misconstrued by Mad and others. It would be easy to misread Simulacra and Simulacrum along these lines, and many have.

Other than that, you couldn't be more correct.

 

[athon]

Post modernism remains alive and well in pedagogical studies and approaches to education, unfortunately.

My distaste for its influence is the focus it maintained in the past to equal weighting to student views and opinions. Educational philosophies based on postmodern approaches placed constructivism at the forefront - which IMO isn't necessarily a bad thing. The problem was that all knowledge constructed through one's own experience and social values has equal validity. The idea that a student could be objectively wrong was discouraged. Many teachers found this approach difficult to do justice to and the result was a generation of students who believed that all facts and opinions were equally right, rather than all opinions had equal right to be heard and discussed.

I know this is not postmodernism in its own right, however the educational philosophies that arose from it did more damage in science education than good.

Athon

 

[Pipirr]

Volatile, would you mind giving a definition of post modernism? In a nutshell, as it were?

I understand that you have some expertise in the matter. I've always found post modernism hard to pin down, so would appreciate it if you could offer an explanation or definition.

 

[quixotecoyote]

A fair point, I suppose. But many people who dump on post-modernism don't seem to have actually read any, and thus make false conclusions. That some woos misuse, and misunderstand, philosophy I have no doubt. I'd just ask that you extend the same courtesy in checking woo claims about philosophy that you do in checking woo claims about quantum physics.

Just a quick example - the belief that women should be paid equally to men for doing the same job is a position borne out of social constructionist post-modern philosophy. It's social constructionism which presents the position that we should be sceptical that x is better than y just because it's always been that way. You all work through problems and opinions like that regularly (indeed, I'd hold that this type of relativism is important for sceptical thinking), but yet are often all too quick to disregard the contribution postmodern thought has made to the changing social climate.

My position is that it's too far gone to get back. Postmodernism has stopped being the philosophy about social constructionism and has been fully appropriated by woo interests. Outside of a select few academic institutions that still teach it in the correct manner, the original meaning of the word is lost. It's like complaining that hussy actually means housewife and shouldn't be used to describe promiscuous women.

 

[Miss Whiplash]

Interesting topic, but shouldn't this be in the philosophy section?

 

[godless dave]

Postmodernism is useful for studying art and literature, but has no relation to the real world.

 

[pchams]

Postmodernism is useful for studying art and literature, but has no relation to the real world.

Please explain why you make this claim.

 

[Mangafranga]

My position is that it's too far gone to get back. Postmodernism has stopped being the philosophy about social constructionism and has been fully appropriated by woo interests. Outside of a select few academic institutions that still teach it in the correct manner, the original meaning of the word is lost. It's like complaining that hussy actually means housewife and shouldn't be used to describe promiscuous women.

The OP referred to dead French guys. Surely this at least intends to refer to "postmodernism" as academic philosophers use the term (even if few of us in the thread (myself included) understand how they use the term).

 

[Darat]

...snip...

Just a quick example - the belief that women should be paid equally to men for doing the same job is a position borne out of social constructionist post-modern philosophy.

...snip...

Some people were making arguments that women should be equal (including being paid equal for the same work) for quite literally centuries.

(ETA: Suppose I shouldn't make such a claim without at least some support - here's a rather famous example - The Declaration of Sentiments from 1848.)

 

[Mangafranga]

Some people were making arguments that women should be equal (including being paid equal for the same work) for quite literally centuries.

They must have had long beards then (I presume even women grow beards when they reach age 200).

 

[jimtron]

Volatile, would you mind giving a definition of post modernism? In a nutshell, as it were?

I understand that you have some expertise in the matter. I've always found post modernism hard to pin down, so would appreciate it if you could offer an explanation or definition.

Yes, after reading the posts so far, I'm not sure if everyone involved would agree on a definition of the term postmodern.

eta: From the Wikipedia entry on postmodernism:

The term was coined in 1949 to describe a dissatisfaction with modern architecture, leading to the postmodern architecture movement.[5].
(snip) If used in other contexts, it is a concept without a universally accepted, short and simple definition; in a variety of contexts it is used to describe social conditions, movements in the arts, and scholarship (incl. criticism) in reaction to modernism.

 

[Mangafranga]

Yes, after reading the posts so far, I'm not sure if everyone involved would agree on a definition of the term postmodern.

From the Stanford entry on Postmodernism "That postmodernism is indefinable is a truism."

 

[Darat]

They must have had long beards then (I presume even women grow beards when they reach age 200).

 

[quixotecoyote]

Yes, after reading the posts so far, I'm not sure if everyone involved would agree on a definition of the term postmodern.

eta: From the Wikipedia entry on postmodernism:

As far as postmodernism is a reaction to modernism, it is more an extension than a rebuttal.

 

[volatile]

Well, many philosophers far more advanced than I have devoted whole books to this subject, but I'll try for you, Pipirr.

It's true, that defining post-modernism is contentious and difficult. Indeed, most of the philosophers most strongly identified with post-modern thought, such as Michael Foucault, did not self-identify as post-modern. However, let me try and explain my use of the term, which might help refute this misconception that postmodernism somehow implies "everything is equally true", which is certainly not the case.

Personally, I equate the term "post-modernism" most strongly with "post-structuralism", and it seems to be a misreading of post-structural thought which has lead to the image of post-modern thought such as the OP.

The Wiki entry on Post-Structuralism quotes Derrida, stating that "it rejects definitions that claim to have discovered absolute 'truths' or facts about the world". Whilst this might, at first glance, seem to imply that anything goes, or that post-structuralist thought inherently rejects scientific empiricism. However, the post-structuralist arguments are far more nuanced than this, and essentially seek to refute the central claim of Structuralism that rejects "the concept of human freedom and choice and focused instead on the way that human behavior is determined by various structures".

The truth that postmodernism criticises, then, is what might be shown to be constructed truth - that is, the truth of the meaning of a painting, or the truth of the rigid gendering of certain biological tropes. Post-structuralists argue that what makes a boy "a boy" is not inherent but constructed by culture and society, and they argue that meanings of art works are personal to the reader, not imposed by the artist.

It makes no claim on empiricism, per se, and tends to refer to things beyond the empirical reach of science, as Matt the Poet pointed out earlier on.

 

[volatile]

As far as postmodernism is a reaction to modernism, it is more an extension than a rebuttal.

In some respects and areas, this is true. But if you think of the term in application to architecture or design the post-modern is an implicit rejection of the rigidity "modern" tended to imply in those disciplines.

 

[volatile]

Postmodernism is useful for studying art and literature, but has no relation to the real world.

You realise that art and literature exist in, are part of, are about and indeed reflect the "real world", right? How do you separate "art and literature" from "the real world"?

 

[volatile]

I just found a rather nice summary in The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (1995, p. 708)

Post-modernism - In its broad usage, this is a 'family resemblance' term deployed in a variety if contexts (architecture, painting, music, poetry, fiction, etc.) for things which seem to be related - it at all - by a laid-back pluralism of styles and a vague desire to have done with the pretensions of high-modernist culture. In philosophical terms post-modernism shares something with the critique of Enlightenment values and truth-claims mounted by thinkers of a liberal-communitarian persuasion; also with neo-pragmatists like Richard Rorty who welcome the end of philosophy's presumptive role as a privileged, truth-telling discourse. There is another point of contact with post-modern fiction and art in the current preoccupation, among some philosophers, with themes of 'self-reflexivity', or the puzzles induced by allowing language to become the object of its own scrutiny in a kind of dizzying rhetorical regress. To this extent post-modernism might be seen as a ludic development of the so-called 'linguistic turn' that has characterised much philosophical thinking of late.

 

[brodski]

It makes no claim on empiricism, per se, and tends to refer to things beyond the empirical reach of science, as Matt the Poet pointed out earlier on.

You realise that art and literature exist in, are part of, are about and indeed reflect the "real world", right? How do you separate "art and literature" from "the real world"?

I think you pretty much answered your own question in eth quote above. It is when PoMo type philosophers (PMTPs) try to reject empiricism when it conflicts with the “reality” which the PMTP wishes to construct , that it becomes an issue for skeptics.

Feminist critique of science and engineering is a classic example (e=mc^2 being a "sexed" equation for example, or the guff about fluid dynamics not being modelled because it's too feminine and therefore intimidates male scientists and engineers)

The other issue that becomes an area fro sceptics is when PMTPs, in the same way as “scientismists” conflate “fact” with “opinion”, it was never a “fact” that women should be paid less than men. When discussing how thing sshould be ordered one is not discussing facts.

I also find it humours that you criticise people for misreading postmodernists , but the that’s just my own twisted sense of humour

 

[Mojo]

You realise that art and literature exist in, are part of, are about and indeed reflect the "real world", right? How do you separate "art and literature" from "the real world"?

That would explain why I've recently seen a homoeopath describing Neal Stephenson's Baroque Trilogy as a historical source.