5 ms·

Nowadays postmodernism is mostly used to portray someone and then deploy a critique. It is a rhetorical offensive tool. I understand your need to defend left-l

by 131012 10y ago

Nowadays postmodernism is mostly used to portray someone and then deploy a critique. It is a rhetorical offensive tool. I understand your need to defend left-leaning coders and to understand the ideological underpinnings of modern science, but I suggest you update your conceptual framework, just as you should be wary using an unsupported browser.

jschwartzi 10y ago
Update it to what, I wonder?
- danharaj 10y ago
  "Objectivity", "rationalism", "freedom", or some other totally non-ideological word, I'm sure.
  - 131012 10y ago
    My point is that I know no contemporary scholar claiming to be postmodernist and I am not aware of recent efforts to build on this theory. I might err, as it is impossible to read everything. What I have witnessed is that people use postmodernism as a strawman, usually in a reactionary stance. This article is no exception, even if it brings some interesting points debated in other comments. As a serious answer to a somewhat rhetorical question: Some have suggested realism and I find their endeavor interesting. This book is one good example. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674004122&content=reviews http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674004122&co...
    - danharaj 10y ago
      That's probably because postmodernism isn't a theory. It's a very broad term that encompasses many, many responses to Modernism and the politics of that era. Critical theory is alive and well, especially in law. I do love me some good critical theory since it's effective application can dismantle most ideologies that refuse to acknowledge their basis in violence. I don't think anyone is a "critical theorist" but it's certainly a tool many scholars use. Postmodernism had a lot of fruits. Some of them are still perfectly juicy and nutritious and some turned out to be bitter and indigestible. Certainly, I would prefer to discuss the weirdest pomo over the vulgar scientism that's popular around here :)

by 131012 10y ago

jschwartzi 10y ago

Update it to what, I wonder?

danharaj 10y ago
"Objectivity", "rationalism", "freedom", or some other totally non-ideological word, I'm sure.
- 131012 10y ago
  My point is that I know no contemporary scholar claiming to be postmodernist and I am not aware of recent efforts to build on this theory. I might err, as it is impossible to read everything. What I have witnessed is that people use postmodernism as a strawman, usually in a reactionary stance. This article is no exception, even if it brings some interesting points debated in other comments. As a serious answer to a somewhat rhetorical question: Some have suggested realism and I find their endeavor interesting. This book is one good example. http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674004122&content=reviews http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674004122&co...
  - danharaj 10y ago
    That's probably because postmodernism isn't a theory. It's a very broad term that encompasses many, many responses to Modernism and the politics of that era. Critical theory is alive and well, especially in law. I do love me some good critical theory since it's effective application can dismantle most ideologies that refuse to acknowledge their basis in violence. I don't think anyone is a "critical theorist" but it's certainly a tool many scholars use. Postmodernism had a lot of fruits. Some of them are still perfectly juicy and nutritious and some turned out to be bitter and indigestible. Certainly, I would prefer to discuss the weirdest pomo over the vulgar scientism that's popular around here :)