13 ms·

As I said on this forum before hearing people talk about postmodernism as if it is the current "thing" within continental philosophy circles is really odd. It h

As I said on this forum before hearing people talk about postmodernism as if it is the current "thing" within continental philosophy circles is really odd. It hasn't been for a decade or more. The backlash against these methodologies has been pretty severe within continental philosophy itself. For example, Meillassoux's critique of correlationism pretty much says that the whole epistemological manoeuvres, perhaps vulgarised by postmodern turn, by which it is claimed there is nothing "real" without a human correlated to it and that "reality" cannot be truly accessed, only reality as it appears to human beings, distorted by power, ideology etc etc. There is a good description here though might be pretty high level. https://euppublishingblog.com/2014/12/12/correlationism-an-extract-from-the-meillassoux-dictionary/ https://euppublishingblog.com/2014/12/12/correlationism-an-e...

pls2halp 9y ago
The paper is from 2005, so not exactly current philosophy(I fixed the title to reflect that). I just saw this elsewhere and thought it's exploration of "five favourite rhetorical manoeuvres: Troll’s Truisms, Motte and Bailey Doctrines, Equivocating Fulcra, the Postmodernist Fox-trot and Rankly Relativising Fields" would hold true in regards to the sophistry that dominates the site and industry, even out of it's philosophical context. The Troll's Truism in particular is seen a lot in tech.
Wintamute 9y ago
Whether its a thing within current academic philosophy is by-the-by though isn't it? The issue under discussion is to what extent has postmodernism entered and undermined current popular understanding of cultural issues as well as lets say less, ah, rigorous disciplines within the humanities. Perhaps the modern exponents of continental philosophy should be doing more to export their evolved criticisms of postmodernism to the rest of the academy and wider society?
nkoren 9y ago
I don't get the impression that its relevance is due to any particular currency within actual philosophy circles, but rather because postmodernism is the motte to which the more academic strains intersectional feminism retreat when pressed -- and that very much is a "thing" in contemporary left-wing activism and internet flame wars. On the street and in less academic varietals of intersectionalism, this just consists of "you should shut the fuck up, because you are male / white / heterosexual / cisgendered / wealthy / neurotypical / had good parents / some other form of privileged that I just thought up". In more respectable garb, this gets dressed up as "your arguments have no validity, because <insert postmodernist gloss on ad hominem dismissal here>". Which is no less toxic to having any kind of rational and inclusive dialogue, and deserves to be taken down on its own terms. (Note: this is coming from someone who is firmly left-wing and even has considerable respect for many aspects of intersectional feminism when applied in a philosophical / analytical context; I just despise what it has done to the tone of left-wing activism over the last 10 years.)
- kadenshep 9y ago
  >"you should shut the fuck up, because you are male / white / heterosexual / cisgendered / wealthy / neurotypical / had good parents / some other form of privileged that I just thought up". Holy narratives bat man. That is such an inaccurate assessment of what is being discussed, I'd wager you have ulterior motivations for being so disingenuous. I feel like the "shut the fuck up" part of that is a complete misunderstanding of what happens when people who have secure livelihoods in whatever form attempt to "educate" or dismiss the complaints others have about the society they live in, even though the "educators" often have no experience with the hardships being discussed and don't see (and even worse, don't appreciate) the advantages that were given to them -- either due to aggregate "system" side-effects or just straight up inherited security (in its many forms). Or even worse, these "educators" can't even begin to abstractly reason why these complaints might have some merit. In other words, they aren't presenting arguments. There isn't some attempt to counter-reason with the complaints. The actual "shut the fuck up" comes from the "other" side, which strangely seemed to be entirely missed in your post. If you're going to try to use SJW-boogeyman talking points, just come out and do it. Don't try to dress up a turd with poorly used and understood philosophical nomenclature.
  - stult 9y ago
    Are you... are you trying to prove his point? >Holy narratives batman Postmodern narrative analysis as gloss. >you have ulterior motives for being so disingenuous Straight into the ad hominem. >when people who have secure livelihoods in whatever form attempt to "educate" or dismiss the complaints others Some other form of privilege you just thought up.
    - kadenshep 9y ago
      >Straight into the ad hominem. That's not an ad hominem. If you're going to use logical fallacies you had best understand what they are. And don't try to partially quote me to make my statements seem more definitive than they were presented. Nothing I said even remotely resembles what his point was attempting to state. And I definitely didn't just construct some random form of privilege there. What is the point of your response to my post?
mannykannot 9y ago
I did not recognize the title, but as soon as I saw the abstract, I realized that I had read this some time ago. While postmodernism may be history, this particular paper still has relevance because the rhetorical devices it critiques are timeless.
samirillian 9y ago
Meillasoux's critique of correlationism is a critique of Kant/phenomenology, not postmodernism, at all. Viz., that truth is "correlational." Meillasoux's cohort are friendly enough with postmodernists, even if they disagree. The Badiou/Meillasoux critique of postmodernism is for them believing _too much_ in absolute truth, viz., for them being platonists. I would recommend reading "The Clamor of Being" if you actually want to understand the matter.

pls2halp 9y ago

The paper is from 2005, so not exactly current philosophy(I fixed the title to reflect that). I just saw this elsewhere and thought it's exploration of "five favourite rhetorical manoeuvres: Troll’s Truisms, Motte and Bailey Doctrines, Equivocating Fulcra, the Postmodernist Fox-trot and Rankly Relativising Fields" would hold true in regards to the sophistry that dominates the site and industry, even out of it's philosophical context. The Troll's Truism in particular is seen a lot in tech.

Wintamute 9y ago

Whether its a thing within current academic philosophy is by-the-by though isn't it? The issue under discussion is to what extent has postmodernism entered and undermined current popular understanding of cultural issues as well as lets say less, ah, rigorous disciplines within the humanities. Perhaps the modern exponents of continental philosophy should be doing more to export their evolved criticisms of postmodernism to the rest of the academy and wider society?

nkoren 9y ago

I don't get the impression that its relevance is due to any particular currency within actual philosophy circles, but rather because postmodernism is the motte to which the more academic strains intersectional feminism retreat when pressed -- and that very much is a "thing" in contemporary left-wing activism and internet flame wars. On the street and in less academic varietals of intersectionalism, this just consists of "you should shut the fuck up, because you are male / white / heterosexual / cisgendered / wealthy / neurotypical / had good parents / some other form of privileged that I just thought up". In more respectable garb, this gets dressed up as "your arguments have no validity, because <insert postmodernist gloss on ad hominem dismissal here>". Which is no less toxic to having any kind of rational and inclusive dialogue, and deserves to be taken down on its own terms. (Note: this is coming from someone who is firmly left-wing and even has considerable respect for many aspects of intersectional feminism when applied in a philosophical / analytical context; I just despise what it has done to the tone of left-wing activism over the last 10 years.)

kadenshep 9y ago
>"you should shut the fuck up, because you are male / white / heterosexual / cisgendered / wealthy / neurotypical / had good parents / some other form of privileged that I just thought up". Holy narratives bat man. That is such an inaccurate assessment of what is being discussed, I'd wager you have ulterior motivations for being so disingenuous. I feel like the "shut the fuck up" part of that is a complete misunderstanding of what happens when people who have secure livelihoods in whatever form attempt to "educate" or dismiss the complaints others have about the society they live in, even though the "educators" often have no experience with the hardships being discussed and don't see (and even worse, don't appreciate) the advantages that were given to them -- either due to aggregate "system" side-effects or just straight up inherited security (in its many forms). Or even worse, these "educators" can't even begin to abstractly reason why these complaints might have some merit. In other words, they aren't presenting arguments. There isn't some attempt to counter-reason with the complaints. The actual "shut the fuck up" comes from the "other" side, which strangely seemed to be entirely missed in your post. If you're going to try to use SJW-boogeyman talking points, just come out and do it. Don't try to dress up a turd with poorly used and understood philosophical nomenclature.
- stult 9y ago
  Are you... are you trying to prove his point? >Holy narratives batman Postmodern narrative analysis as gloss. >you have ulterior motives for being so disingenuous Straight into the ad hominem. >when people who have secure livelihoods in whatever form attempt to "educate" or dismiss the complaints others Some other form of privilege you just thought up.
  - kadenshep 9y ago
    >Straight into the ad hominem. That's not an ad hominem. If you're going to use logical fallacies you had best understand what they are. And don't try to partially quote me to make my statements seem more definitive than they were presented. Nothing I said even remotely resembles what his point was attempting to state. And I definitely didn't just construct some random form of privilege there. What is the point of your response to my post?

mannykannot 9y ago

I did not recognize the title, but as soon as I saw the abstract, I realized that I had read this some time ago. While postmodernism may be history, this particular paper still has relevance because the rhetorical devices it critiques are timeless.

samirillian 9y ago

Meillasoux's critique of correlationism is a critique of Kant/phenomenology, not postmodernism, at all. Viz., that truth is "correlational." Meillasoux's cohort are friendly enough with postmodernists, even if they disagree. The Badiou/Meillasoux critique of postmodernism is for them believing _too much_ in absolute truth, viz., for them being platonists. I would recommend reading "The Clamor of Being" if you actually want to understand the matter.