TBH, I've never been able to form a coherent picture of "postmedernism," I don't really understand what either proponents or oponents mean when refering to it.

TBH, I've never been able to form a coherent picture of "postmedernism," I don't really understand what either proponents or oponents mean when refering to it. That said, I think the place where postmodernism enters normal (non academic) human thought is not disimilar to funkier parts enlightenment era philosophy. Take Des Cartes famous meditations, remembered mostly for his "stage 1" of rejecting all knowledge of anything but ones existence. He then attempts (IMO fails) to rebuild a foundation of knowledge based on pure reason, without any faulty assumptions. What impact did des cartes have on normal people's thought? Almost no one is convinced by his proof of god. No one is convinced to reject all knowledge and stop there. People are still better for going through the exercise. Challenging assumptions & knowledge authorities. Aknowledging knowledge dependencies, how do I know this. Des Carte's solipsism doesn't end anywhere concrete, but it opens the door to less ambituous but much more practical epistimology like Karl Popper's. Likewise, I don't think that enlightement (and subsequent) ethics goes anywhere concrete. Utilitarianism, deontology or whatnot all lead to their own little absurd conclusions if you go down the rabbit hole. Very few people "adopt" them. But, the process does sometimes result in usable ethical frames for situations that do not involve a fat man in a cart. So that's essentially (oops, no essences!), a lot of modern philosophy in a nutshell (are nutshells structures?). Reject earlier thoughts. Attempt to rebuild with mixed success. Meanwhile, get a better understanding of the limits of knowledge. So... postmodernism... Like I said, fuzzy on what postmodern means...... But....I think it's a similar contribution. Reject existing frames. Criticize traditional systems. Try to find alternatives. Hopefully evolve in the process. I think postmodernism opens up some doors to ideas like Yuval Noah Harari's description of human history. A big part of his ideas start with recognizing "fictions," all the things which aren't really real. Things that were made up by people. Tribes, nations, corporations, named places, kingships.... He then asks what are these for? When were they invented? What role do they play.. Postmodernism probably contributed something towards this way of thinking, or the public interest in it. As to the methods used by postmodernist academics.... I've got no idea.