6 ms·
Modernism is Descartes` "I will find a single indisputable axiom and can prove everything knowable from there." His axiom? "Cogito ergo sum." Postmodernism i
by idontpost 8y ago
Modernism is Descartes` "I will find a single indisputable axiom and can prove everything knowable from there." His axiom? "Cogito ergo sum."
Postmodernism is rooted in the notion that there is no indisputable base axiom from which we can build our understanding of the world. It's unprovable assumptions all the way down. The consequences for this, if you accept it (you don't have to, but you're going to have a hell of a time proving you're right), are ENORMOUS and affect virtually every field of human understanding.
In the sciences we tend to start from the assumption that what we measure is real. As a practical matter, that's fine, but there is no sound rational basis for that assumption. It's an unprovable assumption.
All of our value systems (and by extension, our social systems) are founded on unprovable assumptions.
This is the essence of postmodernism, in so many words. There are no sound assumptions. The best we can do is say what follows from one assumption or another, but we can never say which conclusion is right because we can never say which assumption is right.
The implications of this can be particularly disturbing for rule-oriented individuals, but that doesn't make it wrong. It's irrational to claim that some assumptions are better than others without some basis (in which case, they are no longer assumptions).
- manyoso 8y agoThank you. One of the best comments I have ever seen on this forum.
- andrewflnr 8y agoApparently I'm a postmodernist. Interesting.
- PinkMilkshake 8y agoOr you might be a pragmatist.
- hueving 8y agoIf you subscribe to postmodernism then there is no such thing as an 'irrational' claim. All of the observations and logic another person may be using to make the claim are all equally likely to be valid/invalid and claiming otherwise is just forcing your opinions of truth on them.
- marcosdumay 8y agoOh, there is such thing. The fact that no axiom stands by itself does not change the fact that when you subscribe to a set of axioms, you can't deny their consequences. What is rational merely changes, and honestly, the older definition always felt kind of crazy.
- 2muchcoffeeman 8y agoIn the sciences we tend to start from the assumption that what we measure is real. As a practical matter, that's fine, but there is no sound rational basis for that assumption. It's an unprovable assumption. Can you show that what we measure is not real? If you can’t prove anything one way or the other, who cares? Why even bother with this line of thinking?
- pell 8y agoWhy exactly is 1 + 1 = 2? Yes, postmodernism is in a sense very theoretical and I would also say the word itself has been misused or used too broadly in ways, but the essense of it definitely is a step further from the previous default.
- 2muchcoffeeman 8y agoMaybe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principia_Mathematica https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principia_Mathematica
- pell 8y agoGödel countered this with the incompleteness theorems. If you're interested, have a look here: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/
- Alex3917 8y ago> Can you show that what we measure is not real? Yes, just buy any book on the epistemology of measurement.
- idontpost 8y ago> Can you show that what we measure is not real? Do you realize how nonsensical that question is? I cannot show by measurement that I cannot show things by measurement. It's tautological. Postmodernism doesn't assert that measurements aren't real. It asserts that we cannot know if they are. It is, in a sense, an extension of epistemological skepticism to its extreme conclusion.
- PinkMilkshake 8y agoI think you are giving postmodernism too much credit. It's whole premise is a non problem. Looking back on it's history, it's a politically and religiously motivated ideology to push anti-enlightenment values that coated itself in esoteric language to avoid scrutiny. It's not a well thought out philosophy, because they reject the very thing that would allow that to happen, reason. Empiricism solved this issue. You will very quickly learn if your assumptions are wrong by testing them in reality. This is what is meant by "feels over reals" and the opposite. Your assumptions, beliefs, or axioms - no matter how fondly held - will be crushed under the infinite weight of reality.
- Alex3917 8y ago> it's a politically and religiously motivated ideology to push anti-enlightenment values Modernism is closer to being a parody of enlightenment values. I mean do you really think that Descartes, who supposedly came up with most of his ideas while sick in bed and staring at a spider on his wall, would think it was a good idea for everyone to get their news from the Facebook news feed?
- idontpost 8y agoI think your biases are showing. I don't really buy the postmodernist argument, and more or less agree with Empiricism. However, I don't think you can dismiss the postmodernist argument. I cannot prove that Empiricism is correct. > Empiricism solved this issue. You will very quickly learn if your assumptions are wrong by testing them in reality. This is what is meant by "feels over reals" and the opposite. Your assumptions, beliefs, or axioms - no matter how fondly held - will be crushed under the infinite weight of reality. This is simply begging the question -- whether reality is real. That's not a question you can just skip over if you're claiming to be rigorous in your analysis.