3 ms·
> The postmodernists worshipped Nietzsche; he was their lodestar. > deconstruction is fine, but what are you adding? This makes me think that Nietzsche would
by afiori 6y ago
> The postmodernists worshipped Nietzsche; he was their lodestar.
> deconstruction is fine, but what are you adding?
This makes me think that Nietzsche would have despised post-modernism. As if they copied his method but not his intentions.
> And yet...for all the obscurantism and obvious bullshit, the Sokal hoax and everything else—I came to the conclusion that the postmodernists touched something deeper than their critics, something which we have yet to reckon with.
This is something I deeply agree with. In my interpretation that central topic was essentially Nietzsche's "god is dead" and the following loss of center (both individually and collectively).
But then Jung's answer to those problems are superior in every sense, especially in the context of how to approach it from an individual perspective.
This was not the best written comment, but in many sense I have been significantly disappointed by post-modernism especially because I can see a lot of potential unrealized value in it.
- dang 6y ago> This makes me think that Nietzsche would have despised post-modernism. As if they copied his method but not his intentions. Maybe yes, because Nietzsche's real interest was in a positive program. On the other hand, I feel like Nietzsche is more unpredictable and delicate than our image of him. He's quicksilver. If he had continued, he would have gone to unexpected places, so we can't really say. Foucault in his final years was more interested in a positive program as well. There's a great article (discussed on HN in the past) about Foucault taking LSD in Death Valley with some LA friends, and changing his outlook as a result. Unfortunately he didn't live long enough to do more than leave pointers.