3 ms·
Luckily it is also not terribly important what those intellectuals think. The large majority of academics are not engaged in these games, but working on serious
by orbifold 6y ago
Luckily it is also not terribly important what those intellectuals think. The large majority of academics are not engaged in these games, but working on serious science like theoretical physics, mathematics, biology and politely ignore them.
Also in case you are not aware, there already is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-postmodernism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-postmodernism, I'm sure they will come up with Post-post-postmodernism soon enough.
- dang 6y agoThey would have gone on as before no matter what, so this objection doesn't carry any charge. The old always continues alongside the new, individual practitioners almost never change their minds, and institutions have inertia. (I'm not saying that "serious science" is the "old" while postmodernism is the "new"—I'm just saying that if it were, someone would still be making this objection.) Reductionist putdowns don't add anything; they're just a way of saying that you think X is good and Y is bad. If you wanted to look for interesting examples of the postmodernists' influence, the social sciences would be a better place. One can hear echoes of their critiques in, for example, the reproducibility crisis. If your point is that postmodernism was dominated by fashion and cant, sure. That was clear decades ago. But it doesn't follow that there was nothing there, and one ought not to throw the baby out with the bullshit. People often dislike something not because of what it got wrong, but because of what it got right.
- 082349872349872 6y agoIs Habermas worth reading to attempt to figure out what postmodernism got right?