4 ms·

I've done well by staying clear of anyone airing their thoughts about post-modernity in the past 15 years. (perhaps with the exception of some very few individu

I've done well by staying clear of anyone airing their thoughts about post-modernity in the past 15 years. (perhaps with the exception of some very few individuals like Zizek). This is because of the constant efforts from conservative pseudo-philosopher's like Stephen Hicks[0] (who on his YT channel hasn't shied away from inviting neo-Nazis to talk about the subject) all the way to JP[1] who do not understand the topic yet enjoy discrediting and twist the ideas of post-modernity. The odd thing is that these ideas have not been traditionally linked to the left. I find most people who have an opinion about the subject often have not studied them, nor have they read any (or very few) of the original thinkers, and rather form their minds by listening to condensed misrepresentations in tweet-storms, etc. [0] https://crookedtimber.org/2020/03/04/rightwing-postmodernism/ https://crookedtimber.org/2020/03/04/rightwing-postmodernism... [1] https://lachlanrdale.medium.com/analysing-jordan-petersons-views-on-postmodernism-e63ef288680 https://lachlanrdale.medium.com/analysing-jordan-petersons-v...

eeZah7Ux 6y ago
peterson is an excellent example of pseudo-philosophy. Unfortunately the HN crowd appears to be an easy prey, based on all the downvotes you are getting...
mancerayder 6y ago
It seems that applied postmodernism takes a very anti-materialist stance that rankles left wing (old school) progressives and centrist liberals as well. Standpoint Theory and Social Constructivism contradict materialist conceptions of knowledge and power, and they contradict classical liberal ideals of progress. Also, we often see criticisms of social constructivism as "alt right" and the evidence for this are people who are on the right. But there are plenty of people on the Left as well who criticize applied postmodernism and it seems they get swept up unfairly in labels.
jonathanstrange 6y ago
I agree with you and don't understand why you're being downvoted. "Post-modernity" has become almost entirely a straw-man (for bizarre political reasons), as the debate between Zizek and JP illustrates nicely. I mean, JP tried hard, but why would a psychologist agree to participate in an online debate about a very complicated topic in philosophy about which he has read almost nothing in the first place?
- DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
  reflecting on my comment I realize it could perhaps be construed as an attack on OP (specifically my dismissal of anyone with an opinion on the topic the past 15 years). But it wasn't meant like that. I am so deep in my habit of reading only old books and original thinkers, that I forget people don't share this passion. My habit makes me automatically dismiss content generated by anyone still alive or any book that is displayed as new release in a bookshop etc. Secondly I guess it's always a gamble to mention JP no matter in what light on HN since it is considered flame-bait. However IMHO it's impossible to separate the political element from the discussion about post-modernity (whether it's PM in art _or_ philosophy - though oddly those who don't grasp the philosophy also don't get the art). c'est la vie :)

eeZah7Ux 6y ago

peterson is an excellent example of pseudo-philosophy. Unfortunately the HN crowd appears to be an easy prey, based on all the downvotes you are getting...

mancerayder 6y ago

It seems that applied postmodernism takes a very anti-materialist stance that rankles left wing (old school) progressives and centrist liberals as well. Standpoint Theory and Social Constructivism contradict materialist conceptions of knowledge and power, and they contradict classical liberal ideals of progress. Also, we often see criticisms of social constructivism as "alt right" and the evidence for this are people who are on the right. But there are plenty of people on the Left as well who criticize applied postmodernism and it seems they get swept up unfairly in labels.

jonathanstrange 6y ago

I agree with you and don't understand why you're being downvoted. "Post-modernity" has become almost entirely a straw-man (for bizarre political reasons), as the debate between Zizek and JP illustrates nicely. I mean, JP tried hard, but why would a psychologist agree to participate in an online debate about a very complicated topic in philosophy about which he has read almost nothing in the first place?

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
reflecting on my comment I realize it could perhaps be construed as an attack on OP (specifically my dismissal of anyone with an opinion on the topic the past 15 years). But it wasn't meant like that. I am so deep in my habit of reading only old books and original thinkers, that I forget people don't share this passion. My habit makes me automatically dismiss content generated by anyone still alive or any book that is displayed as new release in a bookshop etc. Secondly I guess it's always a gamble to mention JP no matter in what light on HN since it is considered flame-bait. However IMHO it's impossible to separate the political element from the discussion about post-modernity (whether it's PM in art _or_ philosophy - though oddly those who don't grasp the philosophy also don't get the art). c'est la vie :)