4 ms·

Your point being? Waving the makings of an ad hominem in their direction doesn’t discount their entire philosophies. Postmodernists and post-structuralists are

Your point being? Waving the makings of an ad hominem in their direction doesn’t discount their entire philosophies. Postmodernists and post-structuralists are used and cited all across the Arts outside of philosophy, particularly in literary theory.

Der_Einzige 2y ago
A significant portion of the humanities is literally poisoned by Postmodernism/Post-structuralism/Critical Theory. Yes. We call a lot of these fields "Grievance Studies". They're all bunk in the same way that Chiropractors are - despite many "authoritative" insurance companies buying into the scam. Let's open up a random quote from one of the champions of the Pomo movement, Deleuze and Guattari, in their famous work "Anti-oedipus": "we are all handymen: each with his little machines. For every organ-machine, an energy-machine: all the time, flows and interruptions. Judge Schreber has sunbeams in his ass. A solar anus. And rest assured that it works: Judge Schreber feels something, produces something, and is capable of explaining the process theoretically. Something is produced: the effects of a machine, not mere metaphors." You might respond with "Oh this quote is out of context, they're satirizing freud and Freud's reading of Daniel Paul Schreber, a German judge, trying to go beyond him" except that their initial OG champion, Freud, was literally 100% wrong to the point that no one can find ANY experimental evidence for the actual existence of the Oedipus[1] OR Electra[2] Complex or any of the rest of the nonsense that Freud, Jung, Lacan, or any of their disciples peddled through the academy. French post-modernism/post-strcturalism is so incoherent that trying to argue against it is a category error as it makes no claim to exist the same realm as reason (a hegemonic concept ignored by them), rather, it is poetry by another name - and it's particularly poor poetry. The academy would be better off disavowing it, as it's produced nothing of value except an army of unemployable ivory tower elitist "revolutionaries". [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electra_complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electra_complex
- gizajob 2y ago
  I’ll respond with: this doesn’t constitute an argument either.
sramsay 2y ago
Yeah, my first reaction is that this list is more-or-less the philosophy an American lit. scholar would be expected to know. Heavy on continental philosophy, hermeneutics, recastings of traditional metaphysics, neo-Marxism . . . way less Anglo-American analytical stuff, but some.

Der_Einzige 2y ago

A significant portion of the humanities is literally poisoned by Postmodernism/Post-structuralism/Critical Theory. Yes. We call a lot of these fields "Grievance Studies". They're all bunk in the same way that Chiropractors are - despite many "authoritative" insurance companies buying into the scam. Let's open up a random quote from one of the champions of the Pomo movement, Deleuze and Guattari, in their famous work "Anti-oedipus": "we are all handymen: each with his little machines. For every organ-machine, an energy-machine: all the time, flows and interruptions. Judge Schreber has sunbeams in his ass. A solar anus. And rest assured that it works: Judge Schreber feels something, produces something, and is capable of explaining the process theoretically. Something is produced: the effects of a machine, not mere metaphors." You might respond with "Oh this quote is out of context, they're satirizing freud and Freud's reading of Daniel Paul Schreber, a German judge, trying to go beyond him" except that their initial OG champion, Freud, was literally 100% wrong to the point that no one can find ANY experimental evidence for the actual existence of the Oedipus[1] OR Electra[2] Complex or any of the rest of the nonsense that Freud, Jung, Lacan, or any of their disciples peddled through the academy. French post-modernism/post-strcturalism is so incoherent that trying to argue against it is a category error as it makes no claim to exist the same realm as reason (a hegemonic concept ignored by them), rather, it is poetry by another name - and it's particularly poor poetry. The academy would be better off disavowing it, as it's produced nothing of value except an army of unemployable ivory tower elitist "revolutionaries". [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electra_complex https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electra_complex

gizajob 2y ago
I’ll respond with: this doesn’t constitute an argument either.

sramsay 2y ago

Yeah, my first reaction is that this list is more-or-less the philosophy an American lit. scholar would be expected to know. Heavy on continental philosophy, hermeneutics, recastings of traditional metaphysics, neo-Marxism . . . way less Anglo-American analytical stuff, but some.