The Greatest Intellectual Scam of All-Time: French Postmodernism

by cofty 99 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Pistoff

  While what Derrida was on about is subject to ENDLESS debate, my view of Derrida's contribution is summed up pretty well from the wiki:

  1. A desire to contribute to the re-evaluation of all western values, built on the 18th century Kantian critique of reason, and carried forward to the 19th century, in its more radical implications, by Kierkegaard and Nietzsche.
  2. An assertion that texts outlive their authors, and become part of a set of cultural habits equal to, if not surpassing, the importance of authorial intent. (italics added)
     
  3. A re-valuation of certain classic western dialectics: poetry vs. philosophy, reason vs. revelation, structure vs. creativity, episteme vs. techne, etc.

  This idea, that texts outlive their authors, and exceed their authorial intent, seems like a jugular issue for ex-witnesses, and those who have left or are still influenced by Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.
• 

  WhatshallIcallmyself

  slimboyfat -

  Just for clarity, why is post modernism (of any flavour) relevant in discussions about the natural sciences?

  Also, will you really not affirm that the earth is not flat?

  Thanks

  
  
• 

  Pistoff

  The OP contains quotations from three po. mo. writers. They are pretentious in the extreme and totally devoid of content.
  

  As the Dude (or the duderino, if you are not into the whole brevity thing) would say, Like, that's just your opinion, man.

  The po. mo. writers all have something to say, they all have at least one coherent idea, relating to signifier and signified.
• 

  slimboyfat

  What Shall I call myself? The question of the earth being flat is a diversion Cofty uses whenever he doesn't want to discuss other important stuff. It's a shame to let him get away with it. Of course the earth is not flat. But then no view of world should be regarded as final. There are things we think about the world now which will be discarded in future. We don't know which ones. Perhaps we will discover that assigning a shape to the planet is ill conceived in some way. Don't ask me how, that's the point. We don't know what it is about our current view of the world that will be revised or why. Plus there are meaningful senses in which the world is flat. The worm eye view. Why is the worm's view worth less than human? I've not had an answer except being told it's a stupid question. Christianity was based on the view that God's view is paramount. The enlightenment was based on the view that man's view is paramount. Postmodernism suggests that no single view provides privileged access to the truth.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Sometimes I think my beliefs have changed a lot. But when I read this thread it actually strikes me how little my views have changed in the last decade. I wouldn't use the words "apostate narrative" now, but I wouldn't completely disavow the idea either. The rest I pretty much agree with. Didier's OP here is my favourite on this site ever. Maybe newer forum members would like to have a look at it.

  https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/134324/nothing
  
• 

  cofty

  Orphan Crow - Gad Saad is an intellectual. He is not some internet jockey poking fun at things he can't understand. He has read lots of postmodern literature and isn't afraid to point out the Emperor's dangling genitalia.

  Why is the worm's view worth less than human? - SBF

  There you go.

  This began on a thread where I accurately observed that the fact of evolution was as certain as the fact that the earth is not flat. SBF interrupted to object - not about evolution but about the assumption about the shape of the earth. Later in a different conversation he interrupted with his accusations of "scientism" and asserted that the perspective of a worm is just as valid as that of an astronaut. I genuinely thought he was taking the piss. Now I see where this sort of anti-scientific deconstructionism is coming from.

  Pistoff I get your points totally. Where I refuse to cede ground is when postmodernism strays from debating literature and pretends it has something interesting to say about the natural sciences.

  Here is Alan Sokal's comment about his own hoax article that was published in a po. mo. journal.

  In the second paragraph I declare without the slightest evidence or argument, that "physical 'reality' (note the scare quotes)... is at bottom a social and linguistic construct." Not our theories of physical reality, mind you, but the reality itself. Fair enough. Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. I live on the twenty-first floor.
  
• 

  slimboyfat

  How do you know what he's read? He couldn't even identify Husserl. I can't imagine. What's more, he seems to be proud of his ignorance. Precisely the attitude you lambast in creationists. He most clearly doesn't understand what he's talking about. The only reason you can't see that is because you don't know what he's talking about either!
• 

  OrphanCrow

  cofty: Orphan Crow - Gad Saad is an intellectual. He is not some internet jockey poking fun at things he can't understand. He has read lots of postmodern literature and isn't afraid to point out the Emperor's dangling genitalia.

  Gaad is an evolutionary behavioral psychologist. Educated at Concordia University in Montreal. I am familiar with what that means. And, I highly doubt if he has embarked on an in depth study of post modernist political theory. I could be wrong, mind you...but his video speaks for itself

  
  
• 

  cofty

  I highly doubt if he has embarked on an in depth study of post modernist political theory - OC

  Pomo might have something interesting to say about literature or politics. It has no place in the natural sciences.

  When somebody makes a simple statement about the fact that the earth is not flat and a disciple of Deridda interrupts to plead that the perspective of a worm deserves consideration we are in the domain of naked Emperors.
  
  
• 

  OrphanCrow

  cofty: Pomo might have something interesting to say about literature or politics. It has no place in the natural sciences.

  Where post modernism has a place in natural sciences is in the position of critiquing it. The premise of pomo is that a discipline, such as Gaad follows, neglects to consider the cultural bias of the one proposing the behavioral theory. The hypotheses, used by evolutionary behaviorists such as Gaad, come from the position of advancing the modernist narrative - the "Grand Narrative" - as opposed to considering the actual fragmented nature of the human experience.

  Science is political.