tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post5351584536152699909..comments2024-03-28T17:08:15.784-07:00Comments on Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: Postmodernism: Its Family Tree and OriginsLord Keyneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-87839569891931499312015-02-09T23:55:48.165-08:002015-02-09T23:55:48.165-08:00I am not familiar with it.
If he believes the fo...I am not familiar with it. <br /><br />If he believes the following things, then it is just another form postmodernist charlatanry:<br /><br />(1) the view that there is no such thing as objective truth;<br /><br />(2) cultural relativism;<br /><br />(3) following from (2) the view that there is no such thing as objective morality;<br /><br />(4) the view that modern science is just one “narrative” that is just as “valid” as any other, and<br /><br />(5) the view that no text can have a fixed meaning intended by its author.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-4866024803128002192015-02-09T22:30:55.039-08:002015-02-09T22:30:55.039-08:00Any thoughts on Lipovetsky's hypermodernism, L...Any thoughts on Lipovetsky's hypermodernism, LK?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-89020020455984178952015-02-08T21:47:46.664-08:002015-02-08T21:47:46.664-08:00Do you think objective truth exists?
Do you think objective truth exists?<br /><br />Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-10456553651993973292015-02-08T18:41:21.633-08:002015-02-08T18:41:21.633-08:00Right. Well you're pretty much about ten years...Right. Well you're pretty much about ten years behind.<br /><br />The rest of us on the left are a little beyond whether you can or cannot tell jokes.<br /><br />But if that's what your focus is, then please carry on...I suppose that leaves the rest of us to sort out real issues.<br /><br />The left was not killed through 'postmodernism'. It was largely killed through lazy, obsequious academics that never got involved politically and instead turned their ire onto infighting. Be careful, LK, its a new generation and you won't get much sympathy from me. Because I know the type. <br /><br />Ideology and how to distract people 101. But carry on.Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-14289448666179352472015-02-08T12:45:35.191-08:002015-02-08T12:45:35.191-08:00But the universities teach new generations of the ...But the universities teach new generations of the young.<br /><br />Shouldn't it be of great concern to anyone on the non-pomo Left that young people are being taught there is no objective truth, that texts can mean anything and that natural sciences are just one "narrative" which oppress other "narratives" (e.g., creation science)?Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-69373827780480819602015-02-08T11:14:22.046-08:002015-02-08T11:14:22.046-08:00I tried to post a comment yesterday, but it seems ...I tried to post a comment yesterday, but it seems to have gotten eaten. <br /><br />While I can understand your frustration, LK, it might be helpful to keep in mind that the number of people influenced by Postmodernism is probably much smaller than the number who believe in astrology, homeopathy, "New Age" philosophy, ancient aliens, an so on. It looms large at some universities, but nowhere else.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-26445149177867969622015-02-08T10:55:53.173-08:002015-02-08T10:55:53.173-08:00I am astonished that Hegel's prose is always c...I am astonished that Hegel's prose is always clear to you.<br /><br />Here is an example of it:<br /><br /><i>“Sound is the change in the specific condition of segregation of the material parts, and in the negation of this condition; merely an abstract or an ideal ideality, as it were, of that specification. But this change, accordingly, is itself immediately the negation of the material specific subsistence; which is, therefore, real ideality of specific gravity and cohesion, i.e.–heat. The heating up of the sounding bodies, just as of beaten and or rubbed ones, is the appearance of heat, originating conceptually together with sound.”</i><br />Hegel, Philosophy of Nature, section 302<br />http://ashokarao.com/2013/02/25/wisdom_from_hegel/<br />---------------------<br />I have to tell you I see no meaning here. Sir Karl Popper famously pointed to this passage as proof of Hegel's obscurantism.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-78738181357172444852015-02-08T10:39:30.978-08:002015-02-08T10:39:30.978-08:00First, I despise Fox news or right-wing conspiracy...First, I despise Fox news or right-wing conspiracy theorists. <br /><br />Secondly, these ideas do not exclusively come from the extreme progressive mindset, of course. <br /><br />They can come from extreme right wing authoritarians, and are more dangerous from that source. They can come from extreme religious fanatics. <br /><br />But I think it is extraordinarily naive to think there is not a sector of the Left today that has become intolerant of free speech to some extent. Yes, it is often motivated by good intentions, but that does not excuse it. It is a sector that is influenced by extreme postmodernism and hostility to the best values of the Enlightenment. E.g., such people often think no objective truths exist.<br /><br />If you do not believe in objective truth, nothing in Post Keynesian economics can be true. It is self-destructive.<br /><br />There is good evidence it has had terrible effects on third world progressive movements:<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_c3cNG5ttkLord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-70832469852091042122015-02-08T10:17:03.006-08:002015-02-08T10:17:03.006-08:00Oh God... not this rubbish. You've just fallen...Oh God... not this rubbish. You've just fallen hook, line and sinker for the biggest non-argument in existence today. But pursue it if you will. And pursue your Glenn Beck-style chalkboard assessments of where the 'dangerous' ideas came from.<br /><br />I'll concern myself with actual matters. Like how austerity is giving rise to Nazis and so on. I don't take my political talking point from Rowan Atkinson, thanks. Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-37081991335098785982015-02-08T10:08:31.576-08:002015-02-08T10:08:31.576-08:00First of all, I would never ban or burn books or s...First of all, I would never ban or burn books or stop Postmodernists from speaking and writing books.<br /><br />Also, I do not say that the long dead Postmodernists's works will cause "freedom of thought and speech will disappear in the West."<br /><br />But what is of concern is that there is is an extreme progressive mindset -- sometimes allied with postmodernism -- that supports things like, e.g., government hate speech laws. <br /><br />There are plenty of people on the left who think these are violations of free speech, and a terrible path to take, and they are right. This clearly has some relation to cultural relativism, and that has come out of Postmodernism on the left.<br /><br />Some religious extremists could exploit the extreme progressive mindset to impose blasphemy laws. <br /><br />E.g., people on the Left in the UK should be very concerned indeed about this:<br /><br />http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4073997.stm<br /><br />http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9616750/Rowan-Atkinson-we-must-be-allowed-to-insult-each-other.html<br />Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-84009802966744509982015-02-08T09:56:11.286-08:002015-02-08T09:56:11.286-08:00Careful LK. You might have to start writing some n...Careful LK. You might have to start writing some nuanced genealogies. And then it might become clear that things are a little more complex than the black and white, 'good guy' versus 'bad guy' posts that you're writing.<br /><br />Also, I have never been unable to understand anything in Hegel. Not that I agree with half of it. But, like the Post-Structuralists, it is all perfectly comprehensible.<br /><br />Also for the record: many people find Kant unreadable.<br /><br />Some nuance please. Less bellicose rhetoric and Whig history.Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-79534472181343113542015-02-08T09:50:30.160-08:002015-02-08T09:50:30.160-08:00Well, I was thinking above of the type of idealism...Well, I was thinking above of the type of idealism that stems from Hegel and goes to British idealists like Green, Bosanquet, Bradley, and McTaggart. Perhaps with the exception of McTaggart, these idealists were often called "Hegelians". <br /><br />Also, I thought Sartre was not an idealist? Maybe I am mistaken. <br /><br />Also, to be fair, I think Kant's brand of idealism -- transcendental idealism -- was of a very different sort than Hegel's. <br /><br />Hegel actually rejected basic laws of logic like the law of non-contradiction, which modern Postmodernists also do. His writings were also notoriously filled with gibberish -- just like modern postmodernism writings.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-15686244413370198732015-02-08T09:49:35.400-08:002015-02-08T09:49:35.400-08:00Funny then that they've had so much influence....Funny then that they've had so much influence. I assume, as a historian, you know their impact in the history of medicine. Roy Porter's seminal work is thoroughly influenced by Foucault's own provisional excavations. Of course, Porter is not uncritical of Foucault. But we're not fascists, are we? We don't say that no one can criticise anyone else.<br /><br />We judge ideas based on what they generate. Not on whether we fully agree with them. Well, that's what a tolerant person would do. Dogmatists would attack them and write Whig histories.Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-34028863994078910702015-02-08T09:40:26.425-08:002015-02-08T09:40:26.425-08:00I will grant you that Foucault's writing is no...I will grant you that Foucault's writing is not as bad as Derrida's.<br /><br />Nevertheless, Foucault still has the same ridiculous ideas and his theories are fundamentally flawed. Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-79359122319356157662015-02-08T09:38:29.386-08:002015-02-08T09:38:29.386-08:00"People on the left who really value freedom ..."People on the left who really value freedom of thought and speech should be deeply opposed to Postmodernism."<br /><br />Lol. Yes. If we do not oppose the authors listed in the above family tree it is likely that freedom of thought and speech will disappear in the West. Be careful people... reading Lacan or listening to a Zizek lecture will only lead down the path of totalitarianism.<br /><br />Have we heard such exaggerated arguments before? Of course we have. From the Austrians and Hayek. Economic planning = totalitarianism. And so on.<br /><br />Here's an alternative interpretation: the specter of totalitarianism is the key way in which people seek to stifle debate. If you don't like something and don't want it thought about and discussed just say that it will lead to totalitarianism or the stifling or freedom of speech. Or if you want to push your politics you equate the other side with authoritarians.<br /><br />Of course this is an entirely hypocritical stance. <br /><br />Here's another hypothesis: the whole controversy surrounding postmodernism was just another symptom of the left's fracturing. Anyone who is actually involved in politics -- many on the 'left' are not, they just comment and read The Guardian -- know that the key problem up until today was infighting. This whole controversy is, perhaps, just another instance of infighting over things that don't really matter. Thankfully these debates were a 90s and early 00s phenomenon. Today people don't care as much. Well, most people anyway...Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-50169983045184406522015-02-08T09:21:34.970-08:002015-02-08T09:21:34.970-08:00Um if you read that carefully you would see that t...Um if you read that carefully you would see that this is actually a Foucault quote.<br /><br />But then Foucault is 'bad', right? So, then the quote must be 'absurd', no?Philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-82083798024815138662015-02-08T09:20:04.674-08:002015-02-08T09:20:04.674-08:00"Now few but historians of philosophy and Wes..."Now few but historians of philosophy and Western thought have any interest in Idealism..."<br /><br />Strange, I seem to remember a fairly substantial current of thought from the 20th century that is effectively idealist called 'existentialism'.<br /><br />But I suppose you can now lay out the work of Sartre, Merleau-Ponty and Heidegger and call it all 'absurd'. Bonus points if you point out that Heidegger was a Nazi.<br /><br />Also strange that many of the philosophical discussions on this blog center around Kant's 'transcendental idealism'.<br /><br />But please carry on attacking all philosophy as 'absurd' that is not analytic philosophy thus proving my original claim: that most analytic philosophers are to philosophy what neoclassical economists are to economics. They lack nuance. Have very set views on how the history of philosophy developed that privileges their own conclusions (Victoria Chick refers to this as 'Whig history'). And they would be more than happy to take every philosophy that is not their own and engage in what effectively would be a book burning of sorts.TheIllusionisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17642837989235595346noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-80752602468795071462015-02-08T09:12:29.491-08:002015-02-08T09:12:29.491-08:00Yes, that is a very good point. In fact, some extr...Yes, that is a very good point. In fact, some extreme postmodernists and some progressives allied with postmodernism are even prepared to support restrictions on free speech for people they do not like. They often tend to be highly intolerant of people they do not like too. <br /><br />People on the left who really value freedom of thought and speech should be deeply opposed to Postmodernism.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-61566045112083067942015-02-08T08:57:38.062-08:002015-02-08T08:57:38.062-08:00Excellent post and series. For me, the great anti...Excellent post and series. For me, the great anti-intellectual "tell" of the post-modernists is the Searle quote. The real purpose of <i>obscurantisme terroriste</i> is the control over any discussion about any subject, and hence political control. This is all quite Orwellian, since any statement will mean what our intellectual vanguard decides it to mean.dplentinihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14175827472300873294noreply@blogger.com