Christians have been talking about this for at least 60 years, such as Van Till, Francis Schaeffer, and Dr. Peter Jones. They just don't have any limelight. The irony is that Jordan Peterson's pragmatism also lends itself to post-modernism.
Just a quick thank you. I have a Sociology exam this monday and I've been trying to get my head around what postmodernism is and this has been the perfect explanation! Thank you so much.
I get it: Postmodernism says that nothing has more value than something else. It is all about how you decide to interpret whatever it is. And therefore thousands of years of human knowledge counts for nothing. This sounds very French to me. It reminds me of my alcoholic French literature professor. Very arrogant indeed.
You interpreted postmodernism in a way that is completely different than most academics, therefore proving postmodernism's point. It's all about one's specific point of view.
(cont'd) (3) The notion that this formula somehow ought to be understood as a cultural construct, or that the inverse square law should likewise be understood in those terms is simply ludicrous. Those who advance this idea utterly fail to comprehend what these expressions are conveying to us about the nature of the world. The issue is not what things are as yet *not* known, but rather what procedures allow us, to the extent that it's possible, to know anything about the nature of the world.
Thank you. I've read countless material and watched numerous videos, and although from them I believed I had an idea of what the postmodernist state was, this video most succinctly affirmed it for me.
(cont'd) (2) The questions that you pose about the nature of the sub-atomic world, to the extent that they can be answered (if for instance, there actually are strings), the answers exist in the physical world, not in our "texts" -- not as an expression of our culture or our society's power relationships. E=mc(2) expresses an idea about the equivalence of matter and energy in our universe, not the equivalence of men and women, or workers and bosses, or Jews and Christians.
It's a very broad term indeed but currently it's mostly referenced and linked with the far Leftist ideology which encourages the denouncing, and outright destruction of all institutions established prior to Postmodernist thought. It would not be incorrect to say that in practice, Postmodernism is a form of intellectual nihilism. By now it doesn't even meet the requisite characteristics to be considered an academic/intellectual philosophy since it's proponents largely exhibit behaviors consistent with a motivation stemming from emotional root causes. The ideology, agenda, and actions of Postmodernists actually match the symptoms of someone plagued by a pathology. These far Leftists in Postmodernism behave with a pathological mindset instead of having an open minded disposition open to new knowledge.
It's basically a belief in going back to the principles of animal life. . Human evolution has one (1) natural direction, the Kardashev scale based on energy development. Every religion, belief system, philosophy has to adapt to that, and that will unite humanity as one (1) force. Intelligent species aim for immortality in a star system with massive amounts of energy (being able to survive in coming severe ice ages, deflect medium sized threatening asteroids etc). Intelligent species ACT as one (1) force at a certain point in their development, not just REACT to natural random conditions in the solar system and go extinct like animal species depending on pure luck. . Going against this direction (increasing the energy density all the time) = mess/anarchy (what we experience now in the western world). This action will also save most of the existing animal species from extinction, instead of hurting them. . Peace through development (especially supporting developing countries) in this direction is the only way, and nationalism until all major continents/countries have developed to civilized/scientific/tolerant cultures (probably 50-100 years from now). . China is already on its way with this since 25 years ago, lifting 700 million people out of poverty. Now 25000 kilometers of air-cushion railway, aiming for getting helium-3 from the moon for fusion nuclear power (bring the energy principle of the sun to the earth), etc. It can be called hyper-modernism. Russia and US (with Trump) will likely follow this direction, and Europe will become the problem with its rooted postmodernism in politics (greenies, hyper-feminists etc), with a self-destructive philosophy.
I thought this was going to be very subjective and bias but I think this man did a great job accurately defining postmodernism, this reincofrces my understnading of the defintion
@deadeaded It's not that they don't believe in the fact of cause and effect. The truth the post-modernists are skeptical of is moral truth and the truth of progress.
An articulate man who nailed some key points but I think there is a meta perspective on this which is that there is a progression from being puritanical, to purist, to pluralist to something else which is called integral. Which mean what? Pre-modern perspectives tend to exist in a mono-perspective, modern in one perspective that is at least aware of others and post-modernism treats all perspectives as equal. Integralism recogises multiple perspectives but they exist hierarchically
Postmodernism says that there is no defined truth. Everything is subjective. But that makes life very complicated. If there are no boundaries, then what's the difference between a building and a banana? Is it subjective? Yes and no. For me, there are absolute truths which we may not entirely know. However, the outlook on these truths is subjective. Society has taken these subjective truths and made them quasi-objective (i.e. swearing is bad taste), while postmodernism disagrees.
@jimmyt3411 I don't think most postmodernists think there are literally no truths out there. I think the main objective is to show how easily we assume we've found such truth - and also how many truths are socially and culturally constructed in order to keep power structures in place.
Postmodernism came to reinforce the idea of subjectivity in terms of dealing with this life. And it was against what was claimed in the era of Modernism.
@TheSethIkrass nihilism and post-modernism really help you get out of the funk of worrying about right and wrong and how one should live. if there are no universal truths then you can just go about living in accordance of what makes you most happy... although you could go mad trying to figure out the best way to optimize happiness in YOUR situation step by step.
I really appreciate this. This is telling me that Post Modernism is just a philosophy. So why do people like Peterson get his panties in such a wad over it? Like all Philosophy, you don't have to agree with.
Because it removes objective thinking. Leaving you suspended in nothing more than socio-cultural relativism, which is a dangerous place to be. No concern or interest in truth or rationality.
The Postmodernist vs The Scientist when a rock is thrown at their head: Scientist: hey, you threw that rock at me. I saw you do it. Postmodernist: But what is a rock? Did you throw it at me? I saw you do it, but did the rock exist? Do you exist? Is my pain real? Am I real? Maybe the rock and I are the same thing.
1.) His use of the term "modernity" is a sort of swindle--there is no time period wherein intellectuals were completely unified by doctrine or goal. 2.) Perspectivalism does NOT necessarily entail the denial of truth. 3.) The affirmation of perspectivalism entails that there is "objective" truth. 4.) Talk of "objective truth" only makes sense if you tacitly accept distinctly MODERN notions of the subject, object, and perception. 5.) The lack of clarity in "postmodern" thought is astounding.
@jimmyt3411 that's the point. the 'truths' are culturally bound and related to power - so deconstructing that gives us more 'truth' then we had before. we see how the 'truth' is socially, politically and culturally bound.
@DamiaanVDW i think it's a way to re-instate the modernist confidence. we will deconstruct all the bullshit we can - and then we can get on with the great adventure.
@jimmyt3411 that's what a lot of post-modern writers tried to do - bring awareness to these shackles of ignorance disguised as absolute infallible laws and truths. I just prefer to look at -any- philosophical school as potentially (and probably) useful to myself and other people. you just got to be careful not to run with the torch and proclaim it the universal, end-all philosophy
Frankly, I think this idea is a lot of hooey. The concept of four elements wasn't displaced by the current periodic table because of a shift in culture or power -- but because the earlier view of elements simply failed. Water, earth, air -- all could be broken down into simpler irreducible chemical entities -- and that understanding of "elements" led us to realize that "fire" wasn't an element at all. The new idea took hold because it had much greater "explanatory" power.
He made some excellent and thoughtful points RE postmodernism, right up until 2:08. I don't think it is correct that religion should be included in discussions on modernism/postmodernism, presenting certain things as fact. (And I have just noticed who uploaded the video)
I don’t like this post-modern thinking. I don’t create my own reality, truth or meaning. I simply work, live a happy life and prepare a comfortable one for my family and children.
Postmodernism and it’s brand of pessimism is a symptom of a crumbling capitalist system that has failed to meet its promises of progress and widely distributed prosperity. The answer is not to double down on tradition as capitalism is currently doing becoming more conservative and authoritarian in its death throws but instead to look for an alternative that can provide what capitalism has failed to come good on.
@Trimbler00 im not looking for a argument simply asking....... if there is no truth no UNIVERSAL truth how can there be truth at all?? i think more so im looking at your phrasing of the comment "perception", how can universal truth be a perception if its universal?? AGAIN simply asking to pick your brain a lil bit..... thanks in advance for your response :D
No because deconstructionism is a component of post-modernism, but this video also addresses what I think to be the primary component of postmodernism - subjectivism. I think the greatest postmodernist of our time is AOC when she said that it is more important to be morally right, not factually and semantically correct. :)
I have been reading and I feel I have a better understanding of what postmodernism is and in the end, just believing in something doesn't change what is. If you live in a bubble and have a certain perspective does not make that perspective true, it makes you naive. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but it all just seems like a someone not wanting to be told what is it what isn't so they come with a term that says there is not absolute truth; Which seem a little immature.
@bzath666 Wasn't the enlightenment about individuality? Reason for yourself, not through faith, authority, tradition, etc. Think for yourself, that was post-scientific revolution, but postmodernism seems to just obfuscate everything.
@brokenmetaphysics The notion of "for me -- matter is made of --" is a non-starter, as it suggests that somehow matter, at some fundamental level, is one thing for you, and perhaps a different thing for me. Is the mass of a proton one thing "for you" and a different thing for me? That would be rather interesting as it would mean that identical objects would have different masses and weights for you and me.
There are some "star" French Post Modernists who's literature can be pretty entertaining. Incredible obfuscation, even sheer meaninglessness can be found in their misuse of scientific and mathematical language. Interesting ideas are easily missed for their wonderful oceans of language... which can drown the reader. Mental gymnastics or poetry with your philosophy sir? Why not both?
Of course, this fellow would conflate scientific truth with the opinions of religion. Funny thing is, it's postmodern b.s. that allows science and religion to coexist as legitimate truths, because it suggests that their is not truth.
I don't think Bill Kynes is conflating scientific truth with subjective opinions of religion or other ideology groups, I think he's explaining that postmodernism does that. I might've interpreted this video incorrectly, but it sounds like Kynes was more or less being critical of postmodernism, whilst attempting to remain neutral as much as possible.
if is so, than j.j. russoau is the first post modernist. look, somethings need to be kept and reaffirmed while other things need to be rethought and still other things be invented for the first time to add to the world. The spirit of the law says you have value, but what is your value-add to the world. think then who is responsable for the slackers and wankers of the world. GULGAFINGIANS. Learn the rules, work the system, build your OASIS, hope for the best. Vote.
Modernism = Believes that humans can figure out the world through reason, science, empiri, facts, creativity and filosofi. Modernism is progressive and believes in collective human development by exploring the world. Modernism is rational and believes in common sense. Humans are free and possess the capacity to create it's own life. Postmodernism = Believes that their is no such thing as universal truth. The truth is subjective. The world is a social construct. Norms, values and moral is a tool of power to discriminate and expel the "abnormal". Sciences are created by "science regimes" to control the human mind. Discourse. (Michel Foucault) Humans are a product of society and socialization and has no free will.
Pretty biased, Billy boy. You smuggle in this tacit adoration of Modernism that, a few decades ago, was attacked from the pulpit for being anti-faith. Very sloppy and tendentious of you...not to mention dishonest.
@MirageScience 'the new age bullshit' is a huge over-generalization of many different types of philosophy, livelihood, belief, etc... try not to be so dramatic with things!
this video is frustrating because "bill kynes" is extremely lofty and distracting. but what is even more frustrating is that people seem to think that in 3 minutes, he has somehow successfully quantified postmodernism. wow.
@prodprod Well, the typical 'atom' that one can find on a t-shirt is but a caricature of a 'real' atom. What are atoms made of? What are sub atomic particles made of? What are strings made of? What is energy made of? For me, 'matter' is a fractal pattern with no logical conclusion; sure increasing the resolution of the image may have more 'expanatory power', but we use that power to heal, protect and cultivate, as well as harm, abuse and destroy. Progress in science is suscpicous now.
"When I came across the myth of objectivity in certain modern thinkers, it made me angry. So there was only one world for these people, the same for everyone. And all the other worlds were to be counted as illusions left over from the past. Or why not call them by their name-hallucinations? I had learned to my cost how wrong they were. From my own experience I knew very well that it was enough to take from a man a memory here, an association there, to deprive him of hearing or sight, for the world to undergo immediate transformation, and for another world, entirely different but entirely coherent, to be born. Another world? Not really. The same world rather, but seen from another angle, and counted in entirely new measures. When this happened, all the hierarchies they called objective were turned upside down, scattered to the four winds, not even like theories but like whims." -Jacques Lusseyran ("And There Was Light",1953)
The Postmodernist vs The Scientist: Scientist: You disrespect evidence and objective truth, this is war? Postmodernist: But what is war? Are we in war? Were we in war since birth? What is objective truth? Is evidence subjective? Maybe we all see different things, maybe you and I are the same person?
