How would characterize modernism? It's interesting that you mention this, because I've been working on tracing the motifs of modernism from out of the Italian Renaissance.
In defense of Lyotard, he is describing a passage from metallurgy to semiurgy, a change of phase, in Gilbert Simondon's French: déphasement. And it is a condition, an atmosphere, a medium, we all swim in it, the left and the right, left and right, up and down. That is why McManus' post-modern conservatism is a questionable concept just as much as Peterson's post-modern Marxism. When it comes to taxonomies (not categories) of the history of philosophy, we should differentiate (or is it with a "c"?) post-modernist philosophers from post-structuralists. Imo, post-modernists mostly ended up (or better, down) in the quagmire of nihilism, thus betraying their grandfather, the proto-post-modernist Nietzsche. And from the triad of post-structuralists (Derrida, Foucault, D&G) Derrida didn't escape the clutches of nihilism (maybe because he was so focused on language, or, like his friend, late Bernard Stiegler said, because he didn't read Simondon), while the other two proudly carry the banner of affirmation taken up from their granddaddy, uhr-post-structuralist Nietzsche.
Thank you for your comment. I totally agree that they end up in the quagmire of nihilism. Deleuze emerges as the clear winner for me. I always list Difference & Repetition as one of the top 3 greatest works of philosophy written in the 20th century. Simondon's work is powerful. I recall it helped me understand Deleuze. And, as I mentioned in the video, I don't think Lyotard is wrong; I just don't find the characterization being repeated across videos on postmodernism to be very helpful, and I really do believe it has become something of a meta-narrative itself. Recalling Bataille's The Absence of Myth, postmodernism seems more and more these days to be the "selling" of an ideology as a means toward a political end(s). Any thoughts on the contextualizing it in terms of Plato?
@@philosophemes Regarding Plato's connection to postmodernism, it must be in the concept of simulacra, so that Boudrillard's (accurate) reading of Plato's simulacra brings us to nihilism (everything is fake, there's no Real, Matrix rules); but if you turn Plato on his head, like Deleuze does, there are no "ideal" forms of government, nor love (signs of love are "mensonge" - lies, see Proust and Signs), not even the ideology (there is axiology, see Raymond Ruyer, Cybernetics and the Source of Information). Our "principle of reality" (Klossowski) is that we are just one kind of moving-images amongst many others and we have to find new tools to "fight the power" (Societies of Control essay).
@@exlauslegale8534 I appreciate your comments on this. Thank you. One of the benefits of contextualizing post-modernism in terms of Plato is that it helps place post-modernism in an ethical light, rather than merely in terms of semiology. The post-modern discourse analysis floating around these days seems to be a sleight-of-hand, or simply a mask, for power.
Very interesting video.
Though after this one and a bunch before, I still don't know what postmodernism is
I think i would start an explanation of post modernism with an explanation of what is meant by modernism.
How would characterize modernism? It's interesting that you mention this, because I've been working on tracing the motifs of modernism from out of the Italian Renaissance.
Please please please do it again!!
Hi avdrei34326, thank you. I appreciate your encouragement. Sincerely.
Not so bad. One needs a little background & an attention span of more than 3-4 minutes lol
In defense of Lyotard, he is describing a passage from metallurgy to semiurgy, a change of phase, in Gilbert Simondon's French: déphasement. And it is a condition, an atmosphere, a medium, we all swim in it, the left and the right, left and right, up and down. That is why McManus' post-modern conservatism is a questionable concept just as much as Peterson's post-modern Marxism.
When it comes to taxonomies (not categories) of the history of philosophy, we should differentiate (or is it with a "c"?) post-modernist philosophers from post-structuralists. Imo, post-modernists mostly ended up (or better, down) in the quagmire of nihilism, thus betraying their grandfather, the proto-post-modernist Nietzsche. And from the triad of post-structuralists (Derrida, Foucault, D&G) Derrida didn't escape the clutches of nihilism (maybe because he was so focused on language, or, like his friend, late Bernard Stiegler said, because he didn't read Simondon), while the other two proudly carry the banner of affirmation taken up from their granddaddy, uhr-post-structuralist Nietzsche.
Thank you for your comment. I totally agree that they end up in the quagmire of nihilism. Deleuze emerges as the clear winner for me. I always list Difference & Repetition as one of the top 3 greatest works of philosophy written in the 20th century.
Simondon's work is powerful. I recall it helped me understand Deleuze. And, as I mentioned in the video, I don't think Lyotard is wrong; I just don't find the characterization being repeated across videos on postmodernism to be very helpful, and I really do believe it has become something of a meta-narrative itself. Recalling Bataille's The Absence of Myth, postmodernism seems more and more these days to be the "selling" of an ideology as a means toward a political end(s). Any thoughts on the contextualizing it in terms of Plato?
@@philosophemes Regarding Plato's connection to postmodernism, it must be in the concept of simulacra, so that Boudrillard's (accurate) reading of Plato's simulacra brings us to nihilism (everything is fake, there's no Real, Matrix rules); but if you turn Plato on his head, like Deleuze does, there are no "ideal" forms of government, nor love (signs of love are "mensonge" - lies, see Proust and Signs), not even the ideology (there is axiology, see Raymond Ruyer, Cybernetics and the Source of Information). Our "principle of reality" (Klossowski) is that we are just one kind of moving-images amongst many others and we have to find new tools to "fight the power" (Societies of Control essay).
@@exlauslegale8534 I appreciate your comments on this. Thank you. One of the benefits of contextualizing post-modernism in terms of Plato is that it helps place post-modernism in an ethical light, rather than merely in terms of semiology. The post-modern discourse analysis floating around these days seems to be a sleight-of-hand, or simply a mask, for power.
Sober then I cannot put a negative
Interpretation is so wrong I apologize for making no sense at all. I appreciate you're deep study highly! Thank you so very much!!