Respect-worthy decision. I have been talking abt the pros & cons of this & been convinced of the same thing.https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/929748260121583616 …
-
-
Here is a good explanation of what literary theory is and how it is the method used to analyse literature within the academy. http://www.iep.utm.edu/literary/
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
1) Sorry, my bad. 2) Yes, sure, feel free to reject it. I don't embrace it either. No reason to shame-censor it out of schools. 3) But he shared their views, in the same way the Gracchi brothers were socialist. 4) Can you provide some reading lists, or some place to find them in?
-
I'm not free to reject it. I tried to twice and I would have failed if I had continued. Oscar Wilde did not share postmodern views at all. I have now linked the encyclopaedia of philosophy's explanation of literary theory.
-
1. I will not doubt your personal experience, just its systematic nature. 2. He seems VERY similar... "Art for art's sake" is pretty postmodernist. 3. Yes, thank you.
-
Check out
@HdxAcademy for systematic nature. No, that is modernist. -
I disagree. While it decadency(?) influenced modernism, it is substantially different. How can a rational system based on reason be compared with aestheticist views?
-
Modernism wasn't about a rational system. https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Decadence_and_the_Making_of_Modernism.html?id=WOb26cxGBfMC …
-
Postmodernism rejected modernism which was an intellectual and artistic movement which came from the earlier aesthetic movement.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
These days people dismiss all their critics as “extremists” of the opposite ideology. He shows more maturity & sense than many other activists. Much respect