Incrementalism/revolution, objectivity/subjectivity, relativism/pluralism are all areas in which postmodernists thinkers disagree, which leads me to the next point.
-
-
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
2) The actual citations used for what postmodernists think are scarce, and not very good at eliciting your concerns. If you think a group is doing something, provide a concrete example of them doing it. Otherwise, I think you are just trying to create a narrative.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
3) Fitting with the last point, in several places you say "In fact, wrong" or "utterly false", but you don't explain WHY these views are wrong, or why they are false.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
You say there is a postmodernist false dichotomy. I don't agree with you that this is a real postmodernist position, if there even is a single postmodernist position, but even then, I am not even sure the dichotomy is a false one. At least it isn't obvious.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @HPluckrose and
4) Your conception of modernism itself is artificial, in that I think there are going to be disagreements about what modernist projects have worked, or to what extent change is necessary or not. Your argument seems to be, more change is bad. But is that necessarily the case?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @amiguello1 and
We addressed what we mean by modernism and of course, there will be disagreement. Forever. This is productive. That is not the argument. The argument is that liberalism is inherently progressive and produces positive change.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @amiguello1 and
The tension in the article is between good vs bad progress. You seem to think postmodernists want progress of the bad kind, but it isn't clear in your article why it is bad. You think they are wrong about science - though, as I have said, that depends on the postmodernist.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticalJody @amiguello1 and
Well, I don't think we can make it clearer than that. We already spent 10,000 words on the problem with postmodernism and premodernism. If you still don't see what we are saying it is and why it's bad, I certainly won't be able to explain it on Twitter.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @SkepticalJody and
And we are only criticising those who are anti-science. Particular postmodern ideas. My friend is a postmodern artist. He is fine with science. No problem there.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @amiguello1 and
But that is my problem with your article. What does the moral decision of how to structure society have to do with science? (Also, as i have said repeatedly, not all postmodernists are as anti-science as you say they are).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
??? Why would the moral decision of how to structure society have anything to do with science? (As I have said repeatedly, I am not claiming all postmodernists are anything and have set out the ideas from postmodernism that I am opposing)
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose @SkepticalJody and
Look, I can only link you the essays. I cannot read and understand them for you. With this degree of confusion, I don't think there's any point in talking.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.