OK, tweeps, here we go. I will be responding to this shortly. Pls read with an open mind. This is a good faith perspective on benefits of postmodernism from someone who sees the problem with what many (but not he) call the postmodern left. I disagree with his take on it, ofc.https://twitter.com/AreoMagazine/status/985725463778639872 …
-
-
But kudo's to you, and the author, for willing to engage in this public discussion.
-
A major issue for me, and this is the same charge for a lot of Pomo, there are no clear definitions or articulation of different strands within Pomo offered. The author does not even define Pomo. Perhaps this is because it's too difficult to to do, and this again a problem.
-
I think he expects people to know which debates and which aspects of postmodernism he is referring to and, in fact, we nearly all do. I addressed that in this essay in the section: Claim: There is much more to postmodernism than its critics present.https://areomagazine.com/2018/02/07/no-postmodernism-is-not-dead-and-other-misconceptions/ …
-
With respect, this seems unreasonable and a poor assumption for an article defending it. I have studied discourse analysis and social constructivism during my phd and there are as many theories as there are Pomo academics. It's opaque and convoluted.
-
Yes, I addressed that in my piece. It is better to see critics of postmodernism as working backwards from specific problems to their cause. We do need a better name for people who still seem confused about what is being criticised.
@thesadredearth suggested 'New Logocentrism.; -
That might be one of the best discussion and analysis of post modernism I have ever read. You do an excellent job of offering definitions and broad differences which really helped.
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.