Just thinking out loud here but.. Surely different ideologies exist, but sometimes it just seems it comes down to language. So when I say 'different', they hear 'unequal', or 'superior/inferior', because to them those are synonyms.
-
-
Replying to @gsmp_martin @HPluckrose
OR that IS how they see things. That if people are different, then based on some criteria or other, one MUST be superior. This is also why they so strongly object to this thinking, because if they were to agree, they themselves would have to start to believe that
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gsmp_martin @HPluckrose
men are superior to women. Or if they were to acknowledge average IQ difference between populations they would have no choice but to become nazis...?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gsmp_martin @HPluckrose
And maybe that very basal way of looking at things, of understanding the world, is what lies at the bottom of this ideological divide?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gsmp_martin
Yes, absolutely. It's counterintuitive but it comes down to this belief that the world is constructed by discourses - ways of talking about things - and that everything is culturally constructed in this way within hierarchies of identities. Saying things makes it reality.pic.twitter.com/J6DWlEPK3j
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
you link this often but i think jstangroom recently criticized at least the short form - do you have longer conversations from a historic vs modern usage context with the philosopher sorts?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @YLIUAY
I don't know what the last bit means. This is way I look at it. https://areomagazine.com/2017/03/27/how-french-intellectuals-ruined-the-west-postmodernism-and-its-impact-explained/ …https://areomagazine.com/2018/02/07/no-postmodernism-is-not-dead-and-other-misconceptions/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Sorry that was confusing - still used to trying to cut down for 140. I guess I was looking for not as much a longer article but a discussion or debate about fuller context and history with someone w/contrary views and is more of a philosopher [as in not an activist sj type]
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @YLIUAY
. I'm less interested in philosophical precursors to postmodernism than its key ideas and how they've evolved and are being implemented now. Stephen Hicks' Understanding Postmodernism & David Detmer's Challenging Postmodernism might be what you're looking for.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
The history evolving into the current is the full context i was referring to in this case - thanks for the recs. i do find it more engrossing and sometimes deeper to have 2 to 4 voices contrasting and complementing each other - at least when done in mutually respectful format
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Well, that's what I sent. You can find me responding to someone else in 'Skepticism is needed in our Post-truth Age. Postmodernism is not.'
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.