starting to suspect the great human binary divides people who (can? do?) separate empirical claims and abstractions generally from Machiavellian social considerations, and those who can't or won't
-
-
unfortunately the idea that everything is a power game may itself be exploited in power games :D
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
i was going somewhere here and then my phone made a noise
-
maybe the thing i hate the most about power-dynamics-first analysis is that everybody who's into it is so fucking bad at it like it instantly turns into this thing where you have to rah-rah or pooh-pooh based on the most superficial impression of Good For Team or Bad For Team
-
does the rah-rahing actually hurt your team because you're rah-rahing something superficially pro-team but so fucking asinine that rah-rahing it fucks up your team's entire credibility? too bad, have to do it anyway
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I will never stop whining about postmodernism because it is the death of all meaning, despair in a fancy bowtie
-
yeah, this shit lol pale cur will you tell me which pomo you are talking about here? like, quote some statement attributable to pomo that this follows from?
-
I'm thinkin derrida in the main but really the entirety of death of the author
-
okay, i can see it. but isn't that just a basic ass accurate observation, that it matters to us what we read not what dude was trying to write, that like all things is subject to sturgeon's law in what people do with it?
-
that seems basic-ass, yeah; but mainly i see Death of the Author used to claim that any random idiot's wilfully ignorant misinterpretation of a text is just as valid as an actual analysis that engages with authorial intent
-
This is irksome because if art is anything at all, it's communication of authorial intent -- art is work with a result intended to induce a sequence of emotional states in the experiencer of the work's result. DotAuthor denies that communicative act.
-
Probably ought to hop in and defend the core pomo critique as basically correct as written but almost universally misunderstood and misapplied by contemporary enthusiasts "power games are pervasive!" --> "the outgroup has power and is abusing it"
-
yeah, absolutely stipulated i just want to be able to better apprehend what is actually going on, mang is that so much to ask
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think it can be pretty well established that support for post-modernist philosophy is, in essence, a power game. *stares off*
-
that's the thing, like, when we're talking about "supporting" philosophy sturgeon's law is already in action philosophy isn't a "support" thing, politics is a "support" thing, philosophy is a "use" thing
-
The biggest trouble with Sturgeon's Law is the implication that 10% of anything must not be crud, and we both easily think of things with 0% of not non-crud.
-
yeah, that's true, also Utility Georg is an outlier and should not have been counted i just don't think pomo is one of them. if you give a bunch of monkeys a jackhammer, they'll do a bunch of awful things with it, that doesn't mean jackhammers are bad or useless
-
who and/or what is Utility Georg is it like Manuel of the Planes
-
he sits in a cave doing things that are 0% crap, distorting the math on Sturgeon's Law
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.