I have been waiting for something like this, but I'm not sure I get anything out of this in particular.
-
-
-
This was my suspicion
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It seems to say: 1. Postmodernism is simple stuff you already know 2. For example, [crazy thing asserted without justification]
-
The post is a description of Postmodernism rather than a persuasive argument for it
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Also don't get how you reduce everything to about "systems". How is "cameras are phallic", even if true, a "critique of systems"?
-
in this case the system being critiqued is of neutral machines that impassively record reality (and must be shaped this way)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Likewise, "women are oppressed", even if true doesn't imply "we cannot understand the world scientifically" w/o more explanation.
-
No that bit was simply a critique of all human systems, showing their until then invisible bias. Foucault critiqued science
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Overall I feel more confused and less sympathetic to your presentation compared to eg Chapman.
-
This seems likely given my relative inexperience
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.