Postmodernism: is it a new idea?

[DaveElectric]

Post-modernism = there is no explanation for things....which itself is an explanation.

[uriituw]

This guy is a dope.

What does Genesis have to do with anything?

[sgtmcwallace]

this is amazing

[ueahunt]

@Arodinme6 exactly. thats why for people who cannot understand speech, there is a clear definition of postmodernism at 0.23 seconds !!

Hope taht makes you understand that he understands postmodernism the way you wanted him to understand your understandings on postmodernism

[Arodinme6]

@ueahunt And this definition fails because his definiendum isn't encompassed by his definiens. For people who have studied Continental philosophy and postmodernism, it's obvious that PM doesn't follow from the Bible.

[Arodinme6]

He doesn't understand postmodernism if he thinks it comes from Christianity.

[purbrookian]

Tripe.

[mediattackrecords]

yeah hes like most iranians kind of liberal about religion har har har whats new

[Rockstafeller]

honestly, i am shocked we don't have massive suicides since postmodernism crushed spiritual/perennial philosophy

[stephjh2006]

@Rockstafeller Do we not have a spike in suicide? We do in my country especialy amoungst young men

[Conail23]

I took a Postmodern Theory Class a few years ago. The Nietzian line of thining is sooo irrational, pessimistic and chaotic that even considering the arguments just for sake of argument, gave me a monster headache and made me feel like I was toying with insanity. Postmodernism or postmodernity er whatever u wanna call it, is a horrible, sick, irrational, anti-reason mess! I noticed a lot of the writers and thinkers of postmodernism, have even committed suicide.

[2413steve]

@Conail23 : It's called nuance. And I don't understand your earlier comment, other than its pejorative nature, about rationality, and you, of course, being one of the "rational people." Is that how a modernist debates? Because I see a lot of that in these forums... making fun of post-modernistsis pretty fun, isn't it? You know what it reminds me of, it reminds me of Jesus? Just because you prefer (can't handle?) a different plausibility structure, doesn't make anyone else less sincere

[Conail23]

@2413steve, oh nuance is it? Thank you bro! I'm so proud that you're memorizing your vocab! I've already heard all this pretentious, pseudo-intelectual bull! And I'm so over it. If yer so impressed with nuance! lol well good for you but I am not impressed. Modern thinking, atleast thats what you ppl call it, was marked by the enlightenment and reinaasance! What has postmodern theory come up with? Try yer best to deconstruct everything but when you can construct something new then il be impressed

[2413steve]

@Conail23 It's difficult to argue with modernists like yourself because you think you're above everyone else, despite the fact that you do nothing but recycle things within the same plausibility structure. And the only people who use the term "pseudo-intellectual" are those who haven't studied enough to appreciate nuance without simply quoting it. And if you actually had listened during your classes, you wouldn't be so quick to praise the enlightenment.

[Conail23]

@2413steve, by their fruits ye shall know them. Look at the fruits of postmodern thinking! This world is heading into total chaos, and postmodern thinkers are philosophical anarchists!

[2413steve]

@Conail23 Enlightenment effectively brought about modernism, a philosophy ABSENT teleology. What that means is that the modernist plausibility structure does not account for God, and yet modernists like yourself use rationalism (within the same philosophic structure) to reason people to God. I think that's why modernists are so rude and jerkish in forums. Who needs Jesus when you have the enlightenment? Instead, I'll just make fun of people. Just like Jesus did, right?

[Conail23]

@2413steve, ur assuming I am a modernist. It isn't that simple. I guess I polarized things a bit by saying modernism is superior which it probably is, but mostly I said that, to be a "Jerk" I'm a Christian and Christian ideas were around long before the enlightenment or humanism etc. But in all seriousness, do u really think the way postmodernism deconstructs everything that we know about reality is not irrational? I can't fathom how you can't see that it leads 2 madness!

[Conail23]

@2413steve, I remember reading Jean Baudrillard, for example. And the notions he put forth are so utterly absurd to me as well as completely contradictory. It's like "THe Only Absolute is that there is no absolute" Hello, thats ABSOLUTE nonsense! How can the absolute be, that there is no absolute? it is contradictory! It is intellectual suicide! these ppl will talk themselves out of existance! That is going beyond brilliant and into madness!

[Conail23]

@2413steve, and I never said you werent sincere dude, yer just sincerely wrong.

[stevekap8]

This guy really doesn't know how to speak clearly. Or he choices not to.

[DreamsofMajesty]

scribd (dot) com/nb812

[2413steve]

Be nice if he answered the question. What is he talking about? five minutes to say nothing. This guy is over rated.

[Conail23]

@2413steve, are u kiddng me? He answered the question quite thouroughly. Apparently you couldnt comprehend it? Why dont u go make a powerpoint presentation for one of yer professors & stop trying to converse with rational ppl ;)

[SOLACEBOY]

Sure He was Timmy, sure He was.

[simbodoot]

The morality of the Hebrews was based on blind obedience to an authority. This obedience was misplaced because we can see that their deity acted immorally even according to human standards. If we were to take the bible and make a sci-fi movie out of it all of humanity would agree; the bible god was a powerful celestial tyrant bent on extermination of all other culture.

[azjmiles]

@simbodoot If you were to interpret wrong as you are yes you could convince others of your conclusion, no doubt many have. I find it interesting those who don't take the time out to actually understand the God of the Old Testament are so quick to mischaracterize Him to justify their own disbelief. 

[simbodoot]

@azjmiles It doesn't take misinterpretation, just eyes to see the words in the bible. Take the account in judges 20-21. Israel wants war against the Benjamites for protecting their town Gibeah in which a levite's wife was raped and killed. After two failed divinely sanctioned attacks god says "I will give them into your hands". 25,000 fighters are slain as with the entire city and animals, and it is set on fire.

[simbodoot]

Afterwards Israel is sad because they have no wives for their men and their tribe of Benjamin has been destroyed. They congregate to burn offerings and realize Jabesh Gilead isn't present. So in line with an oath they made they slay the entire city, men, women, and children, but keep the virgins for their wives.

It's quite a heartwarming tale

[azjmiles]

@simbodoot your wrongful interpretation goes beyond even this account. You state that God's actions are immoral even by human standards. This would assume there is a morality that God must adhere to, and that there is a judge of morality above God Himself. It seems as though you have taken on this role as the judge of God's morality. If something is good or bad where does that come from? How do you personally know what is right or wrong?

[simbodoot]

@azjmiles Nothing is automatically right or wrong. The universe is utterly amoral and could take you out with an asteroid, tsunami, shark, snake, trainwreck, handgun, or quantum destabilization at any moment, however improbable. I think it's part of the postmodernist perspective to realize this (not that I'm claiming this perspective to be correct in all aspects). Things aren't so concrete. In the video Zacharias was right to say we need something to hang our hat on. For the religious it's god.

[simbodoot]

I guess for me morality is found when all things are taken into account. For instance- it is wrong to inflict torture upon a sentient being, human or not, unless that being has my wife tied up in a room and i don't know where and she's slowly bleeding out of a tube he installed, or something. This depends on our awareness of the spectrum of feelings in another entity and it's intentions. Also there is a lot of gray area.

[simbodoot]

What explanation could god possibly have for slicing babies throats? He couldn't carry out his purpose peacefully? The only possible way this could be justified is if you think Israel was the only nation that contained any people worth building a world out of and that's bullshit and a very low view of humanity!

[hyperseauton]

This crazy motherfucker is kind of correct. There are similar ideas of poststructuralism in early Eastern and Middle Eastern thought.

[kwinkieUK]

People should rely on this mischaracterization of postmodernism. Go read an expert, don't listen to this guy who doesn't understand what it is.

[AgApE010]

Imagine how foolish is a worldview (postmodernism) that denies absolute truth and in denying absolute truth those who hold to it commonly use an absolute statement such as "there is no absolute truth".

Postmodernism = fail

[Hamandchees3]

First: The fact that saying "there absolutely is no absolute truth" is an obvious contradiction does not thereby prove the proposition that "truth is absolute". It simply is not within the grasp of pure logic to do that.

Its possible, for instance, to posit that "truth is provisional". This statement says, in effect, that truth really is not absolute and yet exists. And if you asked how I know truth is provisional, I would say "because I have yet to find anything to the contrary."

[AgApE010]

I don't see the difference, then, between provisional truth and relativism since apparently both of these hold that truth exists and yet is not absolute. Can you please explain further?

[Hamandchees3]

science works under a theory of provisional truth. facts are only facts /on the basis of the present preponderance of evidence/ and are subject to change with better evidence and cleverer theories.

I think what we have to be careful not to do is get stuck in our dichotomies and word choices. Philosophy would never progress if it only worked in the confines of highly "either/or" semantics games.

Provisional truth holds that "Truth" is likely absolute, we just never reach it. As far as we know!

[AgApE010]

For example then, Newtonian physics were thought to be "true" until Einstein stepped in and gave a better theory. Is this an example of science working under the theory of provisional truth?

[Hamandchees3]

Exactly. And in a sense Newtonian physics /was/ true, in the sense that it made very accurate predictions. In that sense it is still true, but dependent on context. It's thus truer to structural engineers than it is to cosmologists.

This is why some post-modernists so adore to point out the importance of context.

[AgApE010]

I understand what you're saying. However it is important to point out that scientific theories don't make any absolute truth claims; they only make educated statements based on the evidence. Thus we cannot look at science and its changing theories and say "truth changes because the theories in science change", vice versa. It isn't truth that's changing, but our understanding of a certain topic, be it cosmology or quantum physics.

[Hamandchees3]

I don't disagree. I am just pointing out that there are alternative theories of truth that don't fall into the false choice of absolutism vs. relativism.

Postmodernism is a vague term but I do believe it has made significant contributions including but not limiting to logic, semantics, social and mental construction, and context.

[AgApE010]

But there really isn't any other choice other than absolutism or relativism. What you described as "provisional truth" is only backed, it seems, by an assumption that scientific theories make absolute truth claims, which they do not.

[itoldu123]

Where did you get that from? I never said scientific theories make absolute truth claims. In fact I said the opposite.

Further, I just gave science as an example of an institution that follows a theory of truth that is neither relative nor absolute. A provisional theory of truth is still logically coherent outside of science.

Absolutism vs. Relativism betrays the finiteness of human imagination. I only argue that this is a false choice. Pragmatic Truth is another choice which is overlooked.

[itoldu123]

sorry, wrong account. this is hamandchees3

[AgApE010]

In response to "where did you get that from":

"science works under a theory of provisional truth. facts are only facts /on the basis of the present preponderance of evidence/ and are subject to change with better evidence and cleverer theories."

-Hamandchees3

[11889music]

So, is he saying that: あなたは馬鹿です！ and 私のこのじょはきれです。 mean ANYTHING to him?

I think not. Even if i spoke the words to him, he wouldn't know how to reply because he has not LEARNed to associate those letters/sounds with meaning.

[hgeldenhuys]

you don't merely suppose, you assume.

[Einstei8]

Really poor thinking skills exemplified by Ravi! Incredibly poor thinking skills! Totally unsophisticated guy... No grasp of post modernism. Of course it is no surprise for me because he preaches about God, so automatically modernism has eluded him. How to understand post modernism which is not a doctrine, like modernism, but a critique of doctrines according to the modernist mold.

[hgeldenhuys]

You are merely voicing an emotional opinion, or an attempt to insult the speaker and not really giving any grounds for your feeling other than you are opposed to the idea of God. It doesn't take an einstein to figure that out.

[Einstei8]

The speaker insults himself effortlessly against anyone who has the faintest philosophical background! It's really easy for him. I suppose you don't have that background...

[Aggy07]

...The speaker has a phD in philosophy.....

[john146only]

cont'

the way toward man making the rules and standing in the place of God. And in the Rev 19 chapter you see how well God takes that rebellion. Actually you see a slow and steady set of judgements destroying all that man has worshiped including self until he comes back to claim his throne. This PM is not just conjecture, it is a worldview that leads to thought processes which will have consequences. So PM a good idea? No, not if you read through Isaiah 13 and the book of Revelation and so on

[john146only]

The new thinking that will take place over Christianity and absolutes ( seemingly and only for a season,) with the new thinking that all things are one, blurring the division of Creator God and his aboslutes and creation who makes it up as he goes along. And we come to see that in the book of Revelation as that all plays out: ultimatly man is still a sinner at heart and can't even get along w/ himself while living in a peaceful utopia of their making, which you are seeing postmodernism paving

[roryphelan]

'Greek Philosophy came perilously close to the truth...he talked about value and virtue, but it never had anything to hang it on.'

what does he mean by this, 'to hang it on'? what does that mean? surely virtue and value are worthy characteristics in themselves, must they be hung on something which forces people to be 'good'?

to hang value and virtue on something that will make you believe there is no choice in the matter, you MUST select this value and virtue?

[hgeldenhuys]

[1] The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good. It is full of wild and wasted virtues. When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad.

[roryphelan]

we are unified by our humanity.

[hgeldenhuys]

we have been unified by our humanity for the past few thousand years. how has that been working out?

[roryphelan]

I do not understand what you are saying.

How has our humanity been unified?

Jesus? the bible? the church?

are you supporting the church or bashing it?

What happens to the people who FEEL at a very basic level that what is thought by the church does not reflect their humanity, or at least does not reflect what they sincerely feel as true goodness in a human.

Are they wrong? If so, what makes them wrong?

What makes the church right?

and other questions

[hgeldenhuys]

What I'm saying is, humanity left to itself will only destroy what little is left in it. All that humanity means is "the rule of man, over other men".

[Their] humanity? There is no such thing, only humanity. All men get what they want in the end, even "their humanity", so they're not wrong, just unredeemed if the choose that.

The "church" is a very generic term. If you mean God's church throughout the ages uncorrupted by man, or humanity, then I would say, hear what their leader claims.

[hgeldenhuys]

Oh, humanity has been unified ever since it became Humanity, capital H, meaning replacing God in the garden of Eden.

[roryphelan]

a provocative statement, but seriously, what makes 'God's church' not that 'H'.

[hgeldenhuys]

Oh, but I am serious.

I would no longer call it God's church. In order for it to be God's church, it has to be, God's church, and not humanity's church.

Granted not all churches are perfect, they are run by us humans and we do make honest mistakes., but if I read between your words, yes, some churches are 100% hijacking their initial intention, some are evil.

The proof of the pudding is in the recipe, not in the eating. Poison can be tasteless.

[roryphelan]

I think you are dancing with your words, and I think you miss something.

your "I wud no longer call it God's church" paragraph...

are you saying God is not Humanity?

Do you think the bible reflects humanity?

"The proof of the pudding is in the recipe, not in the eating. Poison can be tasteless."how do you know what is in this particular recipe, 'Gods' recipe, the bibles recipe, is not poisonous? Because somebody wrote down in the recipe that it is not?

[hgeldenhuys]

No use to reason with a guy who dances with words, is there. Thanks for the insult, goodnite.

[roryphelan]

question mark

[ABAisSCIENCE]

You want to hear about humanity?

If you accept the premise that people are by nature hedonistic that is, that we seek pleasure and avoid pain then you will recognize that its not easy to deal with the truth, and its not easy to change it. By Dr. Phil (1999) p. 121 in the book Life Strategies: Doing what works; Doing what matters.

[dunnededunnedunne]

i do not understand. Postmodernism claims there are no 'master narratives.' The Bible claims it is the master narrative, for all people.

[john146only]

What the main issue of the bible is to say that Lucifer rebelled and so did Adam and Eve, so they are the first to set them selves up as the authority insead of God

s position ( which is your point) and the struggle between the two: The Creator GOd and his authority and the subjective but heady creation who is in rebellion to his will. And then there are those like myself who are the creation who are born again, trusting in that original final word on all things in the name of submission to God

[richardmullins44]

is this guy a "sky pilot"? I think so.

[primetime100]

Awesome as usual!

[coachtaskmaster]

This is such insightful perspective. The tragedy is that those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The intellectual naturalist thinks the eradication of faith and elevation of pure reason will save humanity. Ironically, Greece thought the same thing.

[lahridon2000]

So true - his ministry is a gift from God

[ThomasNixon7]

This guy is amazing