This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← UPDATE: Fashionable Nonsense?

edmundjessie's Avatar Jump to comment 169 by edmundjessie

Comment 160 by DoctorChristian "Postmodernism has a clear meaning, a clear intellectual stance, it has its leaders, its followers, and its body of literature in a number of disciplines. It is real, it has happened, and it has influenced work in a number of disciplines for a generation."

The problem is you could substitute the word 'Postmodernism' in your sentence with the words 'Christianity,' 'Judaism,' 'Islam' etc. and those things could be said to apply equally to all of them. None of those things you mention seem to give it any evidential worth. Just because a movement has gathered a lot of supporters does not necessarily give that movement merit. Sometimes it only says something about the gullibility of it's supporters (a gullibility which in this case Sokal has already exposed).

I think our biggest problem is not a definition. I, like many other on this thread i suspect despite their protestations to the contrary, have what i suppose is a consensus definition of 'Post-modernism 'in my mind formed through association with those things that have already been mentioned in this thread as being 'post-modern.'

The problem is does post-modernism have real-world value and utility? I think what offends everyone most is the contrast between it's apparent real-world utility as a subject (which seems very minimal) and the level of pomposity and self-importance of it's most vocal proponents (as if it is some absolute truth over and above everything else). We look at post-modernism and wonder why it should see itself in equivalence to other academic subjects which seem to have far greater use.

I think what we'd really like you to show is that the subject has worth other than as a tool to keep the academics who teach it in a living.


Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:26:06 UTC | #638546