Live data from Hacker News

Postmodernism generator

elsewhere.org

1–10 of 18 posts

Re: Postmodernism generator

#3
post #2

In case somebody missed it (Richard Dawkins on postmodernism): http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=645178 Edit: here's the direct link to the article: http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/dawkins.html

Oh, I didn't see that somebody has already posted this as a link in the comments. No cross-posting was intended.

Re: Postmodernism generator

#5
post #4

This generator reminds me of the Paper generator by some MIT students.. http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/ ..much more funny and even pdf direct output :D

This is fantastic. And there are some cool stories and links on that page. Thanks for the link :D

Re: Postmodernism generator

#6
It's easy to make fun of postmodern philosophy, but no philosopher made-up postmodernism, they are just commenting or labeling phenomena already inherent in our culture, some of which is even more complex than their method of expressing it. Their comment might be somewhat cryptic, sometimes even creative, as they are always trying to cover their asses from, what they believe is, our loose and unstable language(s), but the overall message of diversity, multiplicity, the questioning of social constructions (sometimes), etc. have been essential tools in our society and cultural/social relations in postmodern culture.

I understand some of the downfalls of postmodernism and I won't defend it, but I'm not going back to rationalism, which influenced the Nazis, or Platonic or Christian Essentialism, which has marked humanity in negative ways for too many centuries, etc.

Re: Postmodernism generator

#8
post #6

It's easy to make fun of postmodern philosophy, but no philosopher made-up postmodernism, they are just commenting or labeling phenomena already inherent in our culture, some of which is even more complex than their method of expressing it. Their comment might be somewhat cryptic, sometimes even creative, as they are always trying to cover their asses from, what they believe is, our loose and unstable language(s), bu…

Studying our culture is done with great rigour by historians, sociologists, psychologists, economists, etc. Philosophy should be married with science, but it has little merrit on its own. It is an ego-centric discipline, where language, not observation, is misused as a basis to suggest some conformity.

The great philosophers of history were those that truly practiced the love of knowledge.

It was Martin Luther who, as a theologist, recognized the failures of organizing society according to catholic doctrine. It was Galileo Galilei who, as an astronomer, recognized our world was just one of many. It was Darwin who, as a biologist, recognized that the reason we exist is life's perpetual struggle for survival. It was Einstein who, as a physicist, recognized that the 2 main aspects of our perceived reality are intermingled.

Re: Postmodernism generator

#9
post #6

It's easy to make fun of postmodern philosophy, but no philosopher made-up postmodernism, they are just commenting or labeling phenomena already inherent in our culture, some of which is even more complex than their method of expressing it. Their comment might be somewhat cryptic, sometimes even creative, as they are always trying to cover their asses from, what they believe is, our loose and unstable language(s), bu…

I'll admit to throwing a paper out the window for including the phrase "occluded feminine matrix", but I expect things I haven't studied to be hard to understand. Focusing in computer science has some unexpected dividends in related fields (math, physics, even economics), but that doesn't mean every field must have synergy with our career choice. Is the idea that postmodern literary criticism is hard to read because we're untrained really that toxic?

Re: Postmodernism generator

#10
post #8
post #6

It's easy to make fun of postmodern philosophy, but no philosopher made-up postmodernism, they are just commenting or labeling phenomena already inherent in our culture, some of which is even more complex than their method of expressing it. Their comment might be somewhat cryptic, sometimes even creative, as they are always trying to cover their asses from, what they believe is, our loose and unstable language(s), bu…

Studying our culture is done with great rigour by historians, sociologists, psychologists, economists, etc. Philosophy should be married with science, but it has little merrit on its own. It is an ego-centric discipline, where language, not observation, is misused as a basis to suggest some conformity. The great philosophers of history were those that truly practiced the love of knowledge. It was Martin Luther who, a…

From wikipedia: "Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, truth, beauty, law, justice, validity, mind, and language." So why should philosophy be married to science? It is your mind that is married to science, so you look at science to prove or explain your existence. I tend to do this, as well, which is why I'm on hacker news and I highly respect all of the mentioned scientists, but I would never confuse science with philosophy.

Furthermore, can science or any scientist explain the complexity that was Michael Jackson or is reality television, both of which were/are true Baudrillardian hyper-realities; or the complexity of image-based wars (like Iraq) and street riots (like Iran) that are fought/waged through the media/twitter/etc. Our expression/lives in postmodern times is what shapes these events and how they are lived/delivered/executed/etc, but the philosophy is the language/concepts behind all of this, and much more of the, often complex, phenomena in our society/existence.

Post reply on HN