Status Updates From Explaining Postmodernism: S...

Se o autor é rival do kant, eu sou kantiano!

Informações desencontradas em meio a críticas mais ou menos bem construídas.

Fantastic philosophy so far

Dense.

it's a struggle so far

Well, at least this is giving me something to do while I’m waiting for new tires on my car.

" حقیقتی وجود ندارد؛ تنها حقایق وجود دارند، و حقایق تغییر می کنند."

Listening to the audiobook as I drive. Quickly becoming a strong candidate for my small, but growing, 'worst' shelf

Very didactic is style.

Wow! What a great book! Really helps to unpack how what we traditionally accept as the status quo, evolved from Enlightenment thinking. Hicks traces these threads through the cultural changes in continental Europe, the United States’ evolution into a Republic, the rise of free markets, and how secularism and religions clashed during the Enlightenment and after. Each page is better than the last one!

A great selection of premises to begin with but dreadfully executed in the delivery. Hicks is infuriating because he constantly passes off opinion as fact and misinterprets a number of key thinkers in the western philosophical tradition- particularly Kierkegaard from my perspective- offering a shallow and peculiarly arbitrary objectivist definition of 'reason'; faithfully setting it as the measure of all things.

A great selection of premises to begin with but dreadfully executed in the delivery. Hicks is infuriating because he constantly passes off opinion as fact and misinterprets a number of key thinkers in the western philosophical tradition- particularly Kierkegaard from my perspective- offering a shallow and peculiarly arbitrary objectivist definition of 'reason'; faithfully setting it as the measure of all things.

A great selection of premises to begin with but dreadfully executed in the delivery. Hicks is infuriating because he constantly passes off opinion as fact and misinterprets a number of key thinkers in the western philosophical tradition- particularly Kierkegaard from my perspective- offering a shallow and peculiarly arbitrary objectivist definition of 'reason'; faithfully setting it as the measure of all things.

I have completed the original book, but will be moving on to another book before revisiting the new editions about art.

Like a mini course in modern/postmodern philosophy! So much information!

A disappointment so far. Over half the book but still no discussion of postmodernist thinkers.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago first published in the West in 1973, was the most widely read and condemnatory. Solzhenitsyn's book drew upon extensive research and Solzhenitsyn's own first hand experience of eight years' imprisonment in the labor camps for the crime of having written in 1945 a letter critical of Stalin's regime.

Stephen Hicks / Explaining Postmodernism

Phenomenology becomes philosophically important once we accept the Kantian conclusion that we cannot start as realists and scientists do by assuming that we are aware of an external, independent reality that is made up of objects that we are trying to understand...So we start phenomenologically __ that is, by simply and clearly describing the phenomena of experience and change.

Stephen Hicks

Postmodernism rejects the Enlightenment project in the most fundamental way possible __by attacking its essential philosophical themes. Postmodernism rejects the reason and the individualism that the entire Enlightenment world depends upon. So it ends up attacking all of the consequences of the Enlightenment philosophy, from capitalism and liberal forms of government to science and technology.

Stephen Hicks

“Postmodernism is the academic far Left’s epistemological strategy for responding to the crisis caused by the failures of socialism in theory and in practice”.

"pornography is, therefore is not free speech but political oppression"

Wonderful book, despite some distracting typos.

Ugh, Hegel

That weakness is the sole source of postmodernism’s power against it.

What is still needed is a refutation of those historical premises, and an identification and defense of the alternatives to them.

The Enlightenment was based on premises opposite to those of postmodernism, but while the Enlightenment was able to create a magnificent world on the basis of those premises, it articulated and defended them only incompletely.

Showing that a movement leads to nihilism is an important part of understanding it, as is showing how a failing and nihilistic move-ment can still be dangerous. Tracing postmodernism’s roots back to Rousseau, Kant, and Marx explains how all of its elements came to be woven together. Yet identifying postmodernism’s roots and connecting them to contemporary bad consequences does not refute postmodernism.

Nihilism is close to the surface in the postmodern intellectual movement in a historically unprecedented way.

If we now add to the postmodern epistemology of language the far Left politics of the leading postmodernists and their firsthand awareness of the crises of socialist thought and practice, then the verbal weaponry has to become explosive.

. Stanley Fish, as noted in Chapter Four, calls all opponents of racial preferences bigots and lumps them in with the Ku Klux Klan. Andrea Dworkin calls all heterosexual males rapists and repeat-edly labels “Amerika” a fascist state. With such rhetoric, truth or falsity is not the issue: what matters primarily is the language’s effectiveness.

This explains the harsh nature of much postmodern rhetoric. The regular deployments of ad hominem, the setting up of straw men, and the regular attempts to silence opposing voices are all logical consequences of the postmodern epistemology of language.