10 Comments

Postmodernism is sophistry. Sophistry is ancient. Esotericism is intrinsic to the sophist's project. My own favorite example is the Duck of Theseus. The "Ship of Theseus" is a real phenomenon in ship construction and maintentance: as a sailing ship is slowly replaced one board at a time, is it still the same ship or a new one? No less a critical thinker than Katy Montgomerie has used this one, in his case to argue that a person could transform into a duck one part at a time. So there you have it, a 3,000 year-old parlor trick of ancient Greeks repurposed as postmodern QT.

Expand full comment

"Postmodernism is sophistry."

🙄 You actually ever read anything about the philosophy itself? See my recent comment and Note here:

https://substack.com/@humanuseofhumanbeings/note/c-39996123

"No less a critical thinker than Katy Montgomerie ...."

LoL. Though I think you might be misinterpreting that "Ship of Theseus" idea. That ship is just a collection of bits & pieces that has a particular form and is capable of a particular function. Which does not change at all as some or all of those bits are replaced. Same thing with humans -- all of our cells are replaced every 7 to 10 years, but there's a continuity that manifests as or constitutes our "personal identity", rather akin to "gender identity" ...

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/identity-personal/

In other news, ICYMI, and relative to your recent post about the infamous Riley Dennis, you might be "amused" by his take on what is required to qualify as a female:

Rational Wiki: "For example, if someone was assigned male at birth, but took puberty blockers and hormones and had a vaginoplasty, they would have “female” hormones, secondary sex characters, and genitals. So, three of their five ways of determining sex would be “female”... That means three-fifths of the sex criteria point to female, and only one-fifth points to male – and if you believe that sex is an unchanging biological fact, that couldn’t be possible. But it is."

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Riley_Dennis

Scientific illiteracy -- as far as the eye can see. And on virtually all sides of the political fence:

https://humanuseofhumanbeings.substack.com/p/lies-damned-lies-and-statistics

Expand full comment

Yes, the Riley Dennis bit is ‘amusing’: to tally a synthetic cocktail that mimics bio hormones as equal to ‘female hormones’..and vaginoplasty mutilation as equal to having female genitalia.. so moving one closer to being a women (with endogenous hormones and an actual vagina), is like saying that a child’s ‘mud pie’ made on a rainy day is actually a pie. Mud pies are pies. Sure- we play along- take a fake bite of the mud, rub our belly and say, Yum! With a wink..to be kind..when it’s a game.

Expand full comment

Exactly! Agree entirely! 100%! 🙂

But, more seriously, a sad sign of the times that we're so ready to pander to the delusional -- fine when we're dealing with kids and their "imaginary friends", somewhat less so when the fate of western civilization hangs in the balance.

Apropos of which, a rather brilliant interview by Helen Dale of Maya Forstater and Helen Joyce, the latter of whom cogently argued that transgenderism is a "civilization-threatening movement". My Note thereon:

https://substack.com/profile/21792752-steersman/note/c-39988418

But, somewhat more broadly, I've also argued that part and parcel of that is a too common inability to differentiate between substance and appearance, between being X and "identifying-as" X, between reality and illusion:

https://medium.com/@steersmann/reality-and-illusion-being-vs-identifying-as-77f9618b17c7

And, more broadly still and relative to postmodernism, why I also argue that rather too many, even on "our" side, are far too quick to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Expand full comment

Postmodernism is the replacement of objective independent reality by subjective anthropocentric moral discourse. And all of the above, too, of course.

It's also a way to gain status, using impenetrable language.

Expand full comment

As soon as I see unnecessarily obscure words being used by the dozens, I assume it's a POMO.

Expand full comment

Here's more on postmodernism:

https://open.substack.com/pub/shadowbox/p/dear-straight-people

Expand full comment

Thank you for this effort, and for commentators. I’ll be rereading and thinking how all this impacts my everyday life. (Not skeptical, just used to living in two worlds-- both important to me but seemingly unrelated to each other. My problem)

Expand full comment

What ChatGPT says, for the record:

Postmodernism is a philosophical, cultural, and intellectual movement that emerged in the mid-20th century, primarily in the fields of art, literature, architecture, and philosophy. It represents a departure from the modernist ideas that dominated much of the 19th and 20th centuries. Postmodernism is characterized by a rejection of grand narratives, a focus on pluralism and diversity, and a skepticism toward absolute truths and objective reality. Here are some key aspects of postmodernism:

Rejection of Grand Narratives: Postmodernism challenges the idea of overarching, universal narratives that claim to explain the entirety of human experience. It argues that such narratives are often oppressive and that different individuals and cultures have their own unique perspectives that should be recognized.

Relativism: Postmodernism embraces cultural relativism, which suggests that there are no objective standards for judging one culture or value system as superior to another. It emphasizes that what is true or meaningful can vary from one context or cultural perspective to another.

Skepticism of Truth and Reality: Postmodernism questions the concept of objective truth and the idea of an objective reality that can be known independently of individual experiences and perspectives. Instead, it often emphasizes subjective truths and multiple, competing interpretations of reality.

Fragmentation and Deconstruction: Postmodernism often engages in the deconstruction of established ideas and texts. It seeks to expose the underlying assumptions, biases, and contradictions in traditional narratives, literature, and cultural artifacts.

Playfulness and Irony: Postmodern art and literature often incorporate playfulness, irony, and self-reference. Artists and writers may borrow from various styles, genres, and cultural references, creating pastiches that challenge conventional boundaries.

Consumer Culture Critique: Postmodernism frequently critiques consumer culture, mass media, and the commodification of art and culture. It raises questions about the influence of commercial interests on society and creativity.

Diversity and Identity: Postmodernism places a strong emphasis on the recognition of diverse identities, including those based on gender, race, sexuality, and ethnicity. It seeks to challenge and deconstruct hierarchies and power structures.

Multidisciplinarity: Postmodernism often encourages the blurring of boundaries between academic disciplines and artistic mediums. This interdisciplinary approach allows for greater flexibility in exploring complex ideas.

It's important to note that postmodernism is not a unified or monolithic philosophy but rather a diverse and evolving set of ideas. Critics of postmodernism argue that it can lead to relativism, nihilism, and a disregard for objective reality. Proponents, on the other hand, see it as a valuable perspective that challenges established norms and encourages a more inclusive and pluralistic worldview. Postmodernism has had a significant impact on fields such as literature, art, architecture, philosophy, and cultural studies and continues to shape intellectual and artistic discourse today.

Expand full comment

Some "interesting" comments from "some smart, thoughtful people in [your] network" ...

Though I think one might reasonably suggest that much of them is a case of the blind leading the blind. You might consider some more in-depth and solid analysis from sources like Britannica and the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Wikipedia: "Postmodernism is an intellectual stance or mode of discourse characterized by skepticism toward the 'grand narratives' of modernism; rejection of epistemic (scientific) certainty or the stability of meaning; and sensitivity to the role of ideology in maintaining political power. Claims to objectivity are dismissed as naïve realism, with attention drawn to the conditional nature of knowledge claims within particular historical, political, and cultural discourses ..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism

And:

Wikipedia: "In philosophy of perception and epistemology, naïve realism (also known as direct realism, perceptual realism, or common sense realism) is the idea that the senses provide us with direct awareness of objects as they really are ..."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Na%C3%AFve_realism

The last bit having some venerable provenance, being, as it is, more or less identical to Plato's analogy with the cave: what we perceive, and how we interpret that is very much contingent on our biases, misperceptions, feelings, and fears:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_cave

No doubt there's a great deal of antiscientific claptrap and outright woo-woo wrapped up in the "practice" of postmodernism. Although one might say the same thing about many "models" of reality -- from feminism to quantum mechanics.

But largely the point of the more or less durable principles of postmodernism is that, as per Plato, "the true forms of objects [are those] that we can only perceive through reason". However and in notable contradistinction to which, the woomeisters of postmodernism insist that it's "models all the way down", that there is NO "reality" whatsoever at the bottom, that one model is as good as any other one -- rank insanity.

You might try reading about "model-dependent realism", a term that "was coined by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow in their 2010 book, The Grand Design."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-dependent_realism

Likewise an oldish NY Times article about Bruno Latour, "the Post-Truth Philosopher, [who] Mounts a Defense of Science":

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/25/magazine/bruno-latour-post-truth-philosopher-science.html?unlocked_article_code=2CVsrc6cWpb5doFGOLeWTZ8Gny1G-8-lh5wE9S6cIOieNoaNSofW-Wsxr9wf9JQMe2G1u15UCiP1IpSoYdozLJ_7L_3J0cEuGtlgSSnvRYkZ9HTdgsbCJUHHNPFw8Rvvgar6i1U_qoZeMflVxIXW15xi8OFl6yDEx_fc78M6HQu08Z9dsPm1auGC18V4x85JoMgkM-Aw5H5HEd_DG9USHuXprhUjJ0ljwCWmSzAyGKMbILzEVD2XZa-6tyVjk0tQcOAt1UPy8inOI8YvF1my5rj-QXzUIeZeMiFAS46QmwRyYKbjjkDwIe9ZBEWOulOUUFK8iHusiVQ_NuC-KhWg8BUxKVQgww3i-_LQdvBE1yaAaCnC21o&smid=url-share

Think you kind of have to make some effort to differentiate between those who know what they're talking about and those who don't, between those who know how to properly use tools and those who don't.

Expand full comment