Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
It is quite reasonable to associate Postmodernism with something indecent, given the characteristic physicality of art, performances, experimental theater, an abundance of pornography, various deviations, etc. Of course, these are all products of the postmodern era, so from the point of view of traditional culture (we are talking about post-Christian heritage) it's indecent, yes. Another thing is that postmodernism is not limited to this and generally tries not to operate with the basic oppositions of “moral – immoral” and so on, so when you ask this question, you show yourself somewhere at the crossroads of all these cultures, projecting onto postmodernism a problem that does not exist for it.
That is, the indecent exists only in a certain discourse and this is clearly not postmodernism. Another thing is that postmodern philosophy is often presented as a kind of sophistry of the XXI (actually XXX) century, not without precedents from Derrida and other Frenchmen, whose works were amusingly described by another postmodernist V. Pelevin in his “Macedonian Critique of French Thought”. Also about the obvious mistakes of postmodern theorists is well written in the book by Jean Bricmont and Alain Sokal “Intellectual tricks. Critique of modern Postmodern Philosophy”. Among Russian philosophers, one of the most famous critics is V. Kutyrev, but this is as far as external criticism is concerned, and if we talk about internal problems, then with regard to logocentric thinking, postmodernism is really a hell of thought. Just look at how Derrida brings Rousseau to exactly the opposite views, thanks to this deconstruction, or how Lacan interprets the texts, to be honest, and how they go out into the space of European heritage and arrange ultra-violence in the spirit of Burgess.
Well, about the fact that it does not exist: in the philosophy of postmodernism, the concept of “truth” ceases to be what it was for all previous philosophy, so that the latter itself becomes only a creative concept, add here a departure from the essential categories of describing reality, all these strikethroughs as new methods of philosophy, anti-theologo-morpho-fallo-ethno and other centrism in the end and total “post” and at the output we get an irreconcilable difference in discourse, so yes, this is a post/not/philosophy of post/not/humanity from the point of view of postmodernism itself.