I Dispelled Post-Modernism...

In about 3 minutes...

from JoeUser Forums
Ok, in English class today we were talking about leading philosophies of the day and the most prevalent one of our time is post-modernism which basically says that all things are relative and there are no truths. I bursted that bubble in about three minutes. If there were no truths, then there are no facts, no facts=no scientific laws, no laws end up tearing down the very fabric of reality, therefore we could not exist because forces such as gravity and the forces that hold atoms together would not exist or exist sporadically. Also, if that's not enough the theory in itself is flawed because it contradicts itself....if it is considered real and "truthful" then it isn't.....oooh....wild stuff eh?...LOL

Well, that's about as philosophical as I get for one day,
~Zoo
philosophy
6,505 views 11 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ok, I got none of that shuan. lol. I'm lost.
no big supprise there though.

~carebear~
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
You're making the assumption of course that for something to be it has to be true. If you look at something like energy, it is less digital and more analogue - according to post-modern thought, so is reality. Some things are more true or real than others, but nothing is definitively true or real. That's why I really hate modern philosophical thought. There's no real point to it.
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
You're making the assumption of course that for something to be it has to be true.


Not quite, something that exists in "reality" has to be the truth....I've never seen lies actually exist except as lies, which in turn are not "real" or veiled truths.

~Zoo
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
It was awesome, i witnessed the action. i want to be a philospher when i grow up, make up stupid stuf and see how many people will follow me.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have read Rand, and I'm starting a 101 Philosophy book for fun

Modernism, and its ilk seem kind of pointless to me.


Peace,

Beebes
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
If there were no truths, then there are no facts,


Truth and fact are never quite the same thing, otherwise why the need for separate signifiers. The difference is often the same as that between data and information. Data is, supposedly, empirical while information is the interpretation of that data and therefore subjective.

So while data can nominally be held to be true, it is of no use to us unless it is analysed and therefore interpreted. Truth is often applied to the interpretation, not to the data, and it is here that the concept of truth finds its weakness. Truth is not the best standard of judgement when it comes to interpretation and is the main reason why "reasonable doubt" rather than the concept of "truth" is used in courts of law.

no laws end up tearing down the very fabric of reality


Here you mistake the laws, rather than the reality, as being necessary. Nature follows no law, it just is. Law is a human institution and if we were not around (and previously we had not been) to give nature the oh-so-clever gift of our "laws" it would continue functioning as it has for the last several billion years. I repeat: tearing down a "law" (a linguistic phenomenon) will not bring about the apocalypse.

I think you might have missed the point. Try finding truth. Do not find something that is "true", and object that has the quality of being "true", but go out there and find truth itself. Impossible.

Truth is a human idea, it is not something we find in the world, it is something we enforce upon it. This is the point of post-modernism, that the interpretive and ideological systems we have previously used to perceive and understand the world are not "natural" or "evolutionary" phenomena, that would make it too easy to absolve ourselves of responsibility, but are cultural and constructed instead.

This does not mean that we do not use the ideas and theories that have served us so well in the past, it means only that we must be aware of them as architectural feats of our own imaginations, not god or nature given precepts and laws.

You must remember that post-modernism is a philosophy that has at its centre ideas and language, not the "real world". You might find it offensive because it sees the real world as a function of ideas and language.

Nice to see that you're not blindly following the modern orthodoxy, but it is often the mistake of youth to think that you can tear down in three minutes what it took an entire century to build.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
"Well, that's about as philosophical as I get for one day,"

Stick to what you do best then. That was a pretty lame attempt. I mean, shit I never thought of those arguments you just put forward before I became an advocate of postmodern philosophies. How about you read up on postmodernism, try Foucault as a starting point, before you decide you actually have even a basic understanding, because you have considerably oversimplified postmodernism in order to support your theories.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
not so highly, you are a legend. Very good effort.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Zoologist03,

Liked it.

Post-modernism is dangerous as well as absurd since it is an amoral standpoint.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
a good source for debunking post-modernism is C.S. Lewis's book *Abolition of Man.*

He doesn't use the sort of arguments used here, but clearly disproves post-modernism in a very rational and easy-to-follow method. He never actually uses the words "post-modernism" but it's quite recognizable. You'll have to stay with him long enough to get the "aha!" though.

Awesome stuff and a short read, too.

Good try Zoo.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well, I see where your coming from Zoo, and I understand where the people with IQ's of 160 and + are coming from above too. lol, hard to imagine, huh? but anyways...
a truth is not always a factual thing, therefore truth is not directly related to scientific laws. and because scientific laws and truth are just human concepts, the fabric of reality isn't torn down because we still experience the scientific laws and still create what is the truth in our mind and what isn't the truth, a lie. it has not been torn down, just oddly misplaced in our minds for a while... but the laws are still there, the truths are still there.

bleh, i dunno. philosophy would be cool to get into, but its kinda a slippery concept to grasp.
hope at least some of that made sense...
??
Love Ya!
~Liv