/lit/ - Literature

>>11538240
Nietzsche

>>11538261
>There are no facts, only interpretations.
Nietzsche was a nihilistic postmodernist, sweetie

>>11538261

>>11538273
>being this retarded

>>11538261
He's not modern either guys.

Here's one OP, "Postmodernism Disrobed" an essay Richard Dawkins wrote:
http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/dawkins.html

From the 90s though.

>>11538294
>Dorkins

>>11538294
>Suppose you are an intellectual impostor with nothing to say
nice self-reflection of dawkins there

>>11538281
"The guy I like is the precursor to the people I dont like, I'll ignore this before I have to form my own opinion on Post-Modernism, instead of what the internet has told me"

>>11538240
why contain it?

Does anyone here think it’s possible to kill manipulation of reality so that everyone understands there is a soul, but no spiritual communicative force present?

In other words, money and personalities these days exist that reflects the money. Is it possible to kill the engine that makes these things possible? Then the schizophrenic business tyrants will fall like dominoes, crippled by their own game

bump

>>11538327
societal collapse

>>11538273
Not all interpretations are of equal worth.

>>11540457
Isn't that just an interpretation not a fact?

>>11538281
But he is right anon

>>11538240
Nietzsche, Macintyre, Gilson, Girard, Foucault, Camus

>>11538294
nietzsche is a modern philosopher by definition, OP just ment one that lived in the postmodern era

>>11538240
They're probably all theologians

>>11538327
>Then the schizophrenic business tyrants will fall like dominoes, crippled by their own game
We're in the same boat, brother. Since modern society is entirely dependent on near-depleted, non-renewable resources (oil and coal) and a planet that's drained of it's ability to sustain life, when they go, you go. And most likely you'll go first, being poor and without resources, and they'll go last, being rich and supplied.

Is post-modernism philosophical cancer?

>>11538327
not with "homo sapiens"

Kierkegaard I guess ? I've never heard postmodernists criticize faith.

>>11543600
>>11542453
Exactly my problem. I can't find any critiques of this postmodernist bullshit except by Christians or pseudo Christian charlatans like Kierkegaard.

Hasn't anyone resisted existentialism or humanism from a 21st century perspective? There has to be SOMEONE arguing for an inherent morality, or at least a subjective morality that one makes for oneself.

This constant questioning and disregarding of everything is ridiculous. We'll have nothing left but hedonism at this rate.

Also in particular I think the focus with postmodernists on power dynamics is reductive and simplistic. Something addressing that would be nice.

t. Op

You probably need to look somewhere around Taylorism/Fordism/fascists. Most of it's going to be full STEMtard engineering major shit that makes Starting Strength look like Tolstoy though.

>>11538240
Seriously how has the importance of this book not caught on?

>>11544104
>not caught on
the author kept shilling it and it made him seem desperate and unappealing and so boosted sales of TLoTiaT in a further spiral of /lit/'s reactionary postmodern ironic mien.

>>11544108
What the fuck is TLoTiaT? I don't feel like thinking.

>>11544120
>What the fuck is TLoTiaT?
lurk more newb

I'm at a bookstore right now

Like, just look at this bullshit man not everything has to be questioned lol some things are pretty cool

>>11544152
I asked for critiques of postmodernism and the freakin chick at the front kept pointing me to Foucault, the very image of radical French cafe postmodernism

Jesus tapdancing christ the ride never ends