/lit/ - Literature

>>vague, ambiguous prose
Nope, you're just an idiot.
0/10: bait harder, faggot.

>>4711307

>hello i am a faggot please read while I jerk off about Las Meninas for fifty pages

No you are the retard.

>>4711307
>being this threatened by the truth

>>4711314
>>4711316
samefag

>left wing
schibboleths of compassion != left

agree with the rest though

>>4711321

>implying samefag
This is how much of a butthurt faggot you are.

>>4711334
actually caring enough to prove that you're not a samefag.
Die.

>>4711327
>schibboleths of compassion

What.

>>4711335

>trying to save face even after you've been blown the fuck out

You Foucault fanboys really need to leave /lit/.

>hypertextuality
>visual-poetic description
>faithful regurgitation
>antifoundational metaphysics
>labyrinthine description
>masked agenda
gg but I have to go to work

>>4711339
>>trying to save face even after you've been blown the fuck out
No such thing happened, faggot

>>4711299

>no references
Full retard
>No scientific basis
Not autist friendly*

>>4711349

>tries to use pathetic 'le samefag' tactic
>gets proven wrong
>goes into damage control mode
>quotes the wrong fucking post

Should... should you be wearing a helmet, or something?

>>4711338
>Continuing this after actually proving your not a samefag
>Calling the other anon butthurt

Jesus christ

>>4711356

>implying I hoozy wizzle wazzle fa da doo gamoo kah butt

>>4711353
Why so ableist, shitlord?

>>4711378
Because autists are my favorite people to fail. Because what you like is shit to me.

As an old time lefty intellectual, fan of Deleuze, Derrida and others -- still I must say Foucault, except for panopticon and first chapter of discipline and punnishment --really seems to be satirizing/exploiting the whole idea of discourse: or an idiot.

>>4711395
>Society Must be Defended
>The Order of Things

>TFW you act as if Panopticon isn't a fuckng chapter of Discipline and the Punish

Do better.
Wrong, you are.

Foucalt is insufferable. I think we can agree the panopticon was good but the rest is SHIT

>>4711386
I bet you deny objective moral values too.

>>4711434
>post Sam Harris
Dat fedora philosophy

>>4711434
>Proudly exclaiming positivism
kek bro, real kek.

>>4711449
>yfw marxists will never be this edgy

>>4711462
>implying Foucault is a Marxist
You've got me in tears, anon

>>4711299
>>4711314
>>4711316
>>4711321
>>4711327
>>4711334
>>4711335
>>4711336
>>4711338
>>4711339
>>4711349
>>4711353
>>4711354
>>4711356
>>4711408
>>4711434
>>4711449
>>4711453
>>4711462

>tfw /lit/ has descended to /pol/ levels of discussion

op is just mad that AIDSgod is, in fact, a GOD

>>4711307
>HAHA, YOU DIDN'T BAIT ME!
>NOW LET ME RESPOND ANGRILY TO SOMETHING YOU SAID AS IF YOU WERE SERIOUS!

that critical moment when a 4chan catchphrase becomes so overused that the actual definition is forgotten

>>4711299
The whole thread was ruined when OP used 'left wing agenda' as an argument to Foucault being a hack. There his credibility went to shit and everybody who didnt get he was a troll at that point is sure dumb

>no references
>flowery, vague, ambiguous prose
>weak as piss arguments
>no scientific basis
>needless words
>blatant statist agenda

>>4711973
>support

Mother fucker, it's not a movement or something. It's a brute fact like the death of god.

>>4711980
why would anyone support post modernism?
sorry I deleted because I wanted to add a pic.

>Mother fucker, it's not a movement or something. It's a brute fact like the death of god.

I understand this but just because this is what happens to a culture with no moral foundation it can be stopped.
Germany did a good job at combating modernism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degenerate_art

>>4711492
This is a /pol/ thread

>>4711299
>Foucalt
>left wing agenda

lel, not everything that doesn't heil twice a day in the direction of the fuhrerbunker is a lefitst

>>4711987
You're getting there /pol/ but you still need to read more to understand what you're talking about.

Don't forget that you're a part of postmodernism, just like the Nazis were a part of modernism even if they thought they loathed it.

I agree that Foucault definitely a shit, but to be fair not all philosophy needs an empirical basis, and indeed the greatest philosophy needs no references (although Foucault is certainly not "the greatest philosophy"). Furthermore, there's absolutely nothing wrong with having a political agenda when it's, you know, POLITICAL philosophy. The problem that arises, however, in all Continental philosophy, is this ambiguity and lack of clear-cut argument. They refuse to just say what they're going to say, and instead hide behind layer upon layer of obfuscation and over-complication. Foucault, too, is guilty of this great crime.

>>4711987
Fascist architecture is postmodernism

>>4711987
>this is what happens to a culture with no moral foundation

vulgar idealist pls go. postmodernism is what happens to a society once it enters the post-industrial era, nothing more.

>>no references
Funny, my copy of D&P has six pages of references in the back. If you're gonna call out Foucault on his sources at least question the way he cherry-picks them, not the amount. He cites his shit, he just picks stuff to fit his conclusion if anything.

>>4712003
I would say some of it is. But a lot of it was a return to the HRE look

>>4712016
this. analytics being dishonest, once again

>>4712017
It wasn't a genuine return. It was a classicist re-appropriation and a rejection of modernism (while being trapped in it). Pretty postmodern if you ask me.

>>4712008
>postmodernism is what happens to a society once it enters the post-industrial era, nothing more.
and yet all post industrial countries have declined in morals and fell into a post modernist trap

>>4712023
i have no idea what you are trying to say by this

>>4712025
are you saying that post modernism is more defined by its rejection of modernism rather than its actual out come?

>>4712034
Two sides of the same coin

>>4712034

The general definition of the postmodern situation is the dissolution of all narratives and metanarratives. The outcome is that traditional foundations that society has oriented itself upon -- let's take scientific rationalism -- are increasingly imperiled or discredited.

Moderns still had a narrative -- science -- to cling to. Now science is set to destroy the planet with nuclear weapons, environmental crisis, or a variety of other issues (lack or "progress", imperialism, state apologism, etc).

>>4712034
>you will never dine in the plaza of the Welthauptstadt, sipping tea with well-dressed and well-bred men and beautiful, chaste women
>you will always live in Smelly Transgender Turkestan 2: Pneumatic Jewgaloo

>If this guy submitted any of his shit to any of my professors, he'd be lucky to get a C-.

I would hazard a guess that none of your professors would be able to hold their own at École normale supérieure, let alone your good self.

>>4712090
>tfw this jumbo faggot googled É

>>4712092
>mfw McDonalds has free wifi

>>4712040

that definition of pm might make sense in philosophy departments, but not in the real world.

we are more at attached to (and faithful in) the technological manifestations of the progress of science moreso than ever.

>>4712040

that definition of pm might make sense in philosophy departments, but not in the real world.

we are more attached to (and faithful in) the technological manifestations of the progress of science than ever.

>>4712126
Turn on your TV and be amazed by all that pomo shit. Especially commercials. Look at 4chan. Look at the hipster. Look at your furniture. Look at anything that has philosophical basis.

>>4712090
It's just another school you cram two years to get into. The French highschool does have 1 year of philosophy, but I doubt it would be that hard for a good and hard-working student from wherever.

>>4711299
You're such a pleb. Muh big werds. None of your professors are as widely published as Foucalt, they'd give him a C out of jealousy.

>>4712126
>we are more attached to (and faithful in) the technological manifestations of the progress of science than ever.
Feyerabend
Technoscience literature from Science and Technology Studies

Watch it go to shit in your hands

>>4712140

It's all left leaning liberal ideology which follows the failure of more authoritarian and collectivist regimes in WW2. Take for example the multiculturalism in TV commercials: the implicit assertion is that a more racially diverse society would count as progress toward our concept of justice. As for the aesthetic choices of hipsters or furniture designers, the freedom to choose one's aesthetic preferences instead of inheriting them was birthed midway through the 19th century and fully established by the 20th. If at all significant as a category postmodernism is a continuation of the liberal individualist themes of the late modern period.

Even this analysis is incomplete because the better part of the "postmodern era" was marked politically by a conflict between the ideology of communism and capitalism.

>>4712157
This. I'm not sure Foucault would have given your professors at Bumfuck State Tech the time of day.

>>4712157
This. I'm not sure Foucault would have given OP's professors at Bumfuck State Tech the time of day.

OP created this thread to test us.
He wanted to see if we would just agree with any thing that sounded vaguely true.
While Foucault is a bit dodgy (he did say some good things),
its the other frenchies who are the true hacks,
most importantly Jean Paul Sartre and Albert Camus.

>>4712254
Foucault ought to lose toes for his abuses of history.

i had a professor who was really into foucault, so i'm sure he'd get an A in that class

>>4712254
Camus was neither philosopher nor French. Stay in school pleb.

>>4712219
>Bumfuck State Tech
kek

>>4712254

Both Sartre and Camus wrote novels. If you think that The Stranger is not a solid philosophical text, then that is fine, because it can work as simply a novel. Foucault was a philosopher.

yeah OP community college professors tend to be real sticklers for mediocrity so i do believe you

still don't get why people say he "won" the debate with chomsky, when he just evaded every question

>>4713501
it's just the worst debate ever

>human nature exists
>no it doesn't

argument over

>>4713365
He was mostly an historian, sometimes he talked philosophy but it wasn't exceptional; even where it was "profound", it wasn't reasoned or argued at all.

>>4713521
No, he wasn't a historian. We can tell this from his absence of archival citations and his failures to correctly read texts. Like his fundamentally poor decision to misuse the panopticon as a metaphor.

>>4713524
how did he "misuse" the panopticon? somehow i get the feeling you are a dumbass but i'll let you prove it first

>>4713524
He cites. Generally.

Durant used metaphors.

His entire philosophy could be described as the rationalization of his desires as the virtues of the emancipated soul.

>>4713532
Yeah, sure, general citations are accept…oh wait.

>>4713531
Please do check the archive.

>>4713503
These days we know that biotruths are real thanks to evolutionary psychology.

>>4713541
nah that's ok why don't you just explain it in your own words

>>4713541

Please do link the relavent content of the archive.

>>4713545
>>4713546
>>/lit/thread/S4669926#p4671005

This is an adequate description.

Deliberate mischaracterisation of historical phenomena is sufficient to remove people from the profession. See Irving's falsifications of equivalent measure in PQ-17.

>>4713552
nigga are you serious? lmao you're too stupid for foucault, just stick to chumpsky or whatever pop radical shit you think is deep

>>4713556
If you don't understand that poor metaphor selection to the point of deceit is an unforgivable historiographical crime then you may as well go back to Gibbon.

>>4713569
go tip your fedora somewhere else nerd

>>4713570
If you're suggesting that upholding a disciplinary methodology in its field of expertise is "fedora" then I have one word for you: Theology.

>>4713569

Foucault has no significance as a a historian. You don't read his work for accurate history.

>>4713556
Ignore him, he's a vulgar Marxist.

>>4713610
>historiography
>Vulgar Marxism
You don't know what words mean when you use them, and not in the sense of the death of the master signifier, but in the every day sense of you're talking shit.

>>4713621

>mfw when I realised Derrida just rips off Kierkegaard

>>4713607
It was earlier suggested that Foucault was a historian. I was correcting this suggestion.

>>4713626

An historian of ideas is still an historian.

>>4713632
wait i thought he was a archaelogist

>>4713633

You thought Foucault was literally an archaeologist?

I'm being trolled here, right?

>>4713633
was a physical biologist

>>4713632
In this case historians of ideas must still be held to the disciplinary standards.

This makes Foucault an amusing fraud.

>>4713645
Nietzsche didn't cite shit either, stop trying to pull down the masters with your shitty slave bullshit

>>4713645
>This makes Foucault an amusing fraud.

>>4711299
>no references
>flowery, vague, ambiguous prose
>weak as piss arguments
>no scientific basis
>needless words

Sounds like every continental theorist ever.

>>4713653
Nietzsche wasn't a historian of ideas. He was a syphilitic pony hugger. This gives Nietzsche's ideas an element of credibility: he doesn't have to be held to the standards of historiography because he set out to talk amusing shit.

>>4713654
The name of that student? Wittgenstein.

„Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen.“

p.s.: beat your child students harder.

>>4711299
Ugh, seriously, 91 replies? Fuck you, /lit/

>>4713662
Merleau-Ponty
Arendt
Whyte
Jameson

>>4713681

They might have all of the above, but nobody has wasted time reading them to find out.

>>4713680

Le indignant bump face.

>>4713684
>Le indignant bump face.
My post meant nothing besides surprise at so many replies to a troll thread, and somehow your post meant even less.

>>4713690
>My post meant

Oh wow, you even uphold the intentional fallacy.

The meaning of your post is its role in the play of signifiers on /lit/.

>>4713698
>words
Cute.

>>4713701

>doesn't write a full sentence
>uses a full stop

American education?

>>4713709
implied (that's)

>>4713709
>doesn't understand grammatically correct usage of language
You didn't give me much to work with either way.

>>4713713

>no u

>>4713684
>They might have all of the above, but nobody has wasted time reading them to find out.
I've read them all, they lack those qualities.