/lit/ - Literature

>>15266613
I know it's self-defeating, and that's the problem with po-mo. There is no practical way to live functionally with it. That's why I made the thread. However, going against to its main arguments is not easy. The subjectivity of truth, and by extension reason, has been bothering me, because I do have empirical evidence of it.

Now, you could argue that a school of thought that condemns reason, using reason for it, is by default making a void argument, since it acknowledges the value of reason by using it in the first place. I have no argument against that. But if this "obvious" flaw was so critical, why the hell did po-mo even take off the ground and permeate academia to this day?