/lit/ - Literature

nobody cares

Is postmodernism over after this?

>>10112056
Jordan we heard you the first time. Go do your zebra analogy somewhere else

>>>/pol/

Not real postmodernism!

What has Paglia even done except write a rather shitty 90s tome of Freudian lit crit and be in FEMINIST BTFO FEMINISM tier clips

>>10112056
>laughs at every joke or semi-blunt criticism he makes

What a woman. I like her.

I at least can respect Paglia for reading postmodernists.

>>10112945
I'm being serious. Are they actually worth reading? I'm not a student of literature or history, so "worth" in my opinion is if they alter my worldview in such a way that I understand the world and myself better.

>>10112056

Everybody on this board is either sucking Peterson's dick or getting rammed by the big black cock of poststructuralism. Enough with the whining from everybody for fucks sake.

>>10112984
go poopy then you loser

>>10112984
Post your porn elsewhere

>>10112989
It's funny how you lack self awareness. The image fags described you.

>>10112957
Yeah read Foucault

>>10112957
It's not completely worthless, but if your goal is to obtain knowledge that is useful and/or gives you a more nuanced view of reality then there are probably several hundred books that you would be better off reading instead.

>>10112957
I recommend the Foucault Reader edited by Paul Rabinow. It is a good introductory work that does not require much prior philosophical knowledge.

>>10112984
this is a blue board fagtron

>>10112957
Foucault is genuinely insightful. Derrida and Lacan are hacks with nothing worthwhile to offer. Can't speak for Deleuze.

pleb.
postmodernism is a conspiracy theory meme

Are there any other Paglia videos like this? She's really fucking smart, and has that same passionate style as JP.

>>10113205
They're mostly a rehash of what she already said with a consistently manic stumbling over her words.

>>10112117
Claimed George Lucas is the greatest artist of our time.

>when you're so dedicated to triggering libs that you defend the prequel trilogy

>>10112056
The only reason Peterson harps about "postmodernists" is because he wants to create a red-herring that will distract people from the real culprits. Jews are to blame for the contemporary nonsense after the 1960s? Ah, no, no: it's those damn French intellectuals man!
Neoreactionaries attempted something similar by trying to shift blame from Jews to Calvinists.
Peterson peddles neoconservative drivel, in essence. As to this video: did anyone catch on that Peterson stopped the dialogue as soon as Paglia started to point the finger at Jews?

Really gets my marbles rolling.

>>10112984
is that mc ride?

>>10113956
>Peterson stopped the dialogue as soon as Paglia started to point the finger at Jews?
that didn't happen at all. wtf?

>>10113971
Watch the end of the video, the last 5 minutes, again. Now keep in mind what I pointed out. When you notice it, you'll shit bricks.

I think Peterson too often conflates postmodernism with neo-Marxism, and he's partially correct, but you could also call the alt right postmodernist. Richard Rorty is a postmodernist but is a committed liberal and I think he shares Peterson's pragmatic definition of truth. Also, he predicted the 2016 election back in 1997.

https://youtu.be/L1qEsGcQeqw?t=1079

https://youtu.be/L1qEsGcQeqw?t=1079

I think Peterson too often conflates postmodernism with neo-Marxism, and he's partially correct, but you could also call the alt right postmodern. Richard Rorty is a postmodernist but is a committed liberal and I think he shares Peterson's pragmatic definition of truth. Also, he predicted the 2016 election back in 1997.

Watch from 16:00-18:00
https://youtu.be/L1qEsGcQeqw?t=1079

How does Peterson reconcile his dislike of postmodernists with his raging boner for Nietzsche

>>10112061
That was Dilbertman on the Sam Harris podcast

How does Peterson reconcile his claim that he and his family deal with "severe depression" yet he has been extremely successful?

>>10112056
whoa
ess jay dabbleyoos btfo
karltural marxists on suicide watch
how will leftists ever recover

>>10114492
whoa
BITING satire from the intellectual elite!
conservatards ABSOLUTELY btfo

>tfw you will never save your father from the belly of the whale, roughly speaking
it's no joke

>>10114064
He's a fraud who has read neither

>>10114064
nothing wrong with that

>>10112056
>BLAH BLAH BLAH, These darn kids and their postmodernism, BLAH BLAH BLAH, random postmodernist strawman, BLAH BLAH BLAH, these darn SJWs

>>10112060
I sure hope so, I hope Anglos will finally stop attempting to understand European philosophy.

>>10115692
This
Americans discovering philosophy was a mistake

>>10115692
"European philosophy" is fucking dead, kid. Who was the last significant euro philosopher? Bourdieu?

>>10112957
Absolutely not, they will only make the world seem more complicated.

>>10115701

Dawkins.
Unironically.

>>10113956
You're right about the jews being the source of the problem but Peterson is a necessary stepping stone for newbies who can't wrap their head around the jewish problem ... yet. I wouldn't give him too much slack since he is disrupting their program. It would be massive if he were to come out and name the jew though. I have trouble believing he isn't aware but knows how hard the kikes would try to ruin his life if he came out and said it.

>>10115717

Jews are a scapegoat the problems Peterson addresses are embedded in our culture.
You're a shill trying to muddy the waters and distract people from the real problem by blaming jews.

>>10113956
Most postmodernist were Jews though. When you name the postmodernist you name the Jew, but it has a chance of reaching normies instead of being shut down as anti Semitic.

You have to let people know the truth indirectly, otherwise they won't listen. Let me give you an example

> see post on r/latestagecapitalism
> " deport the 1% " sign image
> decide to name the Jew indirectly
> comment " whoah, cool it with the anti Semitic remarks "

Ez

>>10115701
>Bourdieu
Bourdieu?! Don't make me laugh, he was a mediocre sociologist. The last living great ones are Badiou an Agamben.
But otherwise philosophy in general is dead. Nietzsche and Heidegger predicted it a long time ago.

>>10115728
Jews have always been the problem, idiot. Protip: you aren't allowed to label yourself a scapegoat when you've been kicked out of other people's countries 300 times, that means the issue lies with YOU.

>>10115728
Correct opinion coming though

>>10112059
t. postmoderist marxist

>>10113004
Foucault wasn't a postmodernist

>>10115738
>Jews have always been the problem, idiot.
>Earth would be a utopia if it weren't for Jews
>tfw you overdosed on ideology

>>10115759
No, he's right. Jews are the problem. The main question is why haven't you figured that out yet? Are you jewish or just dumb?

>>10115769
>Why haven't you figured that out yet?
Well for starters I'm aware that structuring society is a complex problem with many variables and if you propose a single-variable solution then you're simply not addressing the problem.
As our father Dr. Peterson says, the tell-tale sign of ideological possession is the proclivity to attribute all trouble to a single source, in this case, muh Jews.
To be honest you silly people better be thankful for Jews, without them you'd be like a ship without a sail.

>>10115758
Oh just shut the fuck up with your YouTube-inspired, half-baked contrarian nonsense.

>>10115780
> thankful for Jews

So you're a Jew then, no wonder you're so triggered

>>10115788
What anon meant is that without Jews you have nothing to say.

>>10115780
You are in no position to chastise the supposed ideology of others since you aren't educated on the central issue. You can stop being a pleb at any time and start learning about the jewish problem, but until you're willing to do that don't blame others for your own lack of understanding.

>>10114064
Not peterson but my take is that neitsche was predicting postmodernism as well as a direction for how to overcome it towards a modernism that was individual rather than collective.

>>10115797
Please read Nietzsche again and read him more slowly. If anything (and this is also a stretch) he was an aristocrat, not some kind of "modernist". He hated the times he was writing in. For fucks sake.

>>10112056
>"that's how you know you're dealing with people who are ideologically possessed, they attribute everything to one cause"
>proceeds to bash pomo for everything wrong in the world
wew

>>10115821
What I mean by that is, the times would inevitably bring about a collective rejection of the axioms perceived as objective. This would bring about postmodernism, and neitsche would not have recommended that we stop there, but to explore within ourselves for a PERSONAL set of axioms that we could TREAT as objective. So I don't think neitsche was a postmodernist in that sense, he deconstructed but did not recommend a state of destruction.

>>10115885
He simply does not do this. He explains the personal tendencies towards ideology and the many valid reasons people reject the possibility of truth and goodness, and then urges them to GET OVER THEM. People act like he treats the pomos as a collective bogeyman but at the end of the day what he is discussing is the individuals who get caught in that state of mind and the individuals capacity to move past it. I think people misunderstand peterson the most here because he talks about widespread ideologies but always always always has the individual as his reference point. He is always speaking to the individual, not to the collective.

>>10115901
>He is always speaking to the individual, not to the collective
What is the meaning of this?

>>10115885
wtf are they talking about anyway? isn't "pomo" evil precisely because it denies one single cause?

>>10115912
of course not

>>10115911
That you can't evaluate what he is saying based on the spooky things you THINK it could be doing to other people. You evaluate it based on how it has the potential to change your own ego, because that it what he is trying to do.

>>10115917
Why can't I? He's a professor, after all.

>>10112056
automatically distrust the one on the right for looking like Janet Reno

>>10115920
Obviously you can do whatever the fuck you want, I'm just making a recommendation for what I think is the proper way to approach his work, based on my perception of his aims (informed by his disclosure).

I would argue the same of Nietzsche, that his writings were aiming to have a transformation impact on the individual reader, rather than be nattered about and evaded by focusing on their relation to the collective. That he why in my opinion he is still so powerful and relevant

>>10112957
Do you want to waste your life reading post structuralist jerkoffs?

>>10113169
Derrida being a hack is an unsubstantiated meme

>>10115980
>thinks (((Derrida))) is reputable.
Take it to reddit, kid.

>>10115999
Do you have some sort of brain issue?

>>10116021

It's called autism and we're unsure what exactly causes it although it's thought that vaccinations play an important role.

>>10116043
There's no known link between thimerosal and autism. The idea that there is is rooted in a falsified study from the 90s that based it's findings on a sample of 12 children with autism. Later studies conducted with literally 100,000s of children have been unable to reproduce such a causation.

>>10116021
>>10116043
>has internet in 2017
>still ignorant about the jewish question
And willingly showing off those room temperature IQs. Gotta love it.

>>10116055

...your point???
I said that it is thought that vaccinations play an important role.
That is certainly thought.

>>10116065
It's thought that you're a cum-guzzling pony-loving faggot who likes to go into the city on the weekends to get your boipussi filled.

>>10112056
Paglia is interesting and she pretty much exposes Peterson's rendering of postmodernism as the flabby baby it actually is.

>>10116064
No I just don't care about the jew. Worrying about the jew is for talentless, non-competitive people who think doing anything to alter the status quo will increase their mating success

>>10115780
>if I talk in circles maybe I will convince these goys

I'm shocked how much you wrote and how little you actually said.

>>10116139

And what, pray tell, have you said, sir?

>>10116139
Just because you can't follow an argument and need your discussions to be delivered in one-liner Twitter posts about THE ONE TRUE BAD THING doesn't mean that anon made a bad point. It just means you are a brainlet. He made three good points you fucking dummy.

>>10116126
No, it's for people who care about the truth and are willing to fight for it in order to improve the long-term interests of their people, but is in direct conflict with their individual mating success, obviously, since jews go all out in their attempts to destroy anyone who questions or even points out the harm they cause white societies. If you're going to use nature as an excuse for why you are ignorant of the jewish problem, try to at least make yourself aware of how nature works.

>>10116180
Disagreement =/= ignorance.

>>10116180
You're willing to fight for it... by posting shit like >>10116064 ? If you were really concerned with the truth you wouldn't just be trying to bully your way through a Carribean numismatics meet and greet trying to be 'right' and instead would stop to think before taking such stupid logical shortcuts in your reasoning. What causes harm in white societies is the average white's refusal to read or engage with the world around him, like you, and thus fall into mystical thinking and neglect of the systems of determining truth we have set up. Naming the jew will do nothing if there aren't any capable whites to fill the vacuum after they're gone. You owe it to yourself not to limit your world to the jew

>>10116201
All I'm saying is that ignorance is the only result, and will decrease accordingly as one's knowledge increases with regard to how jews differ from whites, how jews negatively impact white societies, and why jews are indeed the main reason for those societies' decline.

>>10112056

>English professors shouldn't get all of their theories from the French

sounds reasonable

>all of world literature should be taught in the same department

???

>>10116229
There should be no lack of capable whites and there hasn't been in the past; whites are responsible for nearly all innovation and cultural advancement. The jewish problem is what stands in the way of that, which is why it is central here.

What the fuck is postmoderosm supposed to even mean anymore

It's like a filler word where you fit in some contrived strawman ideology you disagree with in today's academia

>>10116247
>misconstruing this bad

She said English professors shouldn't larp as French philosophers because the French philosophers were engaging with their own language in a way that was unique to the history of the French language and not applicable to English.

Your second green text just sounds like a total strawman. My best guess is that you're talking about when she said that professors should be required to teach historical-scale narratives instead of structuring their classes on microscopic specializations because this approach adds more overall perspective.

>>10116256
Well there has to be some dearth of capable whites if white culture can be considered 'poisoned'. Probably has something to do with people being slaves to the electronic jew

>>10115937
>the individual reader
What other kind of reader is there? I can't think of any.

>>10116258
From the video it seems like it's primarily the 'theorists' in academia but it seems to be a NA problem.

>>10116275
The mechanisms jews use to poison our society are very recent and thus only now being diagnosed and understood. A natural action and reaction that even in times with far less information proliferation regarding their habits, and a result soon to repeat itself, caused them to be expelled time and time again.

>>10116297
>The mechanisms jews use to poison our society are very recent
last time you said they were ancient, pal

>>10112056
There should be a JBP drinking game like whenever you see him defer to an established thinker like a child about his personal theories worded in exactly the same way (15:30) you finish your drink

>>10116304
Ancient in that they're embedded in their nature, recent in them actually infiltrating and obtaining power.

>>10113956
>>10114007
what the fuck are you talking about

>>10116246
Ignorance is the only result of what? Not know enough? No shit, that's literally the definition you fucking idiot.

I'm saying that you can't infer ignorance because someone disagrees with you.

>>10116277
It's like, sitting down and impotently assessing a writer or speaker based on the impact you think they might be having on other people or collectives, rather than engaging and assessing their impact on yourself. If you focus on the former, you will often miss out on the latter.

In context of this discussion, looking at Petersons input in a large scale debate about postmodernism is bizarre, because he's trying to push and pull and move you as an individual to change your life for the better, not contribute overall to how the collective understands the term postmodernism.

>>10116318
you're not consistent desu

Goddamn i hate Peterson. What is a stronger word? Loathe? Fucking meme professor

>>10116324
>Peterson does not contribute overall to how the collective understands the term postmodernism
ok

>>10116297
I like the other jewposter better

>>10116336
That's right, he contributes to how an individual has the capacity to respond to postmodernism.

>>10116363
Yeah, by teaching them about it. I don't know what you mean by responding to postmodernism, though.

>>10115731
Post-modernists are like 99% French.

>>10116376
If you want a detailed account on the historical movement of postmodernism from peterson, you're not going to get that. Everyone knows it.

But we don't live out our moment to moment lives operating on detailed historical accounts. We live out those daily struggles using gists in relation to a personal sense of ourselves. Peterson links postmodernism to other phenomena, like nihilism, not because they are necessarily linked in the historical account, but because for many people they are linked psychologically. To take postmodernism seriously, personally, has enormous concequences. What peterson is doing often is exploring those concequences, particularly the negative ones, and helping to point people towards ways of overcoming them, ways that people have been overcoming them for a long time. It is as much a therapeutic technique as a purely academic one.

>>10116329
Not really, there's just more complexity and nuance involved than you're willing to educate yourself on.

>>10115701
*manifests behind you*
*sniff* "nothing ideological and so on and so on, kid"

>>10116403
Yes, I understand that Peterson is memeing about postmodernism, but its personal consequences sounds spooky. Do you mean consumerist culture and all that?

>>10116448
No, I mean the impacts it has on a moment to moment basis on how one feels emotionally and how one chooses to live his life. I mean feeling like nothing you do matters and it's all a big cruel joke at your expense and you are just a drop in a big meaningless ocean. I mean INDIVIDUAL impacts, NOW. In my opinion, that is what peterson is trying to address, and that is how he should be evaluated, only after engaging on that level. Not an ideological war, not an internet fight, not a battle of historical and political movements. In the face of the millions of years of biological and cultural evolution, the tide of billions of humans all confused and babbling about God knows what - you, you, YOU, how are YOU going to live YOUR fucking life well! You the individual!

That's what he's trying to help with. Talking about postmodernism as a felt phenomenon, as opposed to strict historical narrative, is a tool towards this.

>>10112056
Camille Paglia is so unpleasant to listen to.

>>10116888
she's frantic but a decent speaker

>>10116633
this Peterson guy sounds like a total idiot

>>10115737
>philosophy in general is dead
??????????

>>10113956
>>10115717
>>10115731
>>10115738
>>10115769
>>10115788
>>10116180
>>10116246
>>10116297
die in a fire

/pol/ please go

>>10116981

>>10112957
No. Read Scruton's 'Thinkers of the New Left' instead.

Foucault cherry picks random examples from history in order to 'prove' his fake theories that present fake problems to which he gives no proper solution except for total chaos.

In Scruton's book, he exposes the contradictions and faults of Foucault and a few other left-wing continental thinkers. It doesn't offer in-depth analysis, but it's a good read nonetheless.

>>10117041
>Scruton
>reading conservatard drivel

>>10112056
I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked,
dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix,
angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to the starry dynamo in the machinery of night,
who poverty and tatters and hollow-eyed and high sat up smoking in the supernatural darkness of cold-water flats floating across the tops of cities contemplating jazz...

The thing is, she was there, she knows what was going on and where the current destruction of the west came from.

>>10116334

I don't like him that much but he's smarter and more relevant than you'll ever be

>>10117085
>implying i'm not pynchon

>>10116988
Philosophy is literally dying, the last living philosophers are going to be dead in a decade. Do you see anything new developing that isn't just a childish fad limited to blogging and vlogging? But it's not only that there are no new thinkers, the culture itself is unable to produce philosophy anymore, obsessed as it is with academic performance and its cancerous hyperproduction of papers that only provide yet another useless commentary of some dead philosopher. And obsessed as it is with the general optimization and automatisation of everything. Why would anybody have a thought anymore when we have artificial intelligence and cybernetics instead? Thinking in the strict sense is becoming obsolete. What I'm saying was said countless times before by people much smarter than me or you.

And academic pseuds like Peterson and Paglia are only symptoms of this. They are simulators of philosophy just like the American pomo pseuds they are reacting to. Gotta keep the simulation alive.

The biggest irony here is that Peterson and Paglia are exemplary products of postmodernism, their way of operating is totally postmodern. It's all an act. Whereas a lot of "continental" philosophers they attack as postmodern were in many cases precisely critics of postmodernism. They are not the first Americans to do this but unlike them some pseuds actually admitted they were wrong once they actually fucking read the works. I doubt Peterson and Paglia will ever reach that stage, but one can only hope. Or at least I hope Americans finally abolish philosophy in their academia in the name of "not wasting money for useless studies" or something like that. That would be even better.

>Mention the jews.
>Everyone goes full fucking retard every single time.

It's not exactly a mystery as to why they're all crazy; They inbreed, and no one outside their fruity culture wants to have anything to do with them because they ritualistically mutilate the genitals of babies and then suck the skin off, and bite the skin with their teeth.

And they've only just recently stopped, in the Americas at least, doing it en masse.

Maybe making children and teenagers watch a baby screeching like a banshee while its cock gets bitten into by a rabbi looking motherfucker isn't the most mentally healthy exercise, huh, jews?

>>10117694
>Do you see anything new developing that isn't just a childish fad limited to blogging and vlogging?

So you think philosophy won't have its work cut out for it untangling the knotted mess that is racial identity and the philosophical moral and ethical implications of recognising your identity as an outsider to 90% of human beings?

>>10112957
The secret that no one will tell you, and what no one wants to admit is, postmodernists are right with the underlying nihilistic claims of their philosophy.

Why do a lot of smart people refute postmodernist philosophy then? Either because they don't understand it/haven't read enough background material, but I assume, for many, they realize that the best approach toward postmodernism is to be a utilitarian. Postmodernism is useless. It is philosophy for no purpose. It doesn't achieve anything. It doesn't help anyone.

In fact, the consequences of postmodern philosophy are likely to be only negative. Smart people realize.

Even Peterson claims, in a couple videos, that the underlying logic of postmodernism is very convincing, and it even seems like he's repressing the urge to acknowledge some of the unavoidable nature of the postmodern conclusion.

People are scared of postmodernism. It breaks down all meaning. It says all of our culture is objectively arbitrary and worthless (but not in a negative way). It tells us that without language we understand nothing, and that language is completely inadequate as a heuristic.

People don't like this. And this argument will only lead to a depressing and nihilistic world view. The only real answer to it is religion.

It is no coincidence that Peterson both hates postmodernism and defers to religious texts. They are the only sanctuary from postmodernism's ruthless stripping of meaning.

Postmodernism also threatens to destroy the traditions of English literary study. It devalues it. That's the reason Camille hates it.

To answer your question. It is worthless to study.

Postmodernism is the most useless philosophy that exists.

>>10117694
>The biggest irony here is that Peterson and Paglia are exemplary products of postmodernism, their way of operating is totally postmodern. It's all an act

This. Peterson is actually a closeted postmodernist. Everything he says literally more or less mirrors the later french postmodernists. Especially Baudrillard and Lyotard.

I'm not sure if he's aware of this or not.

Camille Paglia the same thing, but less so.

>>10117752
Post-modernism is really a double edged sword. It's the endgame of our manic rush for rationality. It has helped in some cases, but now we have to return to our roots or else we'll suffocate in a maze of abstraction where there is no meaning and no truth. Heart vs Mind.

>>10117072
>unironically using the word conservatard

>>10117763
libtards btfo!!!1

>>10117752
>In fact, the consequences of postmodern philosophy are likely to be only negative. Smart people realize.

To be fair, I think postmodernists themselves realized this, but they chose to insert political motivations into their philosophy.

The big postmodernist thinkers were all progressive SJW types, but postmodernism doesn't inherently need to have a political motivation. In fact, it makes political motivations seem unnecessary.

I think the postmodernists advocated so strongly for progressive social change precisely because they realized their philosophy would otherwise be entirely culturally and societal detrimental, so they re-purposed their arguments towards social change, using their nihilistic philosophy as a means for destabilizing what they saw as injustices.

>>10117762

>but now we have to return to our roots or else we'll suffocate in a maze of abstraction where there is no meaning and no truth. Heart vs Mind.

This is done through metaphysics. That would help people understand *why* our roots are our roots in a suprasensible way. It isn't enough to simply return to a prior form of tradition or culture in reactionary protest; you are still mired within the exoteric regardless. We must comprehend why such a change is truly necessary on a metaphysical level in order to have any genuine return. Anything less is a group larp to frantically stave off cultural demise which ends up being a further prolongation within itself under the guise of a curative.

>>10112056
Watched the whole damn thing 2-3 days ago, awesome stuff. I like the cheerful ending.

>>10112103
Discussing modern politics is not politically incorrect, ya derp-cunted dongle-nommer.

>>10117759
>Everything is postmodernism!

>>10112056
>be jordan memerson
>get "oppressed" by having the school faculty of the private, wealthy elite college you work for send you a glorified finger-wag of a letter because you made a fuss over the most important issue on the planet: gender pronouns
>other autists see you as a martyr who is "sticking it to DA ESJAYDUBYAS" for your brave sacrifice of willingly quitting your cushy job as a harvard psychology professor into getting 65k a month for making unedited vlogs where you literally just sit in front of a camera
>don't actually read lyotard, derrida, foucault, adorno, horkheimer, habermas, marcuse, or any other relevant books, literature and documentation commonly associated with postmodernism or the frankfurt school
>whine about postmodernism and "cultural marxism" anyways, never directly attack any actual postmodernists' writings or works or cite any sources like a real academic would just say "they're all dumb lol"
>said autists mindlessly believe you as a "deep thinker" because daddy doesn't love them and they want to blame all of their problems on a vague, mysterious force that they don't understand and they can't define that is somehow oppressing them
Did I miss anything?

>>10118132
Clean your room, being a bible thumping nutcase

Stop posting this faggot on my board. Thank you.

>>10118132
>>whine about postmodernism and "cultural marxism" anyways, never directly attack any actual postmodernists' writings or works or cite any sources like a real academic would just say "they're all dumb lol"
Since there's nothing outside the text, criticizing the world after their publication is directly criticizing them.

postmodernism is over

F

>>10112056
Lads, should I listen to this tradcuck and roastie? Is she a NAWALT or what?

>>10115699
a gigantic mistake, but a mistake nevertheless

>>10115755
I bet you participate in a meme group on some sort of instant messaging app

>>10115717
ONLY THE INDIVIDUAL SUFFERS
THE GROUP DOES
NOT
SUFFER
*starts blubbering on a livestream*

he needs some new meds

Peterson's postmodernism is just code for the JQ of the neo-nazis. It's covert hate.

What will Peterson and Paglia do now that postmodernism is finally over?

>>10118177
>bible thumping
Hardly

>>10118132
You missed that he actually has read those authors you have listed, try again.

>>10119066
If he did, he's doing a really good job at not exhibiting it.

>>10119066
He clearly didn't. Although to be fair maybe he did read them afterwards and now he pretends he didn't, which is also understandable. It's not a good career decision to admit you were just bullshitting.

>>10118132
You missed the majority of the content he delivers, which has nothing to do with pronouns or SJWs, and focuses on an biological, evolutionary and cultural explanation for individual personality and how you can use that knowledge to find meaning in your life and solve problems.

>>10118204
No because their text didn't create this world.

>>10117752
>>10117810

There are many myths of postmodernism and this is one (or a number of them rolled into one). Another is a criticism of institutions that ranges from their inadequacy to their political violence. The 'contemporary' period it seems is the institutionalisation of postmodernism, which itself has become 'untrustworthy', to use a word. It's true that people don't understand/haven't read the postmodernists and as such the same can be said of the 'postmodernists' in the institutions, i.e. the postmodernists that represent, to us, postmodernism. But if we can recognise this, then suddenly postmodernism isn't that useless.

The alt-right HATE me because I know this one simple fact about postmodernism: it is as natural to Western philosophy as classical liberalism. Postmodern criticism is the very same search for truth that demystifies illogical thinking, and consequently it is postmodern criticism that shows to us that the political manipulation on part of the institutions to inoculate itself against postmodernism by adapting it is still within the scope of postmodern criticism. We can't move outside Western philosophy -- it is that pervasive -- and its processes eventually shred away all the ideas that are 'incorrect'. Western philosophy, in its demystification, will still at least function by its own claim to truth which can't be stripped away without a reliance on that philosophy (thus a reliance on that claim to truth). Postmodernism tests the conclusions of philosophy on itself regardless of the consequences, which is something we value in science. As an example, postmodernism (I read Derrida mostly) sees words as 'real' rather than effaced referents, and the 'destabilisation' this project brings about shifts the central ideas of Western philosophy while still reading them (demystifies the idea that writing follows speech) but still leaves that one predicate untouched; its claim to truth.

Which brings me to another myth of philosophy: preservation and conservation. It is no coincidence that in the past few decades there have been movements towards the protection of flora and fauna, indigenous cultures, etc. (headed by Western polities), reassessment of artistic movements excluded from modernism (e.g. Academic art which was eclipsed by the avant-garde, the restoration of the Sistine Chapel!), religious tolerance, emphasis on social and personal wellbeing. Postmodernism, as I understand it, isn't a stripping away of social constructs towards meaninglessness; that is what it claimed of modernism (capitalism). You may be aware of another postmodern myth: everything is valid. It can be taken to strange conclusions but the idea that everything matters also means that everything should be preserved so that we can learn about ourselves. That is not a stripping away, nor is it useless. Another myth: postmodernism is apolitical. Western philosophy tries to be, and the social change we see is the application of humanism to itself.

>>10118719
we can't get over it
only suffer it, as well as modernity

>>10118094
no, not really. a lot is still modernism and stuff like that

holy shit Foucault got BTFOd to the ends of spacetime

>>10119792
What if I told you that so called "postmodernity" is merely a logical development of modernity itself? That the essential aspect of modernity has always been liberation and management of forces, as well as their cancerous proliferation i.e. "growth"? Production, industry, natural resources, commodities, desires, speech, communication, information, all liberated, saturated, and managed through various techniques, the last of which seem to be cybernetic networks.

>>10112056
I see my grandmother in her. I thought this was a great video.

honestly the destruction of the canon is an act of fucking evil

>>10113956
My favorite Peterson vid is where he describes the Holocaust narrative and says there is no possible way it makes sense because it would take too much time and money during the war....

Then concludes by saying, therefore Hitler must have been suuuuppper duper double evil and wanted his own boys to die while he did the Holocaust. And he must have wanted to lose!

That's the only way it makes sense but it happened for sure :^)

>>10120161
Yeah, I mean it's almost like the nazis were insane or something! Lol, they were just doing normal shit lol.

>>10120222
How new are you? Waste of fucking trips.

>>10120309
Newfag! Newfag! Ha, you're fucking pathetic anon.

LOL. Wow so 2017 huh? Argument much?

>>10119066
No he hasn't. Notice in the conversation he blatantly asks Camille to explain what Foucault and Derrida wrote for him.

>>10113229
It's a good claim but her book doesn't back it up.

>>10115738
https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/7295lg/antisemitism_is_historically_a_result_of_jewish/
>inb4 reddit
scared of the truth, /pol/babby?

>>10116423
zizek...easy on the sniffles...

>>10117004
>one eye on nothingness
>one eye on the titties
guess which one is which

>>10112056
>still caring about culture/society
>not investing time into the future (aka science)

>>10113956
neo-reactionaries sort of have a point, though (((Moldbug))) is obviously obfuscating the Jewish role here. Puritans and Jews feed off one another.

>>10121392
>/r/badhistory

lmao

>>10112060
No, it's not like its something that can be destroyed. You can present proof that its worthless and it will just ignore that proof because of what postmodernism is.

Postmodernism is becoming untrendy though, which is the reason Paglia rails against it. That is, to make a name for herself in this manner, or garner academic publicity, not because she's actually invested in any sort of philosophy against it, she is just as much of a con-artist as the pomos.

>>10118132
The gender pronoun thing goes beyond calling yiffys yiffys and dykes panamorous trisexual beings or whatever you fucking retard

its the fact that things which are outright lies and made up bullshit are being codified you idiot

>>10122524
it's almost like the whole free speech thing has always been just a cover for anti-trans messaging, what a surprise

>>10112056
Please /pol/ just fucking go

>>10112056

Peterson correctly describes the discrepancy/incoherence of postmodernists returning/deferring to Marxism/egalitarianism despite those doctrines being very vulnerable to the postmodernists' own tools of critique

>>10122583
Talking about politics isn't inherently politically incorrect, you autist.

>>10122573
Or that the two are intimately related.

>>10114064
>Le if your read person X you must believe all or nothing argument.

>>10120161
>leftist shill detected

I need a father figure
I need to pay $10 a month for a father figure

>>10123167
You can buy a bible for less than $10/month

>>10122627
That's symptomatic of how extremely superficial these "attacks" are. You can take some elements from Marx and criticize the rest.
Besides, in philosophy you always turn against your master eventually and form your own thought. See any philosopher in history ever.

>>10114554
underrated post

>>10122465
i already inb4'd you, sorry sweetie

>>10123575
Wait you can? That scummy Bible salesman lied to me!

>>10113169
>Foucault is genuinely insightful
>Power exists
WOW! FUCKING WOW! MINDBLOWING!

>>10115701
Sloterdijk.

>>10118897
She's not NAWALT but be prepared to hear her say 'okay' >9000 times.

>>10113169
>>10113169
Deleuze and Guattari's war machine/nomadism stuff really took over a lot of lit critique and humanities in general in the 90s and 2000s. It's worth reading if you're interested in the cool new stuff. If you're more interested in getting a grasp of the basics, it's not really worth it.
Also BTFO Freud.
Also check out Paul B. Preciado's "Testo-Junkie" if you want to see the kind of analytical frameworks that came out of D&G's work.
Also Gottfried Liedl, this looney Austrian historian that writes about modernity coming out of Nasrid Grenada in his trilogy "Frontiers"

>>10118177

>>10117771
>Being this much of an ideologue

>>10118132
>Did I miss anything
How about the fact that it's illegal to criticize anarcho-feminism now because it's hate speech to say that chopping of your dick is a bad idea and a mental illness?

Why does a slightly right leaning professor from Canada trigger all the liberals so much?

>>10112056
oh snap how will pomos ever recover?

>>10118078
Modern politics has basically nothing to do with philosophy or literature.

The need of positivists ended when Ulysses was written.

Wasting time talking about whether hicks should be allowed to call people the n word will never be anything close to a valid intellectual pursuit. You're deluding yourself if you think this man is relevant in intellectual discussion.

>>10122524
In what sense are these things lies?
In what sense are these things bullshit?

In what sense will criticizing these things ever get you closer to creating meaningful art

/postmodernism is great as a literary genre, but it is intellectually and philosophically bankrupt as a real-world ideology

>>10129547
I thought postmodernism existed only in architecture? I'm not an American though.

>>10129790
it exists as an insidious boogeyman to scare neckbeards into cleaning their rooms and bathing.

>>10118992
good post

>>10129537
>University professor
>Used to be a heavy drinker
>Spent much of his life wondering how science and religion and co-mingle without contradiction
>Speaks heavily of and criticises post-modernism
>Speaks heavily of former philosophers
>Frequently speaks with other current philosophers
>Risked his job to speak out about his own views and opinions
>Still preaches non-violence
>Pursues criticism of society yet doesn't afraid of anything
>Not true, he was afraid for months and months after the events at U of T
>Wrote non-fiction books
>Actively fought for free speech in Canada, including speaking to the actual people who wanted to implement anti-free-speech laws

But no, Jordan Peterson isn't relevant in intellectual discussion.

>>10112103
t. brainlet

>>10130072
m8, you just need to study some philosophy. Read primary sources. That's all you guys need.
You have no standards yet which is why Peterson passes your bullshit detector. You like him for his boring conclusions instead of his form of thinking which is really drunk-intellectual-in-a-bar-tier.

>>10129547
>Conflating philosophical postmodernism with literary postmodernism
Mmh... it's almost as if you don't know what you're talking about

>>10112056
Wow! Is she right? Does education leave you that stupid?

>>10112056
These people are hicks, their resentment at never understanding post modernism really bleeds through with just A class psuedo science and projection.

There is a part where they talk about frank furtian philosophers being unable to communicate with university staff, which is fine, probably a fair criticizism, but in no way is provable or relevant in the discussion.

There is a part where the male hick even says I don't understand how to argue with a woman who I cannot eventually come to blows with? Lol, the good stuff. This is utterly meaningless, obviously because any discussion where you can only end up fighting isn't a discussion but just a display of who can move the other person.

Also they bitch for minutes about Foucault but don't mention the panopticon which is the concept that validates the post structuralist method of critique. Unseen forces can manipulate how people act, (If you posit god, as this panoptic force you understand how this becomes a problem) which is pretty much the entirety of feminism, but these inbreds are too salty to realize why that does violence to their simple understanding of culture.

>>10130072
If you think he was going to lose his job you're retarded. He has tenure and in Canada they can't fire you unless you beat up a kid or snort coke in class. Anything less than that and there is no threat of being fired. He knew this. Anyone who understands the teachers unions in Ontario knows this.
Also, you don't know anything about Bill C-16 and just swallowed the bullshit apparently.

>>10130629
>There is a part where the male hick even says I don't understand how to argue with a woman who I cannot eventually come to blows with?
Yeah that part was cringeworthy. Even if she yells in your face, you can just yell back.
His premise about how when men speak to each other, there's always and underlying knowledge that they could just start punching each other if they can't agree or get in a heated discussion is ridiculous too. The reason we live in a civilized society is so that we don't get to that point with anyone.

>>10130923
It's especially bizarre coming from a big time free speech guy.

>say whatever you like but get fresh with me and I'll box your head in

>>10130629
If they're hicks then they're pomo hicks. Not the first, not the last either. In fact all of America strikes me as by far the most pomo culture.

Will serious discourse ever be free of the fashionable trends that distribute particular groups of ideas to a mostly non-reading public?

All I see is a bunch of people being info-tained by Youtube videos.

This board should not even exist.

>>10112945
Who is a non-postmodernist modern author?

>>10131123
Hicks are by definition slaves to their culture and ideology.
As much as people meme that most post-structuralists are marxists, that doesn't necessarily have to be the case.

Almost by definition the notion of a post modern hick is meaningless, i'm almost certain you don't know what you're talking about.

>>10131333
>Hicks are by definition slaves to their culture
>>10131123
>all of America strikes me as by far the most pomo culture

>>10131363
for >>10131357

>>10130948
He's basically a nazi anyway so it's warranted to box his smug face in first

>>10131357
Define "hick"

>>10130629
t. salty blue state pomo cultist
You're heavily misrepresenting what they said

>>10112056
It did go a bit denim jacket and cropped t-shirt tbf on Camille