[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 6 KB, 300x168, download (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11401571 No.11401571[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

>gets monumentally butthurt when he realizes his enlightenment worldview has been pretty much debunked by structuralists and poststructuralists
>goes on a social media tirade claiming western civilization is trying to be subverted by those that rekt him without any in-depth analysis

Is there someone as retarded as he?

>> No.11401574

>>11401571
>structuralists and poststructuralists debunking anything at all
get a life anon. You've proven that you're more of a retard than this meme lord will ever be.

>> No.11401577

>>11401574
The fact we live in postmodernity literally proves enlightenment is over

>> No.11401578

>>11401571
yeah you

>> No.11401586

>>11401577
The enlightenment-modern-postmodern view of history is only slightly less stupid than the ancient-medieval-modern view of history, but just as eurocentric and naive. There's more to life than French Snobbery, German Self-Flagellation, and English/American Wankery; in fact most people are not influenced by ANY philosophers except Aristotle, Plato, and Descartes. We don't live in a postmodern age, that's like saying we live in an ageless age.

>> No.11401588

>>11401577
But "we" don't. A bunch of fart-sniffing academics do but the mechanisms of the world are still thoroughly based on enlightenment thinking.

>> No.11401591

>>11401586
This is an equally retarded worldview. The ideologies that govern the mechanics of government may only get popular because they mesh with the current 'zeitgeist' but nevertheless to ignore their relevance just so that you can be the edgiest realist cynic on the block is brainlet-tier.

>> No.11401598

>>11401574
>What is Dialectic of Enlightenment

>>11401586
>that's like saying we live in an ageless age
No it isn't... That's just the term used to describe this epoch. It is the opposite of saying that.

>>11401588
>the mechanisms of the world are still thoroughly based on enlightenment thinking
Can you elaborate on what you mean by this?

>> No.11401599

>>11401591
>unironically believing that ideologies govern the mechanics of government
>unironically using zeitgeist in a sentence while criticizing memerson for being a pseud
>gets mad at me for being edgy even though he started a thread about calling someone a retard
I guess I should have known, responding to a bait thread and all, that you were just gonna be an idiot.

>> No.11401603

>>11401598
>Can you elaborate on what you mean by this?
The World Bank, the IMF, the United Nations, and so on. The underpinning assumptions about how the world does and should work of organisations like these are still thoroughly rooted in Enlightenment thinking.

>>11401599
>>unironically believing that ideologies govern the mechanics of government
>unironically believing that they don't
Governments are led by people who take advice from people who believe in things.

>> No.11401607

>>11401571
>debunked

>> No.11401608

>>11401571
>Peterson
>enlightenment worldview
Anon have you heard the way he talks about "truth" or "God"?

>> No.11401632

>>11401603
>Governments are led by people who take advice from people who believe in things.
That isn't the same as ideologies governing the mechanics of government. Mostly, economic circumstances and power interactions govern mechanics of government. You may identify some ideology or ideologies but these are not the same as the vacuous theory-crafting, tribalism, and upheavalism of the group of -isms people refer to with 'ideology'. Even when they, historically, have shifted some circumstances, actual governance is completely unrelated and a very different game.

>> No.11401635

Stop making peterson threads

>> No.11401636
File: 166 KB, 1339x1115, peterson3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11401636

>>11401608

>> No.11401643

Peterson is the public """"intellectual"""" for people who watch Rick and Morty.

>> No.11401644

>>11401608

Not that anon, but isn't it utility to Peterson? And then in the next breath he chastises the bloody postmodern neomarxists for relativizing truth. Hilarious if he wasn't destroying the board, tragic because he is.

>> No.11401646

>>11401632
>That isn't the same as ideologies governing the mechanics of government
Ah, so Australia just sprung fully-formed out of the ether as a Westminster democracy then? The US Constitution is not an ideological document?

You're so determined to be an edgy realist that you've become a fucking retard.

>> No.11401653

Reminder that your precious Daddy Peterson is just as fucked in the head as you are: https://youtu.be/ro-dGe2d2Fc

>> No.11401672

>>11401598

Horkheimer and Adorno were not post-modernist. They were neo-marxists.

>> No.11401682
File: 531 KB, 1535x1662, men against testosterone.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11401682

>>11401571

>> No.11401701

>>11401571
He is a "postmodernist" himself.
His definition of "truth" is basically: that which works and is beneficial to the individual and society is true.

He's a postmodernist cloaked in the robes of a christian conservative. He uses religious language all the time, but he never argues that a god actually exists. He just argues that religion is a lens and a codex that people can use to look at the world that evolved over time and it is therefore superior to alternative lenses that are man-made and recent inventions such as the various marxist flavors, which proved to be dysfunctional and are therefore false in his view.

>> No.11401820

>>11401586
>enlightenment-modern-postmodern view of history

Nigga the enlightenment is literally modernism

>> No.11401824

>>11401820
Not really

>> No.11401858

>>11401603
> The underpinning assumptions about how the world does and should work of organisations like these are still thoroughly rooted in Enlightenment thinking.

You might be surprised by how out of control an organization like the UN is. My relative is a human rights lawyer for them and his beliefs are even less developed than mine are. His wife works there too and is the cariacture of social justice (she claims children compare her to an angel, which is ironic because she smokes like a chimney and is an atheist). The UN in particular has some branches that are clearly postmodern or at least not distinctedly enlightenment in any meaningful sense (like, Marxism and feminism both technically draw off modernist notions of coherent narratives, but is that what we're really talking about when we say "The Enlightenment"?)

>> No.11401866

>>11401824
Explain the difference pls

>> No.11401935

>>11401824
There is no modernity without bourgeois liberalism, there is no liberalism without Enlightenment. Modernity and postmodernity are advanced, post-industrial liberalism.

>> No.11401941

>>11401577
Dude you are so fundamentally wrong. Do yourself a favor and discard this opinion immediately. You clearly know nothing about it and yet you already made yourself an opinion about it. Even from the logic driven Western Civilization point of view that's just irrationally stupid.

>> No.11401942

>>11401866
Enlightenment: There is an objective world
Modernism: There are several ways to look at the world
Postmodernism: There are endless ways to look at the world and all of them are valid, or maybe something being valid itself isn't really something you can decide anyway and maybe the world doesn't even exist, fuck me if I know, lets just do whatever. Nothing really matters, everything is about power. Let's wear used tampons on our heads wohoo.

>> No.11401950

>>11401571
Anybody who's an academic and doesn't believe in the ultimate evil of the Industrial - technological system is retarded t b h.

>> No.11401951

>>11401950
Can't you just go into the wilderness together with all of your non-retarded academics?

>> No.11402022

>his enlightenment worldview has been pretty much debunked by structuralists
How the fuck could some linguists and literary theorists, which themselves have been thoroughly debunked, debunk enlightenment?
This thread started stupidly and then spiraled out into more stupidity.

>> No.11402052

>>11401571
His world view is not based on the enlightenment. He is in to Carl Jung and says alot of things that are mystical and extremly speculative at best. He has praised phenomenology something that defiently was not a enlightenment project. He has praised Heidegger ironically someone Derridá was influenced by.

>> No.11402054

>>11401942
wew. pretty accurate desu

I think postmodernists are right in the analysis but reach the wrong conclusions. Its true we can never be sure about anything 100% but we have to act according to something and enlightenment seems to explain the world better than anything else.

Otherwise all is left is shitflinging about who is right based on muh feelings as opposed to something that exists objectively.

Its like a form of extreme skepticism, you have to stop at some point or you have nothing left from which you can make any value claims.

>> No.11402075

>>11401950
>Industrial - technological system
>ultimate evil
it is salvation, you faggot. go die in the woods

>> No.11402081

>his enlightenment worldview