Philosophy

» Brian Tubbs - Definitions

In response to Existentialism posted by pink101:

Existentialism is the belief held by those people referred to as existentialists.

Postmodernism is the overall philosophy that came after modernism and is held by those who consider themselves postmodernists.

:-)

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Definitions

In response to Definitions posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Heh heh.
.
Come on. You can do better than that.
.
Existentialism is the belief held by those people referred to as existentialists??
.
What is the belief they hold? That's the question, Brian.
.
What is the "overall philosophy that came after modernism"? And, that is the second question, Brtian. What is the philosphy we refer to as postmodernism?
.
Do you know?
.
Are you an existentialist? Are you a postmodernist?
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - Sorry :-)

In response to Definitions posted by pink101:

I was just in a giddy mood.

A more serious answer...

Philosophers tend to break down the history of their profession in three stages: premodernism, modernism, and postmodernism.

Premodernism is usually understood to be that period of time when people based their worldview on religion and dogma. There was little incentive to think outside the box, and consequently, very little of that occurred.

The Reformation and the Renaissance ushered in the ENLIGHTENMENT - which is considered the milepost in the rise of modernism.

Modernists tended to emphasize MAN (and I mean mankind) over religion. Thus, modernism ushered in humanism. Mankind could and would answer the weighty questions of life and science. We would uncover the truths of our existence.

Modernism is now giving way to postmodernism, which holds that we (mankind) defines the very terms of our existence and our worldview. Whereas premodernists stayed within the "BOX" and modernists believed they could (given time) fully understand, conquer, and even expand the "BOX," postmodernists basically argue that the "BOX" itself is a construct.

For postmodernists, it isn't about uncovering the truth. It's about inventing your own "truth."

I understand that I'm oversimplifying, but given the constraints of this discussion forum, we're stuck with oversimplification.

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Sorry :-)

In response to Sorry :-) posted by BrianTubbs:
.
"For postmodernists, it isn't about uncovering the truth. It's about inventing your own 'truth.'"
.
There is a lot of confusion about what postmodernism means. Maybe this would be a good place for us to start our discussion. I think postmodernism is all about taking our beliefs apart in the discovery of how what we have believed is not based on reliable evidence. It is not about inventing any one's truth; but, more about exposing the erroneous "truths" we have held in the past. It has to do with the democratization of knowledge to the comon people. It does away with such things as eminent domain without reparations. It demands justice where injustice has reigned.
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» RLSharp - Sorry :-)

In response to Sorry :-) posted by pink101:

That's the problem, Phil. As Brian says, philosophy is often divided into three periods. Kant, Descartes and others claimed modernism back in their day. All that was left was post-modernism, which broke from that enlightenment style philosophy (through Romanticism and the Counter-Enlightenment). Existentialism, which is one part of this, is the view that you create truth, but that oversimplifies the position. I guess I should start with an article on that, since I actually AM VERY well versed in existentialism.

The problem is that there is plenty of philosophy that is not modern and yet not really postmodern either. So some philosophers go with ancient, modern, and contemporary (instead of postmodern). This is to distance themselves from writers ranging from Hiedegger to Derrida, all of whom would be considered postmodernists.

Put more simply, postmodernists tend to be contintentalist philosophers in approach (see my article on this distinction..one of the first I posted), but not all present day (or past 2 centuries, even) philosophers are continentalists. Many are analytic. These philosophers would not like being called postmodern, because of the connotations.

Does that make sense?

-- posted by RLSharp

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - Sorry :-)

In response to Sorry :-) posted by RLSharp:

ancient, modern, and contemporary

I actually prefer that classification, because it breaks philosophy down more chronologically as opposed to ideologically. And it allows for the fact that there's great diversity in philosophy within the given periods.

I also don't like the implication that pre-modern philosophers were all backward and ignorant. Some of the most profound insights and observations come from "premodernist" philosophers, including Socrates, Aristotle, Anselm, and Aquinas.

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - But

In response to Sorry :-) posted by RLSharp:
.
But, to define today as the day after yesterday doesn't tell us anything substantial about today other than the fact that it isn't yesterday.
.
We can't define postmodernism as the philosophy after modernism and expect that tells us anything substantial about postmodernism other than the fact that it isn't modernism.
.
That seems like the idea of nexus to me. As we take the word, postmodernism, apart and discover what it truly is we will be exhibiting the core characteristic of postmodernism. Is that a wrong view of postmodern thought?
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - Haven't forgotten this...

Robert, I'm looking forward to continuing this discussion on postmodernism. Were you going to be doing an article or two on the subject? I just don't want this thread to die. Since postmodernism keeps sticking its head up every now and then in discussions all through the Mind & Soul community, it would be good if everyone were on the same page in defining it.

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Haven't forgotten this...

In response to Haven't forgotten this... posted by BrianTubbs:
.
I'm thinking postemodernism is more about being analytical which does seem to be the major philosophical characteristic of the day.
.
Existentialism asks the questions that postmodernism seeks to answer.
.
That's a big thing we're doing here in these threads--asking questions about what has been held as absolute truth. And, we are attempting to answer them. In the past, we wouldn't have asked and we would have looked to the dominant media (the pulpit) for answers.
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» RLSharp - Haven't forgotten this...

In response to Haven't forgotten this... posted by BrianTubbs:

Oops! Yeah, I've been swamped lately. I have 300 students this semester, so I stay VERY busy...on top of some personal (family) issues. Anyway, postmodernism tends to apply to a wide range of topics, all of which largely reject traditional logic and ways of thinking about philosophy. Most postmodernists reject metaphysics as well. I think I'll start with Kierkegaard and work my way into these ideas. Again, there is no postmodernist movement per se, so much as there are a bunch of writers who don't want to be linked to the Enlightenment and traditional philosophy.

-- posted by RLSharp

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds