What is "postmodernism", and why do rightists like Jordan Peterson hate it so much? Is it as bad as cultural marksysm???

It's closer to truth than cultural marxism , which only sounded cool for a while.

Postmodernism is effectively a part of the problem in academia. But like any nu-progressist concept , it's a bastardised and self serving version of it. When someone point out that people other than students pseuds can have their own narratives, it falls back to "reason and science, sinner" or "you're objectively evil".

Well its after Modernism and we all questioned Modernism after the horror of ww2 where totalitarianism was justified by reason. And if rationalism can be taken away from objectivism as a end then it can also be taken as a means for subjectivism/idealogy to justify anything with reason.

This, but its important to understand that post-Structuralism happend as an intellectual reaction to ww2 and Totalitarianism. We can never go back to modernism anymore as objective reason died the moment fascists use reason to justify its existance for (not objective) idealogical goals.

Have you guys ever notiched that right wingers have a huge fetish of modernism and objective reason while having zero understanding of its philosophy and the history of idealogies?

You guys should read the work Eclipse of Reason here is a tiny review.

In this book Horkheimer examines how reason, once used to identify societal goals such as truth, justice, and freedom, has become instead divorced from its objective roots and is now a subjective tool used to justify any particular means and ends regardless of their nature. In particular, Horkheimer wrote this book to address the actions of Third Reich Germany and how Nazism was able to make its genocidal goals appear reasonable and therefore justifiable. Instead of using reason to organize and create society around ideals that we find meaningful, we now use reason to adapt to society as it exists and to make ourselves into as efficient cogs in the machine as we can be. Through rationalization, philosophical concepts have become streamlined and stripped of complexity, which is necessary to the discovery of truth. Truth can only be discovered through dynamic thought: complexity, contradiction, challenge. But truth is no longer perceived as an end in itself; rather functionality has become the dominating ideal of society. (Much of this reminded me of Weber’s iron cage of rationality.) Subjective reason can be used to support ideologies of oppression just as easily as ideologies of progress. “Totalitarianism is bad” becomes no longer an objective truth but a subjective one, applicable only to those who do not benefit from totalitarianism, i.e. its victims. Differing forms of government become simply other patterns to which we must adapt, not question. Democratic arguments become unable to oppose totalitarianism because these arguments lack truth and call upon empty ideals.

The paradox of progress is that technological advances can and have been used for both noble and dehumanizing, violent ends. Progress will not necessarily be a straight line towards "good" despite the fact that it is commonly conceptualized that way. The rationalization of Nazi society (of fascism in general), reflected in the emotionless efficiency of concentration camps and the Final Solution, is a symptom of reason becoming an instrument for determining practical means (“are they efficient, properly classified, methodically rationalized?”) rather than a way of interrogating truth in search of higher ideals to guide society.

youtube.com/watch?v=Hko0kOwRrIU

Wrong, neo-modernism has been rising since the 2000s, and is indeed in a fight against the screeching dying postmo. Certainly it can't be the same as it was, but we can have a new understanding of objective reason with a side serving of perspectivism.

Anything with a prefix neo- shouldn't be trusted.

Wow…. I like this subtle implication that Fascism is factually/logically correct, COINTELPRO? But what makes me sad is that this might be true, and that this person literally can not be argued with, as they have literally rejected logic and reason. What a faggot, lmao.

because we never left

Erry tiem.

well they do

Post modernism is just the one of the many sub movements in cultural marxism.

It's just fodder for the right-wingers that jack off to pretension. They really mean "relativism" but got bored of using the word "relativism". They don't actually mean postmodernism.

There's a lot of right-wing stuff that's post-modernist that I'm sure his fans like. Post-modernism is just a certain skepticism about grand narratives. Postmodernists don't think that all explanations/narratives are equally true/untrue, it's just a school of critical thought.

Relativists on the other hand do believe that all positions are equally true/untrue, and that's what they are really so upset about.

But (like a lot of people on the left) they like to be pretentious so whatever

Its a pseudo marxist liberal field of philisophy and zeitgeist of the western world.

ishygddt, cultural marxists like Horkheimer were zionist shills

doesn't exist
t. Foucault

As it is used colloquially by people like Peterson, in the English-speaking world at least, it is essentially equivalent to irrationalist, essentialist nationalism by minorities (blacks, gays, transgenders, etc.) This is of course not really a correct use of postmodernism, but it's basically an accurate identification of what he complains about, imo. A more accurate definition might involve suspicion of grand narratives and ironic distance from pretty much anything.

Post modernism is basically questioning the validity of absolute truth and further the social condition of metanarrative.
Peterson: *screaching*

Rightists basically don't like it because it precludes fascism.

It's now. It's been the now for 40 years. Its the thing where Lenin cracks open a Pepsi and shares it with Captain Crunch. It's kitch. It's the thing everyone is sick of and hates. It's what everyone wants to be wrong.

Here have a book to read:
libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=A2429E31B62C8515470E140CB76F553E
and ps Peterson is a post-modernist himself but he's too dumb to be aware of it

More like *objective truth still exists in the face of individual interpretation via modal logic* or *questioning moral realities ad infinitum is counter productive to society*

you have a book to read as well

amazon.com/Reflections-violence-Georges-Sorel/dp/B00085ZRMS

Well damn.
isn't fascism literally nothing but meta narrative though? I'm not disputing that postmodernists apparently were in bed with it but their epistemologies should be absolutely at war.

Not without axioms, nigger.

Right-wingers don't like it because it eternally BTFO their "muh objective morality" and "muh stop questioning muh gorillion years of tradition." Also:

Proof positive.

How do you figure? Let's consider an example:

Any so-called absolute truth has questionable truth value, since anything could well be a Jewish trick to undermine the goyim. See: Deutsche Physik.

Here's an updated example:

Any so-called absolute truth may just as well be a white supremacist trick to oppress Black people.

Now, I am of course not calling black people Nazis, but black activists often do engage in irrationalist, essentialist rejection of conventional truth narratives in favor of race struggle.

Argumentum ad antiquitatem is a logical fallacy but that does not mean there is no purposes to traditions you moron. Get past freshman year of college pl0z

Read what fascists actually write, its rarely intellectually consistent its almost always feels>reals.. Literal Nazi Martin Heidegger has been extremely influential in post-modern epistemology.

Most post-modernists, of course, are not fascists, but I do not see the two trends as being incompatible. Richard J. Evans has pointed out that some Holocaust revisionists have been avid supporters of the radically skeptical epistemology of post-modernism.
libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=459969AD7D8350950DC92C89FB7F9340

The issue is that one, Fascism is one big meta narrative, the struggle of the "chosen race" against, well, orcs, basically.
Two, even if they appropriate post modernist arguments they posit an absolute solution of their own, which you cannot do as a post modernist.

Fascists are niggers, this is the truth.

Right, this is why post-modernism is not really an accurate identification by Jordan Peterson of what he dislikes.

There is no purpose to traditions other than muh feels, literally.

Are you extending that to say fascist are just generally retarded (I mean, true) as well?
My incredulity is at the concept of someone adopting or siding with a philosophy antithetical to their own system

Lol, no. Fascism is a merger between state and private property, you aren't even describing the mythology of Not Socialism, which was a war against communism and nihilism not black people or muslims or whatever you see in today's neo nazis. In fact Hitler had muslim soldiers and had them fight in the balkans.

2=2=? cant be sure some people say 5, some people 4…lets just agree to disagree and say that life is meaningless.

that is an a priori assertion, and there is nothing wrong with an appeal to emotions a priori either.

Do they seem to work? This is as good an argument as any, after all.

Well, they're definitely irrationalist. Many philosophers who were allegedly skeptical of meta-narratives were, after all, rather supportive of the Communist meta-narrative in practice.

It's not even comparable and you know it, how retarded.

Human V Ork is the meta narrative of fascism, the practice is separate from its ideological implications.

Do you unironically get your arguments from 05 era youtube creationists?
Also, still a nigger.

it is comparable and its why your're retarded. you dont even know what an axiom is lmao

Well as a fascist. "No" The internal struggle of becoming a better person is more important than separating yourself from the other.

You are a retard

Why are you so anti science?

Self ID is meaningless to what the meta narrative of fascism is you feally-posting nigger.

Are we living in the timeline where uncertainty eats the alcohol or the one where they turn into a dildo? I forget.
Also:

And that whole time I was using your axioms, hey, fag, can you prove I'm real?

You are a moron.

Fission isnt an object holy shit you cant even into basic arithmetic because its based on axioms. All of this based on the a priori assertion that nothing is real. Insane.

Are you sure about that?

WE

Fission is a process, honey, would you be happier if I said >1 atom fissioned equals no atoms?

Also, hey, fag, can you prove I'm real?

Yes, its nuclear transmutation.

1,2,3,_ what comes next in this? The problem i have with post modernists is that they have absolutely no concept of modal logic.

Are you me?

In the human construct of math, sure, it's 4. 4 isn't a thing, mind you, it's a construct, I can just as easily say 5, I won't be "right" by the predominant truth but I can still say it.

I very well could be, have you ever been screened for schizophrenic personality disorder or read the teachings on Brahman?

Also, I'm a Marxist who likes existentialism, I'm not a post modernist.

Get the fuck out of my house.

GeT ThE FuCk OuT Of My HoUsE

No its a modal and object truth.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_truth#Non-classical_logics
If you say 5 you can still be right if 5 means 4, and you change the meanings of the symbol. You are denying logical positivism and the observation of nature at all, so in a sense you are denying science and math as entire institutions.
I cannot control you therefore i am not you, take your solipsism to the garbage.

When I see those two combined together I cant help but think first year philosophy student, but saying that has become it's own cliche, so this is where I'm at homie. I could of went the low road and alluded to the fact that you might rebel turgidity but letting that man slide into the dubstbin of history is for the best.

People fucking invented, it's a construct
And? that's the point, those things are basically axiomatic.
"in a sense you are denying science and math as entire institutions."
Smug_Foucault.jpeg

Schizophrenics cannot control their delusions.
In the conception of Brahman we all exist as components of a self expressing consciousness.
You cannot prove that you are mentally healthy, nor can you truly deny that we may be one, thereby you once again resort to basic name calling instead of "logic" like the nigger you are.

Different person but, so what?

No, people observed and found an object truth. They didn't assert that gravity was a priori F = Gm1m2/r2, they observed it in nature. No, its not a construct ffs you sub 85 Autism Level barely out of freshman year of college nigger.

You are such a moron its hurting.
that doesn't make x true
that doesn't make x or y true

FFS M o d a l L o g i c, do you know it motherfucker? Can you even scientific method?

Impressive.
Again, you haven't proved I'm real.

But you can't prove you're not a schizophrenic, you cannot actually prove your computer is real.

Yes, I'm just arguing a position free of axioms, you're not.

This is next level autism, you have a priori proposition that you just re-assert every time someone states there is an objective truth. If gravity doesn't exist then go walk off of a roof you fucking nigger. F = Gm1m2/r2, is the equation that correlates to gravity. The concept of gravity isn't constructed, it is observed.
1 you dont know what axioms are
2. that is no inherently a good thing

Yes i can prove i am not schizophrenic, because to assume otherwise is firstly to asume that schizophrenics are unaware of their conditions and secondly to assume that i can assert an a priori position from nothing and become nothing.

I'm sorry user but you're acting like a faggot, the Nazi is making more sense than you.

But I don't want to walk off a roof, my prior experiences indicate there is a high likelihood I will be injured.
There is no "law" of gravity, there is a manner in which the external world (which we cannot truthfully assert even exists) behaves predictably. There is no reason that we know of that it behaves that way, there is no reason it shouldn't change tomorrow.

Solipsism is the end point of deduction, it even eats deduction, you can barely even assert YOU are real from your own perspective.
Functionally, you can't live this way either, but to actually try and argue positivism in a abstract sense is retarded.

The best part is that you can never dispute this, every time you try you will play directly into an axiom/presupposition.
Even speaking to me does thus, you're assuming I'm real and that language can reliably transmit information at all.

Not wanting to be injured is an appeal to emotions. You literally cant argue against this , there is no reason not to be injured beyond using an axiom to assert that reason.

The law of gravity is the measurement of the predictability of an event. For BILLIONS OF YEARS it has been a natural law that the universe abides by and has been predictably seen over and over again.
No that is an a priori assertion that you have based yourself around where you use tactial nihilism against all truths but your own based on your own egocentric tendencies.

Let me give you an example.
???

local man can't go 1 post without using a minimum of 5 memewords

Heh, I want to see a Jordan Peterson-Dugin debate now.

What kind of amazing new style of anime is this, and how do I dedicate every waking hour of my life to it?

This is the only reason rightists don't like postmodernism, it shits on their naive idealism

Style is called a furfag's fan animation
You can follow his YT channel I guess youtube.com/channel/UC5sltnJ7yJKUshs7UEUGwKw

nigger, did you just ignore *objective truth still exists in the face of individual interpretation due to modal logic* so you can attack *questioning moral realities ad infinitum is counter productive to society*? And you are calling ME an naive idealist? In order to assert your views on how rightists are naive you have to ignore their arguments lol.

Wasn't post-modernism an excess of the thought of modernity? And wasn't in incorporated into modernity again as one of the modes of critical thinking? Wasn't it over already in the late 2000s? What's all the ruckus?