Postmodernity and Buddhism

[ZenMuadDib]

Does postmodernism resemble Buddhism in any way? From what little understanding of postmodernism what I do know is that it seems like a breaking up of modernity and all that came with that. It can even be said to be a breaking up of reality, but in a very negative way. Quoted in Zygmunt Bauman's Intimations of Postmodernity, Jean Baudrillard is said to believe that the modern world is a world in which simulation cannot be separated from reality, and that any attempt to fight the simulation is only further simulation.

[vicdan]

A part of postmodern program was a laudable goal: the dismantling of the delusions of modernity (yes, there are a few) -- the grand meta-narratives, the objectivist presumptions, etc. However, we were supposed to create something better in its place... and instead, we just got pretentious sophomoric verbal wankery.

On the balance, PoMo is sheer suckage IMO. It could have turned out differently, but it didn't. It's like that kid who was showing real promise, but turned into a coke-snorting wastrel.

[Ataraxia]

Sophomoric verbal wankery is a good description.

Can't say I've found even one valuable idea that it espouses.I've given up looking for anything useful in PoMo personally.

[ZenMuadDib]

A part of postmodern program was a laudable goal: the dismantling of the delusions of modernity (yes, there are a few) -- the grand meta-narratives, the objectivist presumptions, etc. However, we were supposed to create something better in its place... and instead, we just got pretentious sophomoric verbal wankery.

On the balance, PoMo is sheer suckage IMO. It could have turned out differently, but it didn't. It's like that kid who was showing real promise, but turned into a coke-snorting wastrel.

You're assumption is that post-modernism is over, I don't see that at all.

[ZenMuadDib]

You're assumption is that post-modernism is over, I don't see that at all.

I guess I should say my work with it is just beginning.

[vicdan]

You're assumption is that post-modernism is over

No, my assumption is merely that it's going nowhere fast. There's a whole lot more of pretentious sophomoric verbal wankery yet to come, but I see no indications of anything constructive coming out of it. It seems to be just all gratuitous idiocy, all the time.

If something useful were to come out of the PoMo paradigm, at least in terms of philosophy and social studies, you'd expect to see some signs by now, no?..

[ZenMuadDib]

You're assumption is that post-modernism is over

No, my assumption is merely that it's going nowhere fast. There's a whole lot more of pretentious sophomoric verbal wankery yet to come, but I see no indications of anything constructive coming out of it. It seems to be just all gratuitous idiocy, all the time.

If something useful were to come out of the PoMo paradigm, at least in terms of philosophy and social studies, you'd expect to see some signs by now, no?..

There are many. Bauman, Foucault, and Derrida. What is this verbal wankery you're talking about?

[Imadrongo]

You aren't PoMo vicdan?

[ZenMuadDib]

As much as I can see now, the reason that there seems to be no "products" of postmodernism is that, first, it is not about creating products or commodities, and second, the work is gargantuan to begin with. It seems that it has to deal with the whole of history and philosophy among other things.

[vicdan]

You aren't PoMo vicdan?

Fuck no. Are you insane?!.

[vicdan]

There are many. Bauman, Foucault, and Derrida. What is this verbal wankery you're talking about?

Ever heard of the Sokal Affair? If not, check it out.

[ZenMuadDib]

There are many. Bauman, Foucault, and Derrida. What is this verbal wankery you're talking about?

Ever heard of the Sokal Affair? If not, check it out.

Sounds pretty humorous. A little bit of comic relief you could say. I guess social theory is far more complex than physics.

[Ataraxia]

This isn't a bad sledge at PoMo by Dawkins.Mentions the Sokal Affair.

http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/dawkins.html

[vicdan]

Sounds pretty humorous. A little bit of comic relief you could say. I guess social theory is far more complex than physics.

hahahahahaha.

Whew! haven't heard anything this ridiculous in a few minutes... since hsandman's posting of atomic expansion theory of gravity, in fact.

ETA: Try taking a physics class of comparable level to a given social theory class. See which one is more complex.

[ZenMuadDib]

Sounds pretty humorous. A little bit of comic relief you could say. I guess social theory is far more complex than physics.

hahahahahaha.

Whew! haven't heard anything this ridiculous in a few minutes... since hsandman's posting of atomic expansion theory of gravity, in fact.

ETA: Try taking a physics class of comparable level to a given social theory class. See which one is more complex.

Dude, physics is pretty simple. Force this, velocity that, gravity etc. Look, I'll grant that both have their abstractions, but the abstractions involved in social theory are far more complex. Why do you think that you can get a degree in physics in four years and go off to some cozy job, while it takes a lifetime to maybe come close to understanding one aspect of social theory.

[vicdan]

Dude, physics is pretty simple. Force this, velocity that, gravity etc.

Oh man...

OK, you are beyond hope.

Why do you think that you can get a degree in physics in four years and go off to some cozy job, while it takes a lifetime to maybe come close to understanding one aspect of social theory.

it takes a lifetime to master one aspect of physics too; but physicists actually get jobs because they do something real, and that something is in demand. They don't play at sophomoric verbal wankery. Contrawise, a 'social studies' graduate will most likely either get a job popping out more social studies graduates, or be asking whether you want fries with that.

look up the Sokal Affair for stark examples of the sort of 'mastery' some of the greatest PoMo luminaries evidence. if i were you, I'd be embarrassed.

[ZenMuadDib]

Dude, physics is pretty simple. Force this, velocity that, gravity etc.

Oh man...

OK, you are beyond hope.

Why do you think that you can get a degree in physics in four years and go off to some cozy job, while it takes a lifetime to maybe come close to understanding one aspect of social theory.

it takes a lifetime to master one aspect of physics too; but physicists actually get jobs because they do something real, and that something is in demand. They don't play at sophomoric verbal wankery. Contrawise, a 'social studies' graduate will most likely either get a job popping out more social studies graduates, or be asking whether you want fries with that.

look up the Sokal Affair for stark examples of the sort of 'mastery' some of the greatest PoMo luminaries evidence. if i were you, I'd be embarrassed.

I did look up this Sokal Affair, and like I said I thought it was pretty goddamned funny. Physics requires a metaphysics as does social theory. Just because a "practical use", as you would probably say, hasn't been found, which I'm not quite sure it hasn't, doesn't mean it's "wankery".

[xerox]

...

[Philosophaster]

There are many. Bauman, Foucault, and Derrida. What is this verbal wankery you're talking about?

Verbal wankery is what Derrida does. Heck, even some of his supporters admit that (in different words). See Rorty on Derrida...

[Philosophaster]

There's a whole lot more of pretentious sophomoric verbal wankery yet to come, but I see no indications of anything constructive coming out of it. It seems to be just all gratuitous idiocy, all the time.

If something useful were to come out of the PoMo paradigm, at least in terms of philosophy and social studies, you'd expect to see some signs by now, no?..

I think that a few interesting things come out of it, like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gulf_W ... Take_Place

Postmodernists tend to do best when they're not doing "philosophy proper." :-)

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Postmodernity seems in philosophy more like a method or a toolbox - to describe and analyze. Like non-euclidean math is to science. Why expecting to result in something? Like a mathematician produces anything else but what only a few can even read? It's role is to influence the disciplines, science, art, ethics perhaps even - all which are more concerned with making things happen - working it out in some fashion.

Baudrillard's not really a 'postmodernist' though, more like a well known theorist on the postmodern condition. That's my opinion though. He does use some of the toolbox as well, so..., ah well.

Where's Pye when you need her?

[ZenMuadDib]

There are many. Bauman, Foucault, and Derrida. What is this verbal wankery you're talking about?

Verbal wankery is what Derrida does. Heck, even some of his supporters admit that (in different words). See Rorty on Derrida...

Ok let's see how many times we can say verbal wankery... seriously is that a technical term that I don't know about or what?

[vicdan]

Ok let's see how many times we can say verbal wankery... seriously is that a technical term that I don't know about or what?

Yah. They teach it to every major except the social studies and lit-crit weenies. While you guys engage in verbal wankery, the engineers and philosophers and computer scientists snigger in the corner.

[ZenMuadDib]

Ok let's see how many times we can say verbal wankery... seriously is that a technical term that I don't know about or what?

Yah. They teach it to every major except the social studies and lit-crit weenies. While you guys engage in verbal wankery, the engineers and philosophers and computer scientists snigger in the corner.

Lol ok. We get taught things like ideology and false consciousness which you physicists and wankers know nothing about.

[vicdan]

Ah yes, the wonders of marxism... who could forget the Labor Theory of Value, or the idiotic historicism, or the naive economics, etc?..

Excuse me for being unimpressed.