If you're still wondering what Postmodernism is, it's essentially the argument against the grand narratives of life. so take schooling for example. We believe schools are good and they help to educate people which changes their quality of life. well you can also frame schools as being these places where a part of society learns to think the same way as someone who in the end didn't write the book on life so why listen to them? or schools perpetuate ideals that don't actually help society at large because they create classicism between the educated and non educated. or schooling is bad because the quality of education differs between districts, campuses and institutions.
Yeah, postmodernism is a holographic mind interpreting a holographic universe. Just like I thought it is. But now there's a "new" philosophy social constructionism that says exactly the same argument. Everything is socially constructed. What's the difference? It sounds like the same argument that postmodernism has and there's simply a new label for it. I suppose the social construction of language, that's what that is. Still becomes confusing though. Another quite interesting thought. If everything is a social construction wouldn't everything be a videogame for the select few to manipulate through the cause of events? Since everything is socially constructed but also since most people in their own hive mind take their viewpoints in an absolutist direction, everything could be argued to be a zombie videogame for the aware and awake to play through from the zombies of the world.
Postmodernism is like a big art and ideas party where people challenge traditional rules and say there's no one "right" way to do things. It's all about mixing, mashing up, and questioning the old ways to create something new and often a bit confusing. It's like saying, "Hey, let's break the rules and see what happens!"
Glad it helps, Ali. Please note that in this video lecture we only attempted to explain very briefly the meaning of the term. Sure, we will include that in our list. Thank you for reaching out. Cheers!
This how a physicist gave postmodernism a hilarious black eye and live to tell about . For anyone who pays attention to popular accounts of physics and cosmology, quantum gravity is a thing. How could it not be? Quantum gravity is the place where the two pillars of modern physics-quantum mechanics and relativity-collide head-on at the very instant of the Big Bang. The two theories, each triumphant in its own realm, just don’t play well together. If you are looking for fundamental challenges to our ideas about the universe, quantum gravity isn’t a bad place to start. A bit over two decades ago, quantum gravity also proved to be the perfect honey trap for a bunch of academics with a taste for nonsense and an envious bone to pick with science. In 1994, NYU physicist Alan Sokal ran across a book by biologist Paul Gross and mathematician Norman Levitt. In Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science[3], Gross and Levitt raised an alarm about those in the new field of “cultural studies” who were declaring that scientific knowledge, and at some level reality itself, is nothing but a social construct. Unsure whether he should take Gross and Levitt at face value, Sokal went to the library and dove into the literature that they were criticizing. When he came up for air, he was much more familiar with the postmodernist critique of science. He was also appalled at the depth of its ignorance about the subject. Most scientists respond to such nonsense with a muttered, “good grief,” but Sokal felt compelled to do more. He decided to give postmodernists a first-hand demonstration of the destructive testing of ideas that tie science to a reality that cuts across all cultural divides. Sokal had a hypothesis: Those applying postmodernism to science couldn’t tell the difference between sense and nonsense if you rubbed their noses in it. He predicted that the cultural science studies crowd would publish just about anything, so long as it sounded good and supported their ideological agenda. To test that prediction, Sokal wrote a heavily footnoted and deliciously absurd 39-page parody entitled, “Transgressing The Boundaries. Toward A Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.”[ The paper is worth reading just for a belly laugh. It promises “emancipatory mathematics” at the foundation of “a future post-modern and liberatory science.” “Physical ‘reality’,” it declares, “is at bottom a social and linguistic concept.” He embraces the notion, seriously proposed by some, that logic itself is invalidated by “contamination of the social” When he showed it to friends, Sokal says, “the scientists would figure out quickly that either it was a parody or I had gone off my rocker.” Sokal submitted his paper to a trendy journal called Social Text. Understanding the importance of ego, he freely and glowingly cited work by several of the journal’s editors. For their part, the folks at Social Text were thrilled to receive Sokal’s manuscript. Here at last was a physicist who was “on their side!” After minor revisions, the paper was accepted and scheduled to appear in an upcoming special “Science Wars” edition. The bait had been taken, but the trap had yet to be sprung. That came with a piece by Sokal in Lingua Franca that appeared just after Social Text hit the stands, exposing “Transgressing the Boundaries” as the hoax it was. Parody sometimes succeeds where reasoned discourse fails. Sokal’s little joke burst free of the ivory tower on May 18, 1996, when The New York Times ran a front-page article entitled, “Postmodern Gravity Deconstructed, Slyly.”The Sokal Hoax became a hot topic of conversation around the world! Reactions to Sokal’s article were, shall we say, mixed. The editors of Social Text were not amused, to put it mildly, and they decried Sokal’s unethical behavior. One insisted that the original paper was not a hoax at all, but that fearing reprisal from the scientific hegemony, Sokal had “folded his intellectual resolve.” It was lost on them that had they showed the paper to anyone who knew anything about science or mathematics, the hoax would have been spotted instantly. As most scientists did: When I heard about it, I busted a gut! I still laugh, but the Sakai Hoax carries a serious message. In addition to diluting intellectual rigor, the postmodern assault on science undermines the very notion of truth and robs scientists and scholars of their ability to speak truth to power. As conservative columnist George Will correctly observed, “the epistemology that Sokal attacked precludes serious discussion of knowable realities.” Today, from climate change denial, to the anti-vaccine movement, to the nonsensical notion of “alternative facts,” that blade is wielded on both sides of the political aisle. Sokal gets the last word. Quoting from his 1996 Lingua Franca article, “Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the 21st floor.)”
"In addition to diluting intellectual rigor, the postmodern assault on science undermines the very notion of truth and robs scientists and scholars of their ability to speak truth to power." Exactly. Postmodernism is an assault on the quest for truth.
yeah, because our main goal here is just to define the term so those who are interested will have an idea of what the term means. thanks though, Helloimfergie!
@@PHILOnotes gotcha. I mean I suppose the pure definition is fairly long and expository, I appreciate the research put into this video though. Thank you.
@@PatrickTouma The question as a "title" Patrick is not a categorical question. Sometimes a single sentence or paragraph is the answer to the question, and sometimes it is the entire discussion. I hope that's clear. Thank you though for your question.
@@PHILOnotes But you did not define anything. I guess using a post modernism lens your video can be called a definition? Bullshit anti-rational philosophy.
Postmodern thought isthe spirit of chaos and confusion created by people that are part of a group of people who never had to work to be able to eat and had way to much time on their hands whose lives felt meaningless but enjoyed confusing the weakminded and unstable.
The book Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont. It's definitely worth a read for it is a SCATHING INDICTMENT of the Postmodernism Industrial Complex
Isn't post-modernism really one big cover-up for the failure of the French to write a truly interesting novel ever since a sports car ate Albert Camus?
The question as a "title" Patrick is not a categorical question. Sometimes a single sentence or paragraph is the answer to the question, and sometimes it is the entire discussion. I hope that's clear. Thank you though for your question.
@@PatrickTouma more like; Ok boomer thats what you looking for to say bruh edit: foken hell thats a fast response by the OP in the comment section shes really into this fuckin idea rofl.
The book Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont. It's definitely worth a read for it is a SCATHING INDICTMENT of the Postmodernism Industrial Complex
Prior to the postmodern revolution, humanity was contending with modern thinking and the devastating effects it had on itself. Things like both World Wars and the Cold War were direct consequences of the modern perspective. To protest against such a way of thinking was considered an act of rebellion and moving away from such a way of thinking. Think about current protests against systemic injustice happening worldwide. Postmodernism is considered the new paradigm because humanity is collectively starting to understand how "how we think" affects "what we think".
Sometimes the meaning of the term cannot be captured in a single sentence, Jordan. Sometimes you need to present the entire context and surrounding concepts to make sense of the term. That's the case in this video.
@@PHILOnotes it's good that you presented the context and sorrounding concept, but after you did that, you could still explain the meaning of it, or change the title
No, there are definitions. What she left out though is postmodernism from the theological perspective. This is the most dangerous form of postmodernism, and the one you need to be worried about on a daily basis. In simple terms, it is the overthrow of truth to perpetuate a lie. It is how gay marriage came about and accepted in society along with feminism. It's how you arrived at abortion. It's also what the alphabet people currently employ to gain acceptance. It will inevitably destroy an entire civilization if it is not combatted. Your US government is already completely overthrown by it and does not know it.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
If you're still wondering what Postmodernism is, it's essentially the argument against the grand narratives of life. so take schooling for example. We believe schools are good and they help to educate people which changes their quality of life. well you can also frame schools as being these places where a part of society learns to think the same way as someone who in the end didn't write the book on life so why listen to them? or schools perpetuate ideals that don't actually help society at large because they create classicism between the educated and non educated. or schooling is bad because the quality of education differs between districts, campuses and institutions.
Thank you! You did a far better job at explaining what post modernism actually is, through your example, than this video!
true, awesome statement
this one reply answers the title better than the video, thank you
Yeah, postmodernism is a holographic mind interpreting a holographic universe. Just like I thought it is. But now there's a "new" philosophy social constructionism that says exactly the same argument. Everything is socially constructed. What's the difference? It sounds like the same argument that postmodernism has and there's simply a new label for it. I suppose the social construction of language, that's what that is. Still becomes confusing though. Another quite interesting thought. If everything is a social construction wouldn't everything be a videogame for the select few to manipulate through the cause of events? Since everything is socially constructed but also since most people in their own hive mind take their viewpoints in an absolutist direction, everything could be argued to be a zombie videogame for the aware and awake to play through from the zombies of the world.
Postmodernism is like a big art and ideas party where people challenge traditional rules and say there's no one "right" way to do things. It's all about mixing, mashing up, and questioning the old ways to create something new and often a bit confusing. It's like saying, "Hey, let's break the rules and see what happens!"
Thanks for explaining a complex subject by referencing other complex subjects. So helpful.
Nice to hear a version, that's not biased. Appreciated.
All versions carry bias.
I feel this didn't explain what postmodernism actually is
ok, thanks
Yeah this video doesn't really get into the fundamentals about what it actually is
Your lectures are very useful. Could you provide more detailed and comprehensive overview of length of upto 12 to 15 minutes.
Glad it helps, Ali. Please note that in this video lecture we only attempted to explain very briefly the meaning of the term. Sure, we will include that in our list. Thank you for reaching out. Cheers!
great!! another video without a direct definition
This how a physicist gave postmodernism a hilarious black eye and live to tell about .
For anyone who pays attention to popular accounts of physics and cosmology, quantum gravity is a thing. How could it not be? Quantum gravity is the place where the two pillars of modern physics-quantum mechanics and relativity-collide head-on at the very instant of the Big Bang. The two theories, each triumphant in its own realm, just don’t play well together. If you are looking for fundamental challenges to our ideas about the universe, quantum gravity isn’t a bad place to start.
A bit over two decades ago, quantum gravity also proved to be the perfect honey trap for a bunch of academics with a taste for nonsense and an envious bone to pick with science.
In 1994, NYU physicist Alan Sokal ran across a book by biologist Paul Gross and mathematician Norman Levitt. In Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science[3], Gross and Levitt raised an alarm about those in the new field of “cultural studies” who were declaring that scientific knowledge, and at some level reality itself, is nothing but a social construct. Unsure whether he should take Gross and Levitt at face value, Sokal went to the library and dove into the literature that they were criticizing. When he came up for air, he was much more familiar with the postmodernist critique of science. He was also appalled at the depth of its ignorance about the subject.
Most scientists respond to such nonsense with a muttered, “good grief,” but Sokal felt compelled to do more. He decided to give postmodernists a first-hand demonstration of the destructive testing of ideas that tie science to a reality that cuts across all cultural divides.
Sokal had a hypothesis: Those applying postmodernism to science couldn’t tell the difference between sense and nonsense if you rubbed their noses in it. He predicted that the cultural science studies crowd would publish just about anything, so long as it sounded good and supported their ideological agenda. To test that prediction, Sokal wrote a heavily footnoted and deliciously absurd 39-page parody entitled, “Transgressing The Boundaries. Toward A Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.”[
The paper is worth reading just for a belly laugh. It promises “emancipatory mathematics” at the foundation of “a future post-modern and liberatory science.” “Physical ‘reality’,” it declares, “is at bottom a social and linguistic concept.” He embraces the notion, seriously proposed by some, that logic itself is invalidated by “contamination of the social” When he showed it to friends, Sokal says, “the scientists would figure out quickly that either it was a parody or I had gone off my rocker.”
Sokal submitted his paper to a trendy journal called Social Text. Understanding the importance of ego, he freely and glowingly cited work by several of the journal’s editors. For their part, the folks at Social Text were thrilled to receive Sokal’s manuscript. Here at last was a physicist who was “on their side!” After minor revisions, the paper was accepted and scheduled to appear in an upcoming special “Science Wars” edition.
The bait had been taken, but the trap had yet to be sprung. That came with a piece by Sokal in Lingua Franca that appeared just after Social Text hit the stands, exposing “Transgressing the Boundaries” as the hoax it was.
Parody sometimes succeeds where reasoned discourse fails. Sokal’s little joke burst free of the ivory tower on May 18, 1996, when The New York Times ran a front-page article entitled, “Postmodern Gravity Deconstructed, Slyly.”The Sokal Hoax became a hot topic of conversation around the world!
Reactions to Sokal’s article were, shall we say, mixed. The editors of Social Text were not amused, to put it mildly, and they decried Sokal’s unethical behavior. One insisted that the original paper was not a hoax at all, but that fearing reprisal from the scientific hegemony, Sokal had “folded his intellectual resolve.” It was lost on them that had they showed the paper to anyone who knew anything about science or mathematics, the hoax would have been spotted instantly.
As most scientists did: When I heard about it, I busted a gut!
I still laugh, but the Sakai Hoax carries a serious message. In addition to diluting intellectual rigor, the postmodern assault on science undermines the very notion of truth and robs scientists and scholars of their ability to speak truth to power. As conservative columnist George Will correctly observed, “the epistemology that Sokal attacked precludes serious discussion of knowable realities.” Today, from climate change denial, to the anti-vaccine movement, to the nonsensical notion of “alternative facts,” that blade is wielded on both sides of the political aisle.
Sokal gets the last word. Quoting from his 1996 Lingua Franca article, “Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the windows of my apartment. (I live on the 21st floor.)”
MIT Mathematica0101 Very interesting read
Beautiful. BRAVO, Sokal!
"In addition to diluting intellectual rigor, the postmodern assault on science undermines the very notion of truth and robs scientists and scholars of their ability to speak truth to power."
Exactly. Postmodernism is an assault on the quest for truth.
Never really explained it though
yeah, because our main goal here is just to define the term so those who are interested will have an idea of what the term means. thanks though, Helloimfergie!
@@PHILOnotes gotcha. I mean I suppose the pure definition is fairly long and expository, I appreciate the research put into this video though. Thank you.
@@PHILOnotes I mean, the title of your video is a question and you don't answer the question.
@@PatrickTouma The question as a "title" Patrick is not a categorical question. Sometimes a single sentence or paragraph is the answer to the question, and sometimes it is the entire discussion. I hope that's clear. Thank you though for your question.
@@PHILOnotes But you did not define anything. I guess using a post modernism lens your video can be called a definition? Bullshit anti-rational philosophy.
Your lectures are very useful
Glad to hear that, thank you very much!
But what is Postmodernism though?
that's it
Postmodern thought isthe spirit of chaos and confusion created by people that are part of a group of people who never had to work to be able to eat and had way to much time on their hands whose lives felt meaningless but enjoyed confusing the weakminded and unstable.
@@allendodd4844that makes more sense...
Nice discussion, may I ask about the application you used in doing the video? Thanks in advance for your response
Many thanks, Sherlyn for your sweet comment. We used Video Scribe.
The book Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont. It's definitely worth a read for it is a SCATHING INDICTMENT of the Postmodernism Industrial Complex
You just read that what is Postmodernism. But you should explain what is postmodernism.
Isn't post-modernism really one big cover-up for the failure of the French to write a truly interesting novel ever since a sports car ate Albert Camus?
thanks
You don't really explain what is post-modernism.. you only explain the origin of post-modernism💆
Excellent lecture! May I ask I ask your background? Teaching? Student? 😀👍
Thanks, Nama. Yes, I'm a teacher.
Why is postmodernism considered as the theory of education
Ok but what is it?
The question as a "title" Patrick is not a categorical question. Sometimes a single sentence or paragraph is the answer to the question, and sometimes it is the entire discussion. I hope that's clear. Thank you though for your question.
Ok
@@PatrickTouma more like; Ok boomer
thats what you looking for to say bruh
edit: foken hell thats a fast response by the OP in the comment section shes really into this fuckin idea rofl.
The book Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals' Abuse of Science by Alan Sokal and Jean Bricmont. It's definitely worth a read for it is a SCATHING INDICTMENT of the Postmodernism Industrial Complex
why postmodernism considered to the new paradigm?
Sorry, but haven't encountered this question. Thanks though, Romeo.
Prior to the postmodern revolution, humanity was contending with modern thinking and the devastating effects it had on itself. Things like both World Wars and the Cold War were direct consequences of the modern perspective. To protest against such a way of thinking was considered an act of rebellion and moving away from such a way of thinking. Think about current protests against systemic injustice happening worldwide. Postmodernism is considered the new paradigm because humanity is collectively starting to understand how "how we think" affects "what we think".
You didn't explain what it is, just about what the term means
Sometimes the meaning of the term cannot be captured in a single sentence, Jordan. Sometimes you need to present the entire context and surrounding concepts to make sense of the term. That's the case in this video.
@@PHILOnotes it's good that you presented the context and sorrounding concept, but after you did that, you could still explain the meaning of it, or change the title
yeah...thanks for the constructive critique, Jordan. I will take note of that. Cheers!
“The Postmodernists' tyranny wears people down by boredom and semi-literate prose.”
-Christopher Hitchens
thanks
So what the fuck is postmodernism and what the fuck is modernism
Lose ly?
You lost me after that.
Is Post modernism expose hippy culture?
It can, but it's not its focus.
Postmodernism = post USSR marxism
hmmm....
Wtf no definitions at all so I take the concept as BULLSHIT
No, there are definitions. What she left out though is postmodernism from the theological perspective. This is the most dangerous form of postmodernism, and the one you need to be worried about on a daily basis. In simple terms, it is the overthrow of truth to perpetuate a lie. It is how gay marriage came about and accepted in society along with feminism. It's how you arrived at abortion. It's also what the alphabet people currently employ to gain acceptance. It will inevitably destroy an entire civilization if it is not combatted. Your US government is already completely overthrown by it and does not know it.
What a waste of time
👍
thanks Kezziah!
So... what is postmodernism? This is nonsense boring talk
Oh, I see. Thanks for your constructive critique.
You gave it your best.
Didn’t define postmodernism at all. Useless video
why postmodernism considered to the new paradigm?
Sorry, but haven't encountered this question. Thanks though, Romeo.