• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    KAATHAPostmoderni Filosofie
    LOWRIDER
    LOWRIDER --- ---
    DUNAR_: No vtipný. Přijdou mi na tom zajímavý dvě věci. Otázka, jestli existuje nějakej posmodernismus. A pak to, jak se z autorů a jejich prací stávají jména a názvy, který každej cituje a dělá si z nich srandu, aniž by kolikrát věděl proč a o čem ty věci vlastně sou. Zatím se mi nepodařilo pochopit, proč s postmoderními autory spojuje představa toho, že blábolí nesmysly a plácají si, co je napadne. Zde uvádění lidé - Lyotard, Kristeva, Virilio, Rorty, Kristeva, atd. - rozhodně mají co říct, a rozhodně neplácaj nesmysly a neblábolej.
    DUNAR_
    DUNAR_ --- ---
    Dostal se mi do ruky zajímavý text, tak se o něj s Vámi podělím. :)

    "Alex" - Identity Destroyed By Postmodernism

    Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company The New York Times

    December 21, 1997, Sunday, Late Edition - Final

    SECTION: Section 4; Page 11; Column 1; Editorial Desk

    LENGTH: 1330 words

    HEADLINE: Geraldo, Eat Your Avant-Pop Heart Out

    BYLINE: By Mark Leyner; Mark Leyner is the author, most recently, of "The Tetherballs of Bougainville."

    DATELINE: HOBOKEN, N.J.

    BODY:

    JENNY JONES: Boy, we have a show for you today!

    Recently, the University of Virginia philosopher Richard Rorty made the stunning declaration that nobody has "the foggiest idea" what postmodernism means. "It would be nice to get rid of it," he said. "It isn't exactly an idea; it's a word that pretends to stand for an idea."

    This shocking admission that there is no such thing as postmodernism has produced a firestorm of protest around the country. Thousands of authors, critics and graduate students who'd considered themselves postmodernists are outraged at the betrayal.

    Today we have with us a writer -- a recovering postmodernist -- who believes that his literary career and personal life have been irreparably damaged by the theory, and who feels defrauded by the academics who promul- gated it. He wishes to remain anonymous, so we'll call him "Alex."

    Alex, as an adolescent, before you began experimenting with postmodernism, you considered yourself -- what?

    Close shot of ALEX.

    An electronic blob obscures his face. Words appear at bottom of screen: "Says he was traumatized by postmodernism and blames academics."

    ALEX (his voice electronically altered): A high modernist. Y'know, Pound, Eliot, Georges Braque, Wallace Stevens, Arnold Schonberg, Mies van der Rohe. I had all of Schonberg's 78's.

    JENNY JONES: And then you started reading people like Jean-Francois Lyotard and Jean Baudrillard -- how did that change your feelings about your modernist heroes?

    ALEX: I suddenly felt that they were, like, stifling and canonical.

    JENNY JONES: Stifling and canonical? That is so sad, such a waste. How old were you when you first read Fredric Jameson?

    ALEX: Nine, I think.

    The AUDIENCE gasps.

    JENNY JONES: We have some pictures of young Alex. . . .

    We see snapshots of 14-year-old ALEX reading Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari's "Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia." The AUDIENCE oohs and ahs.

    ALEX: We used to go to a friend's house after school -- y'know, his parents were never home -- and we'd read, like, Paul Virilio and Julia Kristeva.

    JENNY JONES: So you're only 14, and you're already skeptical toward the "grand narratives" of modernity, you're questioning any belief system that claims universality or transcendence. Why?

    ALEX: I guess -- to be cool.

    JENNY JONES: So, peer pressure?

    ALEX: I guess.

    JENNY JONES: And do you remember how you felt the very first time you entertained the notion that you and your universe are constituted by language -- that reality is a cultural construct, a "text" whose meaning is determined by infinite associations with other "texts"?

    ALEX: Uh, it felt, like, good. I wanted to do it again.

    The AUDIENCE groans.

    JENNY JONES: You were arrested at about this time?

    ALEX: For spray-painting "The Hermeneutics of Indeterminacy" on an overpass.

    JENNY JONES: You're the child of a mixed marriage -- is that right?

    ALEX: My father was a de Stijl Wittgensteinian and my mom was a neo-pre-Raphaelite.

    JENNY JONES: Do you think that growing up in a mixed marriage made you more vulnerable to the siren song of postmodernism?

    ALEX: Absolutely. It's hard when you're a little kid not to be able to just come right out and say (sniffles), y'know, I'm an Imagist or I'm a phenomenologist or I'm a post-painterly abstractionist. It's really hard -- especially around the holidays. (He cries.)

    JENNY JONES: I hear you. Was your wife a postmodernist?

    ALEX: Yes. She was raised avant-pop, which is a fundamentalist offshoot of postmodernism.

    JENNY JONES: How did she react to Rorty's admission that postmodernism was essentially a hoax?

    ALEX: She was devastated. I mean, she's got all the John Zorn albums and the entire Semiotext(e) series. She was crushed.

    We see ALEX'S WIFE in the audience, weeping softly, her hands covering her face.

    JENNY JONES: And you were raising your daughter as a postmodernist?

    ALEX: Of course. That's what makes this particularly tragic. I mean, how do you explain to a 5-year-old that self-consciously recycling cultural detritus is suddenly no longer a valid art form when, for her entire life, she's been taught that it is?

    JENNY JONES: Tell us how you think postmodernism affected your career as a novelist.

    ALEX: I disavowed writing that contained real ideas or any real passion. My work became disjunctive, facetious and nihilistic. It was all blank parody, irony enveloped in more irony. It merely recapitulated the pernicious banality of television and advertising. I found myself indiscriminately incorporating any and all kinds of pop kitsch and shlock. (He begins to weep again.)

    JENNY JONES: And this spilled over into your personal life?

    ALEX: It was impossible for me to experience life with any emotional intensity. I couldn't control the irony anymore. I perceived my own feelings as if they were in quotes.

    I italicized everything and everyone. It became impossible for me to appraise the quality of anything. To me everything was equivalent -- the Brandenburg Concertos and the Lysol jingle had the same value. . . . (He breaks down, sobbing.)

    JENNY JONES: Now, you're involved in a lawsuit, aren't you?

    ALEX: Yes. I'm suing the Modern Language Association.

    JENNY JONES: How confident are you about winning?

    ALEX: We need to prove that, while they were actively propounding it, academics knew all along that postmodernism was a specious theory.

    If we can unearth some intradepartmental memos -- y'know, a paper trail -- any corroboration that they knew postmodernism was worthless cant at the same time they were teaching it, then I think we have an excellent shot at establishing liability.

    JENNY JONES wades into audience and proffers microphone to a woman.

    WOMAN (with lateral head-bobbing): It's ironic that Barry Scheck is representing the M.L.A. in this litigation because Scheck is the postmodern attorney par excellence. This is the guy who's made a career of volatilizing truth in the simulacrum of exculpation!

    VOICE FROM AUDIENCE: You go, girl!

    WOMAN: Scheck is the guy who came up with the quintessentially postmodern re-bleed defense for O. J., which claims that O. J. merely vigorously shook Ron and Nicole, thereby re-aggravating pre-existing knife wounds. I'd just like to say to any client of Barry Scheck -- lose that zero and get a hero!

    The AUDIENCE cheers wildly.

    WOMAN: Uh, I forgot my question.

    Dissolve to message on screen:

    If you believe that mathematician Andrew Wiles' proof of Fermat's last theorem has caused you or a member of your family to dress too provocatively, call (800) 555-9455.

    Dissolve back to studio. In the audience, JENNY JONES extends the microphone to a man in his mid-30's with a scruffy beard and a bandana around his head.

    MAN WITH BANDANA: I'd like to say that this "Alex" is the single worst example of pointless irony in American literature, and this whole heartfelt renunciation of postmodernism is a ploy -- it's just more irony.

    The AUDIENCE whistles and hoots.

    ALEX: You think this is a ploy?! (He tears futilely at the electronic blob.) This is my face!

    The AUDIENCE recoils in horror.

    ALEX: This is what can happen to people who naively embrace postmodernism, to people who believe that the individual -- the autonomous, individualist subject -- is dead. They become a palimpsest of media pastiche -- a mask of metastatic irony.

    JENNY JONES (biting lip and shaking her head): That is so sad. Alex -- final words?

    ALEX: I'd just like to say that self-consciousness and irony seem like fun at first, but they can destroy your life. I know. You gotta be earnest, be real. Real feelings are important. Objective reality does exist.

    AUDIENCE members whoop, stomp and pump fists in the air.

    JENNY JONES: I'd like to thank Alex for having the courage to come on today and share his experience with us.

    Join us for tomorrow's show, "The End of Manichean, Bipolar Geopolitics Turned My Boyfriend Into an Insatiable Sex Freak (and I Love It!)."
    LOWRIDER
    LOWRIDER --- ---
    ACHERON:
    pokus o ospravedlnění mylných předpokladů
    - historicky podmíněný typ myšlení - myslím si, že každá doba a místo klade jiné otázky a vyžaduje jiné odpovědi - a tím pádem i jiný druh myšlení. Jinak mysleli osvícenci, jinak socialisti 19. století, atd.
    - určitému typu myšlení může odpovídat typ text - příklad Montaigne a jeho eseje, Platón a jeho dialogy, Akvinský a suma, Augustin a vyznání, atd.
    - struktura textu samozřejmě není žánr, ale žánr, má-li být rozpoznatelný jako tentýž žánr by asi měl mít tutéž strukturu.
    - západní filozofie určitě nemá jednu formu, ale každopádně je to druh (styl, žánr???) myšlení, který má po celou tradici schodné prvky - pojmové myšlení, definice, dvouhodnotová logika, podobný typ otázek
    - Wittgenstein, Deleuze, Foucalt či Lyotard sou podle mě právě ti, kdo hledají pro západní myšlení novou formu a nový žánr, nový druh otázek a novou logiku a dají se zařadit do té prstmrderny
    - poslední předpoklad se nedá tak snadno dokázat, to musím líp promyslet
    XCHAOS
    XCHAOS --- ---
    XCHAOS
    XCHAOS --- ---
    http://chir.ag/phernalia/preztags/
    US Presidential Speeches Tag Cloud

    (návod k použití: nad mrakem slov z Bushova projevu je "táhlo", pomocí kterého se lze z 21. století vrátit až do 18. století...)
    ACHERON
    ACHERON --- ---
    LOWRIDER: plus v te otazce nerozumim, zda je postmoderna chápadná jako způsob myšlení, historická fáze nebo filosofický proud
    ACHERON
    ACHERON --- ---
    aha, tak jsem tu strávil asi ctvrt hodiny psaním asi desetiřádkové reakce a prisel jsem o to, protoze zpicenej nyx neukládá rozepsanej text pri omylem zmácklém tlacitku "one page back". takze sorry, ale na to fakt nemám nervy to psát znovu.

    strucne záver - co povazuji za mylné předpoklady:

    - předpoklad, že existují nějaké historické typy myšlení platné pro určitou populaci
    - předpoklad, že tomuto typu myšlení odpovídá nějaký typ textu (žánr, struktura)
    - struktura textu není žánr
    - nevím co je filosofický traktát a nevím o tom, že by text západní filosofie měla jednu formu (Wittgenstein, Foucault, Lyotard, Deleuze, ...)
    - předpoklad, že pro postmodernu je typická nestabilita a anarchie

    neporozumění je základním principem komunikace, porozumění filosofickému textu vyžaduje za prvé porozumění tradici, na kterou navazuje, za druhé, nalezení otázek, na které odpovídá, a za třetí, znalost sémantického pole, v němž se autor pohybuje. jak psát, aby to, co chci říct, působilo, tak jak chci a mělo ten smysl, který tomu chci dát není věc filosofie ale obecným problémem přenosu smyslu pomocí textového sdělení
    LOWRIDER
    LOWRIDER --- ---
    ACHERON: aha otázka filozofie je do velké míry otázkou psaní - jak psát, aby to, co chci říct, působila, tak jak chci a mělo ten smysl, který tomu chci dát. Proto moje otázka zní, jestli je se dá vybrat nějaký žánr, který je pro dnešní myšlení vhodnější než jiný. Většina západní filozofie se odehrává v rámci něčeho, čemu se dá říkat filozofický traktát. Když publikuješ jako filozofický odborník, musíš se podřídit přesně danému žánru - úvod, rozpracování teze, shrnující závěr. Pro postmodernu je podle mě typická nestabilita a anarchie a proto si myslím, že tradiční filozofické žánry pro naše myšlení nejsou vhodné.
    ACHERON
    ACHERON --- ---
    LOWRIDER: objevila se kriticka chyba na adrese zrgdfgfkhk,nnnnnnnm.............................................

    přeformulujte prosím otázku
    LOWRIDER
    LOWRIDER --- ---
    Jaký je podle vás nejvhodnější "postmoderní" (to je fakt shitový slovo) filozofický žánr?
    JAKKILLER
    JAKKILLER --- ---
    VIR_KENNY: to by taky byl paradox, vezmeme-li v uvahu ze jsme na netu na diskuznim foru. :)
    VIR_KENNY
    VIR_KENNY --- ---
    OTELO: tady nikdo sit neodmita.
    SVTONIK
    SVTONIK --- ---
    tu jeden klasicky text
    W. V. Quine: Ontological Relativity
    http://kinot.ic.cz/quine.pdf
    OTELO
    OTELO --- ---
    imho ziskavat informace pouze na internetu jeste nelze, ale odmitat sit za kazdou cenu je jista omezenost. Je to extremni pristup.
    XCHAOS
    XCHAOS --- ---
    JAKKILLER: tady ovšem nikdy nešlo o popření tradičních forem textů - tady jde o zrovnoprávnění nových forem textů. Nejde zdaleka jen o wiki. Mě po filosofické stránce třeba dost zajímá vztah počítačem vs. člověkem srozumitelných textů...
    JAKKILLER
    JAKKILLER --- ---
    ACHERON: napr. a k tomu uz prave potrebujes znalost urcitejch textu. :)
    ACHERON
    ACHERON --- ---
    JAKKILLER: a kdyz preskocime do poststrukturalismu, svihneme ho fenomenologii a ouha, vsechno je text
    ACHERON
    ACHERON --- ---
    JAKKILLER: jasny, z hlediska filosofie a la Foucault je dulezitej uplne kazdej text :))
    JAKKILLER
    JAKKILLER --- ---
    XCHAOS: ovsem tady si v diskuzi o filozofii.
    kazda filozoficka kniha ma svou relevanci a zadna se neda vnimat jen jako zaznam nejakych faktu.
    koneckoncu i ty "obsolete" knihy jsou dulezity.
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam