Living according to a set of doctrines/theses/positions means that the weak spots need to be treated gingerly, and any traffic in such spots need to be forbidden, taboos established, practices that threaten to jeopardize the integrity of reality. But you said yourself: breaking taboos unleashes energy.
This seems accurate (unfortunately).aren't we seeing the grand narratives re-assert themselves via conspiracy, cummings runs the UK, etc? like we want a simpler strongman trump type leader on the one hand and a complex QAnon scenario behind the scenes
You can't do this thread without Poetix.
Is it "reactionary", though? Sokal isn't a conservative, he's a socialist. His stance on postmodern discourse is "I never understood how deconstruction is supposed to help the working class". Perhaps he's making an error there, in that it was never intended to do that in the first place, but then, what exactly is it for?wow what next? the sokal hoax? at once a typically unattractive reactionary tactic from a good honest science guy and fair enough a lot of that theory driven academic stuff doesn't seem to make much sense, almost as if that were the point. @poetix to thread please.
Is it "reactionary", though? Sokal isn't a conservative, he's a socialist. His stance on postmodern discourse is "I never understood how deconstruction is supposed to help the working class". Perhaps he's making an error there, in that it was never intended to do that in the first place, but then, what exactly is it for?
Well, a supposedly prestigious journal printed a paper that was intentionally written as a nonsensical pisstake. The implication is that the whole field is a nonsensical pisstake. I don't really see how that fact can be sidestepped.maybe that's his stance but the over-riding message conveyed by his stunt is look at what a load of shit these theorists are churning out, i can program a computer to parody this nonsense
Perhaps not the working class per se, but this style of philosophy has always marketed itself as being progressive in terms of identity politics - feminist, anti-racist, pro-LGBT, etc.well, you can characterise it in a number of ways but "helping the working class" is definitely not the aim of philosophy as i see it
yeah we're agreeingWell, a supposedly prestigious journal printed a paper that was intentionally written as a nonsensical pisstake. The implication is that the whole field is a nonsensical pisstake. I don't really see how that fact can be sidestepped.
i reckon there's a massive school that thinks philosophy should indeed help the working class and other identities. one adherent founded this forum