People operate with diverse systems of belief and we can live with this incoherence - Political Theology: Four New Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty - Page 118 - Paul W. Kahn - 2011 - Preview - More editions In the postmodern world, the...1 month ago
Savitri Era of those who adore, Om Sri Aurobindo and The Mother.
In view of the fact that multiple anonymous comments in a thread make confusing reading and it becomes difficult to track who is telling what and to whom, only comments bearing some name/pseudonym/identity will appear in future. [TNM 011110 SEOF]
Wednesday 11 April 2007
By MD 11:05 AM Perez, You write: It was hard to tell whether you were debating that postmodernism is too vague to exist or if postmodernism needs to be shot down because it's a pathology of Opinion.It is both those. The perception, however widespread held, that "postmodernism" means something tangible or worthwhile must be bludgeoned. Its users want it to mean too much. They eschew regular language to attempt to mask that failing. And they are intellectually sloppy and/or dishonest.The way to do so is trace its weeds back to their roots; their intellectual roots (of its main proponents). Which in large part are under the heading of the Great Idea, Opinion -- and one aspect of that, namely suspicion/skepticism, has been pumped 24/7 with Miracle-Gro by humanities professors exploiting the mineral-rich soil that is the mass-media age. Thus suspicion has been institutionalized, as a school. People touting "postmodernism" all come from this school. Which, in characteristically non-rigorous, glib, sloppy fashion, doesn't even realize its actual intellectual mother, which is the Great Idea Opinion. People who spout "postmodernism" are deracinated, I've found. Furthermore, so-called "postmodernism" attempts to take credit for developing the practice of questioning assumptions (i.e., deconstruction) and that is absurd; in but one example, Socrates rather excelled, most agree, in deconstructing assumptions. All postmodern "innovations" are present in ancient Greek thought, and plenty of other places.As far as my usage of classical and modern, I don't use them (or, don't mean to) for currents or movements, at least not in the way that I presume you mean, which is as precisely in the way I criticize "postmodernism". So you are wrong. I use (or mean to use) "modern" as its general meaning, "contemporary". If I haven't, then I'll be more careful in the future. I use "classical" in a couple different ways, clear by context of usage. Classical education refers to paideia anchored in study of great works of art and thought; classical artistry is a term I've played with, but am in the process of transitioning out of in favor of "great artistry", but in any event, refers to artistry anchored in the great conversation between artists and thinkers in the history of Western civilization. Then there's classical music, but I don't really use that descriptor much, because I don't like it. Overall, classical for me relates to timeless, relates to standards, relates to ideas and themes, relates to contemporary life, and is not snobby. If that doesn't make sense, keep reading my work, and perhaps clarity will emerge. Some people get it, some don't. I'm fine with that. md By MD 11:06 AM Tusar, I'm not familiar with any of Sri Aurobindo's poetry. So if you have any good examples, feel free to share. md