In my previous blog post about postmodernism I explained how in modernism a big emphasis was put into scientific accuracy, facts, evidence-based testable reasoning, and repeatable experimentation (as well as, on the political side, equal rights and the dismantling of royalty, nobility and all forms of inherited leadership, in favor of representative democracy). I also explained how postmodernism is a completely insane new ideology that makes no sense and pretty much discards all that in favor of, what effectively amounts to, superstitious beliefs about truths and facts being relative, and being whatever we want them to be (one concrete, practical and very widespread example of this being that "gender" is whatever the person wants it to be, and scientific testing has absolutely nothing to do with it.)
In some sense, in some contexts, however, it might be more accurate to say that in postmodernist ideology it's not so much that truth is relative, as much as truth being irrelevant. As in, it's not important what the actual facts are, but what kind of effect they have (in whatever social matter is the subject of discussion). In other words, it doesn't matter whether something is factually accurate or not, it only matters how it affects some sociopolitical issue being discussed.
For example, if examining the writings of some philosopher (or even scientist) from 200 years ago, the modernist approach would be to examine how factually accurate these writings are. All that matters is the writing itself, what claims it makes, and whether those claims can be verified as correct and accurate. Moreover, the claims are examined and valued on their own merit, regardless of who wrote them. If these claims can be scientifically verified to be accurate, they can be taken into account and added to our pool of knowledge.
The postmodernist approach, however, doesn't care if the claims made in these writings are factual and accurate. It only cares what effect these claims have in our society. Moreover, and even beyond that, it cares who wrote them. Postmodernism looks as much, if not even more, at the person making the claims, as the claims themselves. For instance, it will look if the author was a white man, or for example a black woman, and assign importance of the writing based on that factor alone.
Even if the claims can be scientifically demonstrated as factually correct and accurate, that doesn't matter if they have some kind of negative impact (real or perceived) in whatever postmodernist political agenda is at play currently. If it goes against the narrative, it will be discarded (and even heavily opposed) regardless of its accuracy. Likewise if the claims are conformant with and support the political agenda, they will be favorably received completely regardless of their factual accuracy.
Likewise current scientific teaching and research is seen as relevant only if it supports the postmodernist agenda currently being promoted, else it will be considered unimportant, or even opposed if it's deemed as being contrary to the agenda. And "being contrary to the agenda" may be judged by completely irrelevant things, such as what the skin color of the majority of teachers, students and/or researchers is. Just the skin color of the majority of people engaging in that field is enough for the postmodernist ideology to determine whether it has a "positive" or "negative" impact on the political agenda being pushed. The relevance and factual accuracy of the field in question is of no importance.
The scary thing is that this form of postmodernism is creeping into more and more universities, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom. "Social studies" and "humanities" departments, who fully embrace exactly this kind of postmodernist thinking, are gaining more and more power in these universities, while STEM (Science/Technology/Engineering/Math) field departments are losing their power, and in an increasing manner shunned and shoved aside (even to the point that at some colleges they are already even hindering students from enrolling into STEM classes.) In many of these universities the boards of directors, the people at the very top, the ones who are in charge of all decisions pertaining to the university, is almost completely overtaken by these postmodernists who value political agendas more than science. And they are the ones in charge of assigning budgets to the different departments, and deciding which classes are mandatory and which aren't.
If this is not stopped, it will potentially have a devastating effect in our society. "Social studies" and "humanities" courses have no usefulness in building one's career, and they do not contribute to our scientific and technical knowledge. If a future generation of people is mostly illiterate when it comes to science and technology, it will cause a societal collapse. And this isn't even going into the fact of how totalitarian, oppressive and anti-human-rights the current postmodernist regressive leftist ideology is.
In some sense, in some contexts, however, it might be more accurate to say that in postmodernist ideology it's not so much that truth is relative, as much as truth being irrelevant. As in, it's not important what the actual facts are, but what kind of effect they have (in whatever social matter is the subject of discussion). In other words, it doesn't matter whether something is factually accurate or not, it only matters how it affects some sociopolitical issue being discussed.
For example, if examining the writings of some philosopher (or even scientist) from 200 years ago, the modernist approach would be to examine how factually accurate these writings are. All that matters is the writing itself, what claims it makes, and whether those claims can be verified as correct and accurate. Moreover, the claims are examined and valued on their own merit, regardless of who wrote them. If these claims can be scientifically verified to be accurate, they can be taken into account and added to our pool of knowledge.
The postmodernist approach, however, doesn't care if the claims made in these writings are factual and accurate. It only cares what effect these claims have in our society. Moreover, and even beyond that, it cares who wrote them. Postmodernism looks as much, if not even more, at the person making the claims, as the claims themselves. For instance, it will look if the author was a white man, or for example a black woman, and assign importance of the writing based on that factor alone.
Even if the claims can be scientifically demonstrated as factually correct and accurate, that doesn't matter if they have some kind of negative impact (real or perceived) in whatever postmodernist political agenda is at play currently. If it goes against the narrative, it will be discarded (and even heavily opposed) regardless of its accuracy. Likewise if the claims are conformant with and support the political agenda, they will be favorably received completely regardless of their factual accuracy.
Likewise current scientific teaching and research is seen as relevant only if it supports the postmodernist agenda currently being promoted, else it will be considered unimportant, or even opposed if it's deemed as being contrary to the agenda. And "being contrary to the agenda" may be judged by completely irrelevant things, such as what the skin color of the majority of teachers, students and/or researchers is. Just the skin color of the majority of people engaging in that field is enough for the postmodernist ideology to determine whether it has a "positive" or "negative" impact on the political agenda being pushed. The relevance and factual accuracy of the field in question is of no importance.
The scary thing is that this form of postmodernism is creeping into more and more universities, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom. "Social studies" and "humanities" departments, who fully embrace exactly this kind of postmodernist thinking, are gaining more and more power in these universities, while STEM (Science/Technology/Engineering/Math) field departments are losing their power, and in an increasing manner shunned and shoved aside (even to the point that at some colleges they are already even hindering students from enrolling into STEM classes.) In many of these universities the boards of directors, the people at the very top, the ones who are in charge of all decisions pertaining to the university, is almost completely overtaken by these postmodernists who value political agendas more than science. And they are the ones in charge of assigning budgets to the different departments, and deciding which classes are mandatory and which aren't.
If this is not stopped, it will potentially have a devastating effect in our society. "Social studies" and "humanities" courses have no usefulness in building one's career, and they do not contribute to our scientific and technical knowledge. If a future generation of people is mostly illiterate when it comes to science and technology, it will cause a societal collapse. And this isn't even going into the fact of how totalitarian, oppressive and anti-human-rights the current postmodernist regressive leftist ideology is.
Comments
Post a Comment