or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Stupid political crap your friends post on facebook.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Stupid political crap your friends post on facebook. - Page 22

post #316 of 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Humphrey Appleby View Post

Its half past 8 in the morning here, can someone translate this into something my tired brain can understand please?
Literature professors involved in deconstructionism promote irrationalism and skepticism of standards of truth and thereby dissolve the moral imperatives which are communicated through genuine philosophy and which elevate and broaden the intellects of those who engage with these imperatives.[2]

I know what that means, and I still don't know what that means.

It does, however, tell me that the author was being lazy.


As for funny political bits from facebook, here's my Congressman:
Quote:
Mitt Romney thinks North Carolina trees are the wrong height. Pass it on.
post #317 of 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Humphrey Appleby View Post

Its half past 8 in the morning here, can someone translate this into something my tired brain can understand please?
Literature professors involved in deconstructionism promote irrationalism and skepticism of standards of truth and thereby dissolve the moral imperatives which are communicated through genuine philosophy and which elevate and broaden the intellects of those who engage with these imperatives.[2]

It sounds to me like he is cutting and pasting a synopsis of Allan Bloom's thoughts from Wikipedia.

Basically whoever wrote this claims that Bloom's says that deconstructionism impoverishes the study of the humanities because of it's skepticism towards the traditional objects of philosophy. I.e. they steer students away from "truth and beauty" etc., which apparently would "elevate and broaden their intellects".

I've never read any Allan Bloom so I couldn't tell you if this is accurate or not. I always get him mixed up with Harold Bloom, who is a big fat douchebag.
Edited by munchausen - 2/25/12 at 7:19am
post #318 of 5465
Anytime I see something written in pomo or decon or crit-lit, I fully expect the word "hegemony" to appear at least thrice.
post #319 of 5465
I don't really understand it either. I did get a humanities degree but my school's humanities department was very conservative. I'm pretty sure most of my professors agreed with Allan Bloom.
post #320 of 5465
Thread Starter 
My programs were slightly left of Joseph Stalin. And yes, he just borrowed an opinion from Wikipedia. I'm sure he had never heard of Bloom before.
post #321 of 5465
I'm not going to pretend that my English degree wasn't fairly useless, but I do feel that being able to quote Shakespeare and Yeats has served me better in life than being able to explain Derrida and Lacan would have.
post #322 of 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchausen View Post

I'm not going to pretend that my English degree wasn't fairly useless, but I do feel that being able to quote Shakespeare and Yeats has served me better in life than being able to explain Derrida and Lacan would have.

Where your studies based on chosing between the former and the later? Allan Bloom was a reactionary and that Saul Bellow quote is stupid right wing essentialist thinking meets new agism feel good bullshit but I certainly won't bother to correct Mordecai, time will hopefully do it for me.
post #323 of 5465
I think it's a pretty sad irony that Derrida is the whipping boy for people who are scared of the erosion of traditional values. After all, the only thing the dude ever wanted to do was to read the Western philosophical canon in painstaking detail. I suppose some practitioners of deconstructionism might've fueled the casual dismissal of the movement as some sort of relativism/nihilism. But Derrida himself never wanted to go in that direction, and his later work is full of deep concern for political responsibility and the transmission of knowledge. (Archive Fever is one of the most useful little books around.)

I suppose none of this is terribly relevant now, since deconstructionism is more or less a non-issue except in the minds of folks who think it's a bogeyman.
post #324 of 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

I think it's a pretty sad irony that Derrida is the whipping boy for people who are scared of the erosion of traditional values. After all, the only thing the dude ever wanted to do was to read the Western philosophical canon in painstaking detail. I suppose some practitioners of deconstructionism might've fueled the casual dismissal of the movement as some sort of relativism/nihilism. But Derrida himself never wanted to go in that direction, and his later work is full of deep concern for political responsibility and the transmission of knowledge. (Archive Fever is one of the most useful little books around.)
I suppose none of this is terribly relevant now, since deconstructionism is more or less a non-issue except in the minds of folks who think it's a bogeyman.

For the vast majority of people bashing it "deconstruction" is merely a shorthand for "liberal humanities professors who don't teach absolutes when it comes to lit, philosophy etc.". I certainly don't think they care about Circonfession or know that, say Barthes, may have been one of the main thinkers of the structuralism but that le plaisir du texte and Sade, Fourier, Loyola can be seen as early post-structuralist works.
post #325 of 5465
i think that the right wing conservative fascists who don't understand postmodern critiques of transcendent methods look to past models and modalities for metrics to define the transitive normative hegemonistic qualitative thought including the use of commas to create false dichotomistic hobgoblins of consistent virtue oppressing quanta. But then whose to say I'm right or wrong?

3+5=hotdog
post #326 of 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post

i think that the right wing conservative fascists who don't understand postmodern critiques of transcendent methods look to past models and modalities for metrics to define the transitive normative hegemonistic qualitative thought including the use of commas to create false dichotomistic hobgoblins of consistent virtue oppressing quanta. But then whose to say I'm right or wrong?
3+5=hotdog

Sentences like this are exactly why I hate the humanities.
post #327 of 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by deadly7 View Post

Sentences like this are exactly why I hate the humanities.

Isn't that like saying you hate mathematics after reading a troll post saying "2+n=toaster"? I mean it uses signs that evoke maths but is instantly recognizable as gibberish and so is the post you quoted. Oh and in before Sokal affair.
post #328 of 5465
^^

And its only going to get more and more incoherenter and incoherenter from here, folks.
post #329 of 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by deadly7 View Post

Sentences like this are exactly why I hate the humanities.

Isn't that like saying you hate mathematics after reading a troll post saying "2+n=toaster"? I mean it uses signs that evoke maths but is instantly recognizable as gibberish and so is the post you quoted. Oh and in before Sokal affair.

Exactly.

But it doesn't have to just be gibberish. If the person isn't knowledgeable of the subject, the dismissive attitude is always an easy option to take.

It's like this formula is why I hate mathematics:

42

Apparently this makes sense to some maths people. Something about zeta regularization blah blah.

I see math that is inimical to its true worth of advancing our practical knowledge devil.gif
post #330 of 5465
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuuma View Post

Isn't that like saying you hate mathematics after reading a troll post saying "2+n=toaster"? I mean it uses signs that evoke maths but is instantly recognizable as gibberish and so is the post you quoted. Oh and in before Sokal affair.

In my limited experience, sentences like what I quoted are commonplace in humanities literature. I took a few classes in undergrad and realized "Well fuck, that's a lot of words to say absolutely nothing of value" and gave up on that area. If you understand and enjoy it, all the more power to you, but don't pretend that logorrhea makes your literature any better.

For more on the subject, I present the words of the brilliant Mr. Richard Feynman:
Quote:
The physicist and storyteller Richard Feynman describes a time when he took part in a conference discussing "the ethics of equality". Feynman was at first apprehensive, having read none of the books which the conference organizers had recommended. A sociologist brought a paper which he had written beforehand to the committee where Feynman served, asking everyone to read it. Feynman found it completely incomprehensible, and feared that he was out of his depth — until he decided to pick one sentence at random and parse it until he understood. The sentence he chose (to the best of his recollection) was:

The individual member of the social community often receives his information via visual, symbolic channels.

Feynman "translated" the sentence and discovered it meant "People read". The rest of the paper soon made sense in the same fashion.
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verbosity
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Stupid political crap your friends post on facebook.