goldendawn
ὄσον ζῆς...
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2004
- Messages
- 1,579
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
I agree with you, Deus Ex Machina, that postmodernism can be seen as the contemporary loss of faith in the grand unifying structure (this notion has also been linked to the development of capitalism). I believe that postmodernism is absurd; and postmodernism wouldn't disagree with me (it can't really do anything anyway, because according to postmodernism, nothing has meaning 
). You mentioned the significance of existentialism in postmodern thinking. Both Nietzche and Satre would have agreed that life is devoid of any essential meaning, but they also diverge from postmodern thought in an essential way (haha, like the pun?). Satre believed that "existence" is the ultimate truth; he espoused the notion that man is "condemned to be free". For whilst, according to Satre, there is no innate meaning in life, the fact of existence means that humankind must make its' own choices, and define its' own meaning. I believe that postmodernism is a phase. It is part of the process of breaking down old ideas. It has marked similarities to overindulged, overintellectialised existential angst, which is the questioning of what is real, before the return to illumination. I think its' important to remember that some things are immanent. I would agree with the existentialists that "beingness" is essential. I also believe Trismegistus when he states, "as above, so below" - that the microcosm of the self is a reflection of the universal macrocosm. I also believe that life is in a constant cycle of oneness , separation, and the return to the one. And I would counter postmodern doubt with a simple statement: whether or not we can be sure that we are perceiving what someone else is perceiving, the truth remains - we are all perceiving. And whether or not I can prove that anyone else exists - the truth remains - I am.
Plotinus said: "I believe that there is something of the divine mystery in everything that exists...in truth, at very rare moments, we can experience that we ourselves are the divine mystery."
). You mentioned the significance of existentialism in postmodern thinking. Both Nietzche and Satre would have agreed that life is devoid of any essential meaning, but they also diverge from postmodern thought in an essential way (haha, like the pun?). Satre believed that "existence" is the ultimate truth; he espoused the notion that man is "condemned to be free". For whilst, according to Satre, there is no innate meaning in life, the fact of existence means that humankind must make its' own choices, and define its' own meaning. I believe that postmodernism is a phase. It is part of the process of breaking down old ideas. It has marked similarities to overindulged, overintellectialised existential angst, which is the questioning of what is real, before the return to illumination. I think its' important to remember that some things are immanent. I would agree with the existentialists that "beingness" is essential. I also believe Trismegistus when he states, "as above, so below" - that the microcosm of the self is a reflection of the universal macrocosm. I also believe that life is in a constant cycle of oneness , separation, and the return to the one. And I would counter postmodern doubt with a simple statement: whether or not we can be sure that we are perceiving what someone else is perceiving, the truth remains - we are all perceiving. And whether or not I can prove that anyone else exists - the truth remains - I am. Plotinus said: "I believe that there is something of the divine mystery in everything that exists...in truth, at very rare moments, we can experience that we ourselves are the divine mystery."
Last edited:
