Is there any philosophy more useless and baseless than postmodernsim?

This.

What both Scholasticism and post-modernism have in common is that they are philosophies perverted for political reason. The whole point of Scholasticism was to conciliate Christian religion with Greek and Roman philosophy. The whole point of post-modernism is to salvage the legacy of Marxism from the wreckage of the Soviet Union.

None of them were concerned with truth.

>How could gender roles have developed so consistently throughout history

This is something that isn't really true but in order to qualify this statement you'd need to do some historical and anthropological digging i.e. become a postmodernist.

Also it would pay to be more accurate in your wording but to be aware of how writing can be misconstrued or even dangerous you'd have to acknowledge the legitimacy of postmodern thoughts regarding language.

Down with the monarchy! Louis XVI is an incompetent ass! The aristocracy undermine Western values and civilization by wet-nursing their children. Their art is hypersexualised and decadent!

idealism

A very postmodern argument.

I'm fucking fed up with clapping at the opera too. Fucking Austrians coming over here and stealing our bloodline.

As a project, one could call postmodernism nothing more than an ideal

the neo-scholasticism of contemporary analytic philosophy

>The whole point of post-modernism is to salvage the legacy of Marxism from the wreckage of the Soviet Union.
user, what the fuck kind of translation did you read of Heidegger?

It's literally the exact opposite. Postmodernism is concerned with what 'is' rather than ideal states.

>the ontic is the _real_ theological ontology srsly guys
gtfo kys qq

And it fails miserably.

>being concerned with existence has failed
Pretty sure it's still going bro

Really? It has been the main paradigm of thought for 50 years and even survived the 'science wars' of the 90s. I would say it's pretty successful regardless of the straw men.

postmodernism was a product of a complacent and overfed liberal order that is now crumbling at an accelerating rate.

Benjamin>>>Derrida, anyways

>philosophy
>postmodernism
The fact that you think one of these fits the category of the other demonstrates just how 18 you are. Please leave.

foucault was actually a self described 'classical liberal' like milo and sargon of akkad.

Philosophy isn't a popularity contest. In any case, I would say that you're measuring it on the wrong scale. Think hundreds of years, not the last century.

I don't know what you're arguing if you think it is unsuccessful despite its success. Is there some postmodernist who has failed to not make postmodernism idealist? Who?

Republican curr I'll see you executed for the atrocities you visited upon my maman in the Vendee. The Catholic and Royal Armies will triumph over your godless, revolutionary dictatorship!

>Is there any philosophy more useless and baseless than postmodernsim?
pessimism via german idealism is pretty useless and metaphysically vague.

I can't help but be triggered at how much people misunderstand post-modernism.

Arguably, it is inherently apolitical, as you could use tools that were essentially developed by post-modernists to deconstruct liberal and/or progressive principles.

Is po-mo destructive? Yep. But you can use it as a tool for your own retarded political missions. The fact that a bunch of extreme progressives perverted it and used it for their own cause just means that they're ahead of you in the game, for the most part.

In any case, we should become Accelerationists or deeply religious/spiritual. In reality, that's the only thing we can do after what post-modernism caused.

I don't think yiu understand what pomo is OP.

post modernist think that child cant consent to sex but can consent to changing their sex, it's a flippery flop with zero merit to it as it assumes social constrcuts are negative

Postmodernism is not a singukar coherent philosophy you dense cunts. Go back to JBP YouTube comment sections from whence you came.

I think the word your looking for is "post-structuralism", but even then you're utterly clueless as to what the fuck you're actually talking about

>muh STEMshit
Biology is for children

>100 years of "post modernism progress"
>leftists are now confused about which bathroom to use.

truly, great ideology.

>le west is good becuz i sed so
Age of consent is a disgusting notion that separated me from my beloved for too long.

What in fucks name are you babbling about

I want to ask you a question
Are you getting your idea about what postmodernism is from one singular person who fed you this definition?

Again, where are you getting this idea that bathrooms and leftists are in any way actually mentioned or involved with postmodernism? Who told you this?

Leftist are the one regurgitating this garbage and now they call their physical parts social constructs. It's pure ideology for the mentally ill, 7.62 mm is the best solution much like against communism.

You really just look like a bunch of retards when you condense movements as complex and multifaceted as postmodernism into bogeyman representations of things you don't like.

nice pents

quints of truth

:^)

>bogeymen representations
bogey implies it isn't true, but fiction, but this degeneracy is true.

...

How long will it take us to get to the big ?

Nice septs, future user.

Explain the relationship between that degeneracy and postmodernism. How are you saying postmodernism led to that?

Foucault's deconstruction of social constructs appropriated by cultural marxists as a tool to destroy Western culture.

The figure in the middle is just a man with a boner. It's saying that sex and masturbation is fine. Based on that direction, it looks to be specifically promoting sodomy. At least complain about that.

>western culture is good becuz i sed so

let's see

You are free to go to central asia or China if you think Western culture isn't the best of them all.

hurr durr

Ok but how though? How are you understanding social constructionism? If you understand it you must know the idea of degeneracy itself isn't subsistent. Where are your values coming from? Who are the cultural marxists that took the idea? What does marxism have to do with it? What do you think there was to gain from asserting this movement purely from an ideological angle?

at the post-rate of the last five days, it will take about 8 months

Bad meme.

IF Y DUN LIEK IT Y CN GEIT OWT! *unzips dick*

Postmodernists think children can consent to sex

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petition_against_age_of_consent_laws

>they cant becuz i sed so

What?

>he doesnt read the greeks
>he doesn't read romans
>he doesn't read the old testament

Children can consent. The notion that consent is limited to some meme range is nonsense. 'consent' as a whole shouldn't even be relevant. You lame memers separate families. You caused irreparable rifts between my beloved and I.

western civilization is built on fucking tiny little boys you idiot

Like the post said, postmodernists think children CAN consent.

Why is that wrong? You yourself are more of a postmodernist than I.

because children are fucking retards that don't understand what they're agreeing to, as well as having no life experience to know whether or not they're getting taken advantage of by an autistic adult

I didn't say it was wrong, I was just correcting the dude who thinks postmodernism is somehow hypocritical because of supposed conflicting stances on children and consent.

Should we really pretend that the Age of Consent Laws controversy actually describes postmodernism? For fuck's sake, what does that have to do with Lyotard, Deleuze and Rorty? Fucking nothing.
This criticism is as ridicolous as someone dismissing Kant's philosophy on the ground of him being socially inept. Pathetic.

You dodged the question. What's this have to do with postmodernism as a whole?

Not an argument, statist.

its rhetoric
>all postmodernists are pedos!
>and we can all agree that pedos are evil!

you dont need the government to know that fucking children is degenerate and a sign of severe mental illness

Have you ever read Foucalt? You know derrida is associated with deconstruction, right? Do you not think that Foucaltian ideas could be applied to conservative politics?

>THINGS I DONT LIKE ARE BAD!
Stay impotent. One of has a stable family and young daughter, the other is a NEET whining about DUHJENNYRUSSY inbetween masturbating to MLP (the series, not even pornography) and loli (they're not REAL children!)

I appreciate this post style - press all and any pseud /pol/emics on the details of their arguments - and hard. Ask them to explain the underlying mechanisms and paths of their points. Require definitions be given of the terms they use and the scapegoat bogeymen they summon.

Of course, none of them read jack shit, so they'll flounder.

With vigilance, this board could cease to be a supportive or enjoyable environment for them. Drive them out. Take Veeky Forums back.

Let's put it this way: there may teenagers or children who could consent. Maybe they exist.
The problem is that they are an exception, and no one can ever predict the long term damages one can do to a child by subjecting to such an experience. Even if they child seems to consent, you genuinely do not know what will this do to him psychologically, and how much it will fuck him/her up in the next 30 years.

Since it's such an absurd gamble, people have decided to set an arbitrary age of consent, which should do the trick for most people. Virtually everyone is mature enough to have sex at that age, and the risk of actual trauma is lessened considerably.

Doesn't that sound like a nice deal?

you write like an autist

>an exception
Not an argument. I've heard your lame rhetoric so many times.
Eat shit, statist.
Better to write like one than actually be one like (you)

QUINTS OF TRUTH

says the guy who literally fucks kids

>kids
She was 13 when we started dating and no sex happened (because of your disgusting laws) ;^)
So you're wrong on both accounts ;^)
btw (you)'re gay and have AUTISM

Lets all answer retarded /pol/ users this way

>13
so barely pubescent and with a half-developed brain
what a catch man

>barely pubescent
Wrong and that isn't a bad thing
>half-developed brain
Lame STEMsperger meme. More 'mature' than you, 'spergy.

brain development is a meme?
so i guess fucking babies is on the table too now?

No, they aren't attractive, nearly as fun to be around, and you can't dress them up because they flail too much.
Brain development is a nonissue. What part of that bothers you, 'sperger? What is with the Ressentiment?

>liking old hags
Absolutely disgusting. Enjoy your cellulite on cellulite on cellulite on sag and wrinkles.

>how though?
How, if not the American reception of post-modern philosophers?
>How are you understanding social constructionism?
Social constructionist metatheory allows that any coherent epistemology must be self-reflexive, but, while it denies that any assertion can be true, and that there are any independent realities to be referred to, it nevertheless treats discourse as having objective existence, and assumes that its own statements about discourse are true. Thus, in asserting its own basic premise, it contradicts it.
>If you understand it you must know the idea of degeneracy itself isn't subsistent. Any problem with this?
Why would I, when social constructionism isn't subsistent? As Aristotle put it: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
>Where are your values coming from?
Requires further linguistic and evolutionary investigations, my provisional answer would be "survival (working title)." But why should we act like we know anyway?
>Who are the cultural marxists that took the idea?
Laclau, Alinsky, social activists that are Laclau or Alinsky, social activists that read Laclau and/or Alinsky?
>What does marxism have to do with it?
Will you deny that, influence-wise, Marx gives to the French and Italian post-moderns and the post-moderns give back to marxists, neo-marxists, post-marxists, something-marxists? Why?
>What do you think there was to gain from asserting this movement purely from an ideological angle?
Won't you see any value in the history of philosophy?

>smelly dumb teleiophile /pol/ scum hops the thread because he can't handle that a FUGGIN DEEJENNYRUT has a better life than him
expected of breasts...

>Old Testament
>Valuable source for philosophy
>Using OT to critique post-modernist ideology

>it nevertheless treats discourse as having objective existence, and assumes that its own statements about discourse are true. Thus, in asserting its own basic premise, it contradicts it.

No, the discourse isn't independent of the discourse.

...

Stupid frogposter

Is post-modernism deconstructing itself a paradox?

no, that's just post-structuralism.

To be fair, that's Veeky Forums trying to meet /pol/ half way and find some truth in their argument. Probably by "postmodernists" they mean "Harry Potter readers who claim to have read Beauvoir"

Beauvoir does follow in the Heideggerean strain of postmodernism, and hews more closely to it than other Frenchies SJWs might be able to name. Derrida himself didn't want to be defined as postmodernist or poststructuralist or whatever.

A lot of the French postmodernist front was sexually perverse, but it's not in a way that the Harry Potter fans are at all. Let's not pretend that original perversity wasn't part of the scene, because it makes it easier to revise the history and say that really Beauvoir acted like a modern Harry Potter demisexual whatever. She didn't, and while she was a more evil person, she was a more competent postmodernist too who probably would have told half those tumblrites to get a fucking job.

The problem with that compromise is that Veeky Forums knows damn well that no SJW can understand Heidegger even as poorly as Sartre, so there's no way those Harry Potter fans have read her. They claim her as an influence, but if she were, they wouldn't be taking away our loli.

Could be; is not. Advocating Weimar-tier degeneracy is the way of the left and post-modernism. Social constructs are net positive for the West, in the West.

>How.
Lets not play obtuse leftypol, we know all how it is done.

That post-modern (diversity/multiculturalism) narratives seeks to implement cultural Marxist objectives can be demonstrated by reference to founding Frankfurt School theorist Herbert Marcuse's repurposing of the term tolerance.

In a 1965 ~ Marcuse defined tolerance as intolerance; said it can be implemented through undemocratic means to stop chauvinism (xenophobia), racism, discrimination; and should be extended to the left while denied to the right:

>"The realization of the objective of tolerance would call for intolerance toward prevailing policies, attitudes, opinions, and
the extension of tolerance to policies, attitudes, and opinions which are outlawed or suppressed."

>"Surely, no government can be expected to foster its own subversion, but in a democracy such a right is vested in the
people (i.e. in the majority of the people). This means that the ways should not be blocked on which a subversive majority
could develop, and if they are blocked by organized repression and indoctrination, their reopening may require apparently
undemocratic means. They would include the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and
movements which promote aggressive policies, armament, chauvinism, discrimination on the grounds of race and religion,
or which oppose the extension of public services, social security, medical care, etc."

>"Liberating tolerance, then, would mean intolerance against movements from the Right and toleration of movements from
the Left. As to the scope of this tolerance and intolerance: ... it would extend to the stage of action as well as of discussion
and propaganda, of deed as well as of word."

It is through such post-modern constructs that interoperable narratives are established among various left-wing groups as well as between them and Isla mist groups at all levels. For example, from the 2001 Conference of Foreign Ministers at Bamako, Mali, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) declared its commitment to fight racism and xenophobia and then declared lslamophobia a "contemporary form of racism"

>In this context, the World Conference urges all states ... take all necessary measures to combat hatred, discrimination, intolerance
and acts of violence, intimidation and coercion motivated by racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
particularly against Islam
>Racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance which display an increasing trend, in their most subtle and
contemporary forms, constitute a violation of human rights. 3. Contemporary forms of racism are based on discrimination and
disparagement on a cultural, rather than biological basis. In this content, the increasing trend of lslamophobia, as a distinct form of
xenophobia in non-Muslim societies is very alarming.