I enthusiastically endorse the comments made below -- what they do is focus
on what I think is the actual question: not whether or not the
antipostmodernists have anything to say, but rather what motivates their
attacks.
I think it is an archaic debate -- but that doesn't mean it isn't playing a
significant political role.
-- John
On Fri, 19 May 2000 15:04:42 EDT, foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> This discussion reminded me of Wittgenstein's, Heidegger's, Husserl's,
> Rorty's and Quine's work. I mean, haven't there been many
twentieth-century
> attempts at universalist, positivist epistemological formulations? Isn't
this
> an obsolete, archaic debate?
> Hasn't this attempt to salvage an essentialist, universalist,
positivist
> epistemological scheme has already been attempted, over and over again?
For
> example, Husserl's phenomenological work began with a Cartesian, Kantian
> attempt at an objective method of epistemological bracketing, but
resulted in
> failure, in an ex post facto classification of consciousness.
Wittgenstein,
> in another example, probably the most brilliant mind in twentieth-century
> philosophy, attempted to construct an objectivist, Logical Positivist
system
> of epistemological knot-loosening, but eventually capitulated into
> relativism, with his later exposition of "Language Games" in his
> Philosophical Investigations.
> In other examples, didn't Heidegger effectively separate "logos"
from
> metaphysics? If "logos" is an expression of ontological discourse,
> Being-towards -the -World, therefore not Platonistically transcendental
or
> metaphysical, but part and parcel of a wandering, existential,
> phenomenological discourse, then
> wouldn't this critique establish a foundation for deconstructionism and
> hermeneutic
> discourse?
> Finally, the skeptic of postmodernism referred to himself as an
acolyte
> of "Analytical Metaphysics. " Hasn't the Analytic, Positivist project
been
> devastated by
> critics such as Rorty, Davidson and Quine? Haven't their defections and
> subsequent
> critiques undermined the legitimacy and even the viability of the
project?
> Isn't Positivism the last gasp of Platonism, with the need for
universalism
> and a God's eye view? Obviously, Positivism is more heavily appropriated
from
> Cartesian modernism, which, as Heidegger pointed out, is a slightly
mutated
> version of Platonism, with the conventional obsession with unanimity and
> universalism.
> TRV
> Seattle, Washington
>
_______________________________________________________
Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite
Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp
on what I think is the actual question: not whether or not the
antipostmodernists have anything to say, but rather what motivates their
attacks.
I think it is an archaic debate -- but that doesn't mean it isn't playing a
significant political role.
-- John
On Fri, 19 May 2000 15:04:42 EDT, foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> This discussion reminded me of Wittgenstein's, Heidegger's, Husserl's,
> Rorty's and Quine's work. I mean, haven't there been many
twentieth-century
> attempts at universalist, positivist epistemological formulations? Isn't
this
> an obsolete, archaic debate?
> Hasn't this attempt to salvage an essentialist, universalist,
positivist
> epistemological scheme has already been attempted, over and over again?
For
> example, Husserl's phenomenological work began with a Cartesian, Kantian
> attempt at an objective method of epistemological bracketing, but
resulted in
> failure, in an ex post facto classification of consciousness.
Wittgenstein,
> in another example, probably the most brilliant mind in twentieth-century
> philosophy, attempted to construct an objectivist, Logical Positivist
system
> of epistemological knot-loosening, but eventually capitulated into
> relativism, with his later exposition of "Language Games" in his
> Philosophical Investigations.
> In other examples, didn't Heidegger effectively separate "logos"
from
> metaphysics? If "logos" is an expression of ontological discourse,
> Being-towards -the -World, therefore not Platonistically transcendental
or
> metaphysical, but part and parcel of a wandering, existential,
> phenomenological discourse, then
> wouldn't this critique establish a foundation for deconstructionism and
> hermeneutic
> discourse?
> Finally, the skeptic of postmodernism referred to himself as an
acolyte
> of "Analytical Metaphysics. " Hasn't the Analytic, Positivist project
been
> devastated by
> critics such as Rorty, Davidson and Quine? Haven't their defections and
> subsequent
> critiques undermined the legitimacy and even the viability of the
project?
> Isn't Positivism the last gasp of Platonism, with the need for
universalism
> and a God's eye view? Obviously, Positivism is more heavily appropriated
from
> Cartesian modernism, which, as Heidegger pointed out, is a slightly
mutated
> version of Platonism, with the conventional obsession with unanimity and
> universalism.
> TRV
> Seattle, Washington
>
_______________________________________________________
Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite
Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp