post modernism is not always linked to power plays / hierarchical positions. It’s about skepticism, even of itself.

post modernism is not always linked to power plays / hierarchical positions.

It’s about skepticism, even of itself.

—-

You make your case. Nothing is off-limits.
 —-
 The distrust is good. Fundamental to all of the sciences.
—–
  Yeah, you’re doing a modernist/constructionist view of post-modernism.It’s not a denial of any truth. It’s a recognition that the best we have is contingent truths, subject to change.Small t vs big T truths. And big T truths are generally constructed of mutual agreement of small t truths.Observation, experience, testing, these all lead to tentative validation of truths.
=====
 truths are provisional and contingent. If you want an absolute yardstick hiding in the Platonic realm somewhere, you can if you like. But if it comes crashing down, don’t be surprised.
=====
 Agile Programming is a good example of an explicitly self-conscious postmodern programming paradigm.
====
 a) changingminds site lacks an author.
b) allaboutphilosophy:
“Statement of Faith
The sole basis of our beliefs is the Bible, God’s infallible written Word, the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments. We believe that it was uniquely, verbally and fully inspired by the Holy Spirit and that it was written without error (inerrant) in the original manuscripts. It is the supreme and final authority in all matters on which it speaks.
====
 Thing is, we’re already in post post-modernism.Post-modernism raised many issues during its tenure. But now those are rarely issues anymore, but are in an “always already” state, and we are all building upon that.
=====
 Any instance of fundamentalism today is a post post-modernist phenomenon.You can’t turn back the clock, only build-upon. Post-modernism had its impact already.
=====
 Example: Who today believes in the inalienable right of authority without also acknowledging social conditions and environmental contexts?
====
 You wouldn’t have quantum physics as it is today without post modernism.If you know your physics history, they were satisfied NOT asking deeper questions up through the late 1960s.
=====
 Mandelbrot wrote extensively on many topics, not just fractals but also economics and was a post modern mathematical scientist.
=====
 You can call yourself by a strong category if you like.
=====
 “Did Quantum Physics Lead to Postmodernism?” is a common question whose answer is yes.
Pure Physics basically stopped after the 1940s and wasn’t rekindled until the late 60s/early 70s.
=====
 The Aleph, 1945. Borges was VERY inspired by quantum physics.“On the back part of the step, toward the right, I saw a small iridescent sphere of almost unbearable brilliance. At first I thought it was revolving; then I realised that this movement was an illusion created by the dizzying world it bounded. The Aleph’s diameter was probably little more than an inch, but all space was there, actual and undiminished. Each thing (a mirror’s face, let us say) was infinite things, since I distinctly saw it from every angle of the universe. I saw the teeming sea; I saw daybreak and nightfall; I saw the multitudes of America; I saw a silvery cobweb in the center of a black pyramid; I saw a splintered labyrinth (it was London); I saw, close up, unending eyes watching themselves in me as in a mirror; I saw all the mirrors on earth and none of them reflected me; I saw in a backyard of Soler Street the same tiles that thirty years before I’d seen in the entrance of a house in Fray Bentos; I saw bunches of grapes, snow, tobacco, lodes of metal, steam; I saw convex equatorial deserts and each one of their grains of sand.”
=====
That’s the sanitary history.
 —————-
 That’s your binary talking again. It’s not false. Missing chunks.
=====
 Q: What was the state of academia vs technology with regards to:physics vs math in the 1950s-early 1970s?How does that period of time differ from the 1890s-1940s and 1970s-today?
======
 That’s good. What do you know of the distrust between physics and math departments from the 1950s-early 1970s?
====
 Better still: WHY were there SO MANY “mavericks” in physics from the 1960s-1970s, from Bell on through?
=====
 If you go through biographies of many of the greats during that time (Feynmann was established by then so he’s not one of them), they all suffered the same problems in their physics departments.
======
I always thought Fred Hoyle got crapped on BUT Steady State was widely taught from the 1950s-early 1970s – and that’s in astrophysics.
 
In quantum physics, well, you must know this story by now:
 
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-the-hippies-saved-physics-science-counterculture-and-quantum-revival-excerpt/
======
 Modern theoretical physics would not exist were it not post-modernist.So, don’t crap on it all the way, unless you want a return to Newtonian.

=====
 Today’s atheist is a post-modernist.
=====

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


8 − = seven

Leave a Reply