Martin Heidegger[ edit ] Martin Heidegger rejected the philosophical basis of the concepts of "subjectivity" and "objectivity" and asserted that similar grounding oppositions in logic ultimately refer to one another. Instead of resisting the admission of this paradox in the search for understanding, Heidegger requires that we embrace it through an active process of elucidation he called the " hermeneutic circle ". He stressed the historicity and cultural construction of concepts while simultaneously advocating the necessity of an atemporal and immanent apprehension of them.
University of Minnesota Press, Introduction The object of this study is the condition of knowledge in the most highly developed societies. I have decided to use the word postmodern to describe that condition. The word is in current use on the American continent among sociologists and critics; it designates the state of our culture following the transformations which, since the end of the nineteenth century, have altered the game rules for science, literature, and the arts.
The present study will place these transformations in the context of the crisis of narratives. Science has always been in conflict with narratives. Judged by the yardstick of science, the majority of them prove to be fables.
But to the extent that science does not restrict itself to stating useful regularities and seeks the truth, it is obliged to legitimate the rules of its own game.
It then produces a discourse of legitimation with respect to its own status, a discourse called philosophy. I will use the term modern to designate any science that legitimates itself with reference to a metadiscourse of this kind making an explicit appeal to some grand narrative, such as the dialectics of Spirit, the hermeneutics of meaning, the emancipation of the rational or working subject, or the creation of wealth.
For example, the rule of consensus between the sender and addressee of a statement with truth-value is deemed acceptable if it is cast in terms of a possible unanimity between rational minds: As can be seen from this example, if a metanarrative implying a philosophy of history is used to legitimate knowledge, questions are raised concerning the validity of the institutions governing the social bond: Thus justice is consigned to the grand narrative in the same way as truth.
Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives. This incredulity is undoubtedly a product of progress in the sciences: To the obsolescence of the metanarrative apparatus of legitimation corresponds, most notably, the crisis of metaphysical philosophy and of the university institution which in the past relied on it.
The narrative function is losing its functors, its great hero, its great dangers, its great voyages, its great goal. It is being dispersed in clouds of narrative language elements--narrative, but also denotative, prescriptive, descriptive, and so on.
Conveyed within each cloud are pragmatic valencies specific to its kind. Each of us lives at the inter section of many of these. However, we do not necessarily establish stable language combinations, and the properties of the ones we do establish are not necessarily communicable.
Thus the society of the future falls less within the province of a Newtonian anthropology such as structuralism or systems theory than a pragmatics of language particles. There are many different language games a heterogeneity of elements. They only give rise to institutions in patches-local determinism.
They allocate our lives for the growth of power.Postmodernism is a broad movement that developed in the mid- to lateth century across philosophy, the arts, architecture, and criticism and that marked a departure from modernism.
The term has also more generally been applied to the historical era following modernity and the tendencies of this era. (In this context, "modern" is not used in the sense of "contemporary", but merely as a name.
In our post-Cold War, post-colonial, post-Christian world, Western culture is experiencing a dramatic shift. Correspondingly, says Myron Penner, recent philosophy has taken a postmodern turn in which traditional concepts of reality, truth, language, and knowledge have . These are the questions Lyotard asks in The Postmodern Condition.
He believes that the method of legitimation traditionally used by science, a philosophical discourse that references a metanarrative, becomes obsolete in a postmodern society. essay on child labour causes. King lear madness essay help mini research paper assignment sheet essays on the great depression pdf best way to organize an argumentative essay.
Pgpmax essays on poverty legalization of cannabis essays liposuction personal experience essay essay history other. (§ 1) It was Joseph Hudnut who, at Harvard with modernist Walter Gropius, in an article published in spoke of 'the post-modern house'.
With his report to the Province of Quebec's Conseil des Universités called: The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (), Lyotard introduced this notion into contemporary philosophical discourse, and proposed that his own commitment to this.
In The Postmodern Condition Jean-Francois Lyotard extends that analysis to postmodernism by looking at the status uf science, technology, and the arts, the significance of technocracy, and the way the flow of information and knowledge are controlled in the Western world.