Re: MD The mythology of science

From: phyllis bergiel (neilfl@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Tue May 06 2003 - 02:56:34 BST

  • Next message: Steve Peterson: "MD MOQ"

    Hi Rolin:

    I'm relatively new, too, so this probably isn't my place, but welcome.
    > Rolin said:
    but my question is about post-modernism. i have read some wilber and
    > the pirsig books and have come to the idea that post modernism does not
    > "reject" anything. it may appear that way from the modernist model
    > (see wilber's discussion of this in "a brief history of everything"
    > when he talks about egocentrism vs ethnocentrism vs worldcentrism) but
    > in actuality, post modernism embraces and transcends (the wilber battle
    > cry) what has come before. the post modernist "despair" is actually a
    > result of a modernist still stuck in the "old" way of thinking, i.e.,
    > in "transition"...
    > Admittedly, I am not familiar with Wilber outside these posts; it strikes
    me that his philosophy is somewhat new, compared to what I would term the
    foundational writers of postmodernism. (And at the risk of making some
    enemies, anyone who has the audacity to title a single volume, a "brief
    history of everything," makes me suspicious. Especially when he's also busy
    staring think tanks and centers. I'll reserve total judgment until I've
    read him, but...) I've just spent the past semester in theory class - by
    these, I mean Derrida, Lyotard, Baudrillard, Foucault, Jameson, etc.
    One of the few things I've come away with as definitive of postmodernism is
    its anti-foundational stance against modernism, and this seems to entail
    anti-philosophy, too.
    From my reading of Jameson, postmodernism is inclusive only in its desire to
    co-opt what most of us call philosophy into what is to me a less rigorous
    field, called theory.
    > my question is, are we, in the twilight of modernism, at all able to
    > "flip" over into a post modernist mindset...or is that still a way off
    > yet?
    I see the main contribution of Postmodernism as being more openminded to the
    unfamiliar. Fusion (food or music) is good! But, if you mean inclusive to
    the point of being nonjudgmental, non-choice making, sorry, I don't think
    it's possible, with the exception of hermits.
     i happen to find post modernism very inspiring...i am a musician
    > and have found post modernism to be instrumental (no pun intended) in
    > understanding the role of music in our "new" lives.

    How do you see this role of music?

    phyllis>
    > On Monday, May 5, 2003, at 01:19 PM, phyllis bergiel wrote:
    >
    > > Exactly. This paper I've mentioned is a discussion of the way
    > > postmodernism
    > > has rejected rationality and philosophy. I see the MoQ and elements
    > > of ZAMM
    > > as a way to preserve the strengths of western philosophy while
    > > allowing the
    > > insights of postmodernism to correct some of the problems. Amazingly,
    > > some
    > > of the more problematic parts of postmodernism get "corrected", too.

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 06 2003 - 02:51:56 BST