Frankly I think Postmodernism is a mess that needs to be forgotten while
retaining the individual points of critique that are considered party to
it. There are a few aspects to this assessment. First is that the Modernity
that we consider such is much larger as people like to narrow the
consideration down to their own concerns, Impressionism gets the title
while romanticism is pushed aside and before High Modern can even be born
folks are already talking of the postmodern, these narrow time oriented
patterns are false and not useful I would suggest. Much of what is
considered postmodern had already been around in one form or another while
things like postmodern architecture (is just bad architecture) is just one
along a line of new forms, just as postmodern dance is just one in a line
of the new and what did Ezra Pound say "make it new"? So I find very little
meaning in separating any one form out from the rest as being mod or
postmod. The same can be said for literature, grand narratives never died
and what followed was just more of the new and the same can be said for
painting - it never died, just more of the new. And there is the entire
notion of post, hard to be post- something when it is still around. What
one can say and this is my prefered track is to say "Modernity, ok now
what?" This is my thesis: Modernity is a dialectic between
Academy/Canon/Control and Avantgarde/Critique/Revolt both bringing forth
new modes of thinking and form in a dance that neither wins but instead
rise and fall in phases through time. One can truly say, I believe, that so
to speak we have always been Postmodern. The problem I think that rises
from this debate is in failing to see that Critique is not new and failing
to recognize your history is always the downfall of a position. A second
problem is in failing to recognize the ever present Tradition that is
positioned as being in the past, which it is not. The world of 1789 to 1812
is very much the cultural canon of the Elite: Top Hats and dress codes at
the Derby, red carpet balls, the Met Gala, Opera, Theater, the Symphony,
the Ballet, Neoclassical facades, Royal Societies, Academy itself, the
systems of control and the entire Industrial Urban life of the Modern Man.
This is still the world controlled by and for the rich elite and which
those who suffer under it toil against in Critique and Revolt. The only
thing one can say regarding time is to recognize that the Pre or Early
Modern was the in a Multi-Polar World of the Ottoman, China and India while
Europe was learning and Modernizing slowly catching up to those that they
would then Colonize, the era of classical Modernity and Western Hegemony.
The time since 1948 being the reintegration of those former great powers
back into a Multi-Polar World but one no less Modern. Is this New World
Order meta-modern? Eh, why go there? An Integral world? Sure but I still do
not find enough meat in these arguments to think that we are any less in a
position of Critique and Revolt; we just have more Major Powers to revolt
against.
Onwards brothers and sisters, the struggle continues.

Follow me on Medium or Substack for more
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nemo67.medium.com_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=TD_0_xGPisqvCLMrPB0kX7cSz1yEStV6BnsY4NubS70&s=xCogCTKmJ25XKfr2bQvfq93bjfZ5USQYqDjxmLpa88g&e= 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__themysteriousdeepblack.substack.com_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=TD_0_xGPisqvCLMrPB0kX7cSz1yEStV6BnsY4NubS70&s=_0EJq-o3Gbsb8MEhBMGKB5GN5Ea6M9GzRDinlv_Dth4&e= 

Timothy Rollin Pickerill
Business - https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.AudioVideoArts.com_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=TD_0_xGPisqvCLMrPB0kX7cSz1yEStV6BnsY4NubS70&s=mBeoYgEEkhERZL2EQ05TSaIYRMaoplANLK4a3ZJjvv0&e= 
Photography - https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__instagram.com_pickerillphotography_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=TD_0_xGPisqvCLMrPB0kX7cSz1yEStV6BnsY4NubS70&s=V8cikJFiqwWdOvCH1M0bmPVaoSTA6DJoemj9iUnSY_Q&e= 
Art - https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.TR-2DPickerill.com_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=TD_0_xGPisqvCLMrPB0kX7cSz1yEStV6BnsY4NubS70&s=f0NUvUX__eRZ10evrFmyQMeqk07S2RvxGQktlFI1SZE&e= 
646-299-4173 (cell)


On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 3:15 PM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Love this conversation and I will not add much, but let me just make a
> note that is very relevant to UTOK:
>
>
>
> JUST and the ToK System complete change this debate. That is, from a UTOK
> perspective, the modern versus postmodern debate about knowledge is
> woefully inadequate and poorly framed and unresolvable precisely because we
> were missing the necessary pieces.
>
>
>
> JUST gives an ontology, a metatheory of how knowledge is socially
> constructed. That is completely novel, and if you do not have that,
> everything is confused. So JUST is a game changer when it comes to the
> social construction of knowledge, because it is an ontological theory of
> that knowledge construction.
>
>
>
> Then, you get the ToK System advance, and that is a game changer also.
>
>
>
> So, UTOK clearly gives a metamodern sensibility that includes and
> transcends via fundamentally new theoretical advances that allow us to
> clean up, clear up and grow up from the modern versus postmodern confusions
> regarding the nature of human knowledge. That is, if you aren’t looking at
> the modern versus postmodern issues via JUST and the ToK, you are not
> looking at them clearly.
>
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
>
>
> *From:* theory of knowledge society discussion <
> [log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *lee simplyquality.org
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 11, 2022 2:10 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: TOK Postmodernism Is Not Inherently Anti-science
>
>
>
> *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links
> or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is
> safe.
> ------------------------------
>
> Nik,
>
> Thanks for this.
>
>
>
> Here is my simplistic explanation of how I see postmodernism. (And yes, I
> am aware I included column “A” in the spreadsheet, and shared my ontology
> on this list).
>
>
>
> When I was in grade school we learned that: 1) Christopher Columbus
> discovered America, 2) He was a hero for doing so, and 3) The world is a
> much better place as a result of his discovery. This is a (coherent)
> narrative that is comfortable for European Americans to hear. A valuable
> postmodern contribution is to recognize that this is only one of many
> possible narratives emerging from the interpretation of events, and this
> particular narrative is advanced by those in power as a way of maintaining
> power. All of this is true. I am critical of postmodernism whenever it
> suggests that “all we have is stories, these are all made up, go make up
> your own story, they all have equal veracity and value.” This is not true.
>
>
>
> A key skill in navigating this territory is to keep in mind the
> distinction between “brut facts” and “Social Constructs”.
>
> See: Exploring Social Constructs
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikiversity.org_wiki_Exploring-5FSocial-5FConstructs&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=IdYu726FU31tcbpPR-eYYDI1T0vDDXcZZFFi9fPRw-g&s=uvx2rmxjXluyPk37bfZmFxTWeVovqwVRe7xfPLdShw0&e=>
>
>
>
> With respect to Columbus, the brute facts are: 1) A person know as
> Christopher Columbus existed at the time. 2) He was on one of three ships
> that travelled from Europe to Hispaniola in the year 1492. 3) This was a
> big deal to his European sponsors. 4) Colonization began soon after, 5)
> Perhaps millions of indigenous people died, 6) Many people in North America
> claim to own land, 7) Various history books tell selected portions of this
> story using various narrative themes.
>
>
>
> Both brute facts (as described above) and a variety of social constructs
> (celebrating Columbus Day, various celebrations (and protests), many
> stories, books, and text books, …) exist.
>
>
>
> This distinction between brute fact and social construct is in play now in
> transgender discussions.
>
> Gregg was very helpful in reminding us that (the brute facts of sex) sex
> (at birth) is bi-modal, not binary.
>
> Transgender advocates are correct in observing that many customs and
> traditions we associate with gender (e.g. pink is for girls, …) are social
> constructs, likely advanced by those in power to stay in power. The
> discussion gets heated when either the brute facts or the social constructs
> are denied or distorted.
>
>
>
> The birther theories
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Barack-5FObama-5Fcitizenship-5Fconspiracy-5Ftheories&d=DwMGaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=IdYu726FU31tcbpPR-eYYDI1T0vDDXcZZFFi9fPRw-g&s=ggAEXDUHHyRoVzQMvM_szoumfkaKMQ5FfDruqSA_2bY&e=> (and
> now the “big lie”) are other examples of how narratives can be advanced by
> powerful people to gain power, test loyalty, or for some other personal
> gain. (And I hope it goes without saying that I don’t consider Trump to be
> a postmodern theorist.)
>
>
>
> I hope this is clear, accurate, useful, and respectful.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Lee Beaumont
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 11, 2022, at 12:01 PM, Nicholas Lattanzio <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> hat mode
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1