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

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

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 (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