News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by bitwize on Thursday February 09, 2017 @01:53PM (#13609690)
The rationalists say that a major purpose of language is to communicate facts about the world.

The postmodernists say: "What are 'facts'? What is 'world'?"

So with facts gone and the real world gone, that leaves only one purpose for language, for saying anything at all: to get others to do what you want them to do. (This is a simplification of Wittgenstein's "language-games" of the form of e.g., the Builders' Game.)

I've always maintained that Derridean postmodernism is, in actuality, a form of long-form trolling whose main purpose was to provoke traditional philosophers by baffling them or getting them to fruitlessly debate the propositions. In this it's sort of a language-game: Derrida produced words, and the philosophers reacted in just the way he intended them to when he wrote the words. Whether it was for his own amusement, to show those stiff-necked rationalists that they're not immune to cognitive or deductive traps, or whatever -- who knows? But the interesting bit is that trolling survives as a valid intention for Derrida to produce the philosophy he did, whether or not he took his own propositions seriously (though if he did, he would have to consider whether the academics he was trolling existed just in his own head).

Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by ocschwar on Thursday February 09, 2017 @02:46PM (#13610215)
> So with facts gone and the real world gone, that leaves only one purpose for language, for saying anything at all: to get others to do what you want them to do.

And now we have a regime in the United States that has downright weaponized this posture.

Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by camdenlock on Thursday February 09, 2017 @02:58PM (#13610340)
Indeed. It's distressing how this tactic can be (and is) employed by all sorts of unhinged extremists, from radical postmodernists to Trump and his cronies.

Being an obscurantist is apparently a great strategy if you want to fool and exploit people. Would that it weren't so damn effective. :/

Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by camdenlock on Thursday February 09, 2017 @02:40PM (#13610149)
I upvoted you, but I also felt compelled to leave a more substantive response to your comment:

Brav-fucking-o.

Since you seem keen on the idea of shining a light on liars and abusive pedagogues, you'll no doubt enjoy this (now-ancient, from 2005!) piece of criticism from the late Christopher Hitchens published in the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/22/books/review/transgressing...

My word, do we need clever critics now more than ever. D:

Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by bitwize on Friday February 10, 2017 @10:46AM (#13616127)
Well, picking on Derrida's philosophy is like picking on Rob Liefeld's art, or the crazy 90s hair your wife had in her yearbook photos: everybody pretty much now agrees that it was bad, and that we were a little crazy when it was in fashion.
Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by kps on Thursday February 09, 2017 @03:15PM (#13610485)

  > I've always maintained that Derridean postmodernism is,
  > in actuality, a form of long-form trolling […]
I disagree. I don't think it's coincidence that postmodernism arose where and when it did; it is precisely suited to exonerate France's ‘performance’ in WWII.
Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by mannykannot on Thursday February 09, 2017 @04:08PM (#13610995)
I am not sure that Derrida invented the form; I get the impression that he was responding to structuralists on their own terms.
Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by bitwize on Thursday February 09, 2017 @05:56PM (#13611823)
In other words like a good troll. A good troll knows their audience and is intimately familiar with that audience's strongly-held beliefs, so they can refute them with arguments that may or may not be sound, but seem plausible enough at first glance, so that the audience will get good and mad when the troll seemingly yanks the rug out from under them.
Re:Derrida vs. the rationalists by mannykannot on Friday February 10, 2017 @07:23AM (#13614876)
Surely the purpose of language is to get published?