Stephen Hicks on Postmodernism Part 1

[@jeffmcelroy5364]

Whod listening in 2024? This mans commentary and analysis couldnt have been more accurate and on point.

[@thadtuiol1717]

Holy crap, he gave this speech way back in 1998! It's 22 years later, and the chickens have really come home to roost.

[@HalJikaKick]

I know!!

[@uberdonkey9721]

This guy explains things so clearly. These two videos are gold.

[@MarkHill45]

Thank you doctor Hicks. I started to wake up a couple years ago and my life now is a million times better. I give you some credit for it.

[@DarthAlphaTheGreat]

When I hear "contradictotions are normal", I actually hear "War is peace; freedom is slavery; Ignorance is Strength"

[@Wingedmagician]

I dont think thats right. Contradictions are normal in different levels of resolution or organization. Think about the micro and macro of physics... how the data you get from one level seems to contradict the data you get from the other. Thats just a symptom of our limited (not nonexistent) tools for knowing reality.

[@DarthAlphaTheGreat]

Micro and Macro Physics are not contradictory---in fact all current models made SURE that they are not. The current model would work for BOTH micro and macro provided the correct data is inputted up to probability. A model can only truly be self-contradictory when it predicts the motion of the micro perfectly but the macro COMPLETELY wrong (or vice versa). That's what a contradiction means. Also contradictions are NOT normal in life---unintuitive perhaps, but there is always a reason and when it comes down to it, it correctly reflects reality and evidence. Unintuitive != contradiction, contradiction means if it happens the other is IMPOSSIBLE. Like War is Peace---those words by definition are not the same, so while you can spin it however you like (see 1984), it is just a spin you cannot change the reality (of meaning of words) that they mean different things that is fundamentally incompatible---under ANY level of intellect---unless you go through with doublethink (see 1984 again).

[@Wingedmagician]

Thanks for responding. I recently read 1984 too and it really hit me hard when Winston was being... I dont know... reeducated? But I still want to be very careful with that kind of Aristotelian "2+2=4" (if you will lol). When it comes to math and science its more reasonable! yes thank you and I dont know anything much about physics so excuse me on that bad example. but other ways of "knowing" or "moving" in the world are not so clear cut and free from paradox or contradiction.

[@greywinters4801]

Do you mean moral objectivity, promoted by the deranged post modernist Mao Zedong

[@DarthAlphaTheGreat]

Moral objectives do not exist. There are always BETTER morals depending on situations and need of society. If there is any "objective moral" it would be one that is based on what is beneficial to individuals and at large societies in the long run. That's why moralities change. Mao is NOT a post modernist. He believed in the superiority of rigor and structure, analyzes battle tactics. He believes HIS version of morality is absolute and all who opposes is wrong. Cultural relativism is NOT a thing in Mao's eyes, there is only ONE true and good ideology, and that is communism. You are an idiot to consider Mao a post-modernist. He is a modernist. But modernist doesn't make you a good person---you can be rigor and principled on a crazy idea. Post-modernism has 90% flaws but it also have a few good points, and why people gets persuaded.

[@extranolugar4588]

I love this presentation - the current culture war now makes perfect sense. Supporters of the Enlightenment have a lot to lose.

[@LetsGo6009]

So do the anti-Enlightenments, they just don’t know it

The woke idiots have far more to lose.

[@BillM1960]

I wish they published the slides.

[@bdff4007]

With Jackie Vernon narrating with his clicker in hand?

[@DYKWINNING]

Steven hicks postmodern presentation- 2018: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y3Oqk3t9a5irbtk

[@andrewmichaelschaefferXIV]

Giggles A postmodernist cannot objectively "publish" both sides. I'm neither a Modernist or Postmodernist but I thought he did a good job.

[@andrewmichaelschaefferXIV]

@Richard Martinez (it appears I read the original comment incorrectly) Slides / sides Oops I prefer Perennialist or Traditionalist Thank you.

[@andrewmichaelschaefferXIV]

@Richard Martinez thank you sir

[@paulharris3000]

We cannot know reality by reason or experience, but CONSEQUENCE always looms, offering us glimpses of reality...

[@adamuadamu5081]

Effectiveness is the measure of truth

[@stevesmith7839]

There is only one operative system of justice perceptible to rationalism which is that turnabout is fair play. From this all social laws are built so that no one do to others what they do not want done to their self.

[@Hank520Tube]

Hearing words from Kant, like 'one can not know reality by using reason', or questions like 'why does existence exist' is what made me stop taking philosophy classes. But I must say, I truly enjoyed this lecture, really an explanation, by Stephen Hicks. Thanks for posting, Atlas Society.

[@joelb9921]

It’s great to hear how civil the question period is at the end, even tho most of the questions came from people who disagreed with him

[@daverosenthal3975]

What an excellent lecture - clear, structured, and logical

[@Chamindo7]

Critical thinking is so rare these days. Refreshing like cool water in a dry wasteland. Thank you for the excellent upload.

[@susanmcdonald9088]

Lol, how can we return to a past age? Reason got us this far. But his Alt-Right agenda is clear. Try Dr. Steven Goldman, "what scientists know"... Linus Pauling lecture, and teaching company, Dr. Rick Roderick, "Self Under Siege" #8! Explains post-modern trajectory, that got us TRUMP, lol

[@keegster7167]

@@susanmcdonald9088 Interesting. I’ll check out Goldman. Btw are you referencing “Reason” as defined by Plato? Bc yes, that doesn’t get anyone very far. But Hume’s skeptical reason? Heidegger’s mystical reason? Wittgenstein’s semantic? Ferdinand de Saussure’s historicolinguistic? They’re often referenced by Postmodernists but I think they’re the actual few moderate skeptics that have existed since Cicero and have been overcoming postmodernists and similar people. I guess that’s a metanarrative to be skeptical of, tho.

[@flypig698]

Postmodernists are like film critics, they point out flaws based on their view, but the act of making a better movie is not part of their skill set, in fact whenever they do try it mostly fails.

[@SteelyDanimal]

Sohail Uppal amen

[@dodorus966]

And here is you, criticizing post-modernism without offering an alternative. :)

[@zxyatiywariii8]

I think it's because Post-Modernism isn't about creation, it's about deconstruction. In that way, it's effective like a bomb. But wanton destruction is always easier than creation. Like when an over-tired toddler takes two minutes to smash down the beautifully-constructed sand castle that his/her older sibling spent all afternoon building and decorating. Obviously the older child always knew their creation would disappear with the tide; but there's something malicious and envious about ADULTS trying to destroy creative works and IPs that they, themselves, don't have the skill to create. Like with the author Amélie Wen Zhao, whose new book (which is sci-fi/fantasy) was excoriated and even temporarily cancelled, because she's not African-American and therefore she doesn't have the "right" to write a story with slavery in it (as if China never had slavery!) I wish people would see how vindictive and irrational Post-Modernism is; because rationality is what we need most of all nowadays -- not tribalism, not the Progressive Stack which pits groups of people against each other when we most need to be working _together_ to solve problems. 🤷🏾‍♀️

[@kikeheebchinkjigaboo6631]

Sohail Uppal postmodernists are cultural Marxist

[@kikeheebchinkjigaboo6631]

Dodorus destroy cultural cultural marxism

[@ThompsonDB]

To suggest our senses may not fully comprehend the completeness of reality is logical to me, but to suggest that they have absolutely no relation to true reality, despite us having emerged from and existing in that reality, is a non-sequitur for me.

[@coinswaptrader2915]

our ears and eyes can only see 1% of the electromagnetic spectrum...like looking through a key hole and thinking you clearly see inside the other room!

[@pj2345-v4x]

CoinSwapTrader the real reason it doesn’t matter is because it has zero utility. We exist on the visible spectrum, and filter out most of what we could see. The only useful forward movement involves us solving problems by presupposing things. You could sit around and be hyper skeptical all fucking day and you’d just die. That’s all the post modernists are. An aesthetic group of new wave skeptics thinking they are revolutionary for rebranding “there is no objective truth” onto language. You don’t even need to involve language for their beliefs as far as I can tell. Just say we can’t prove our experience maps onto reality. After that point why even care about all the language games. We are all going to keep behaving as if language represents reality anyway, who the fuck cares?

[@franciscomap75]

@@pj2345-v4x good response.

[@JS-dt1tn]

@@pj2345-v4x man, its a shame that you think that is the entire project of postmodern thought. Nevermind the fact that your synopsis is an absurd reduction.

[@Weirdomanification]

@@JS-dt1tn Which stems from the reality that Postmodernism itself is an absurd reduction.

[@Davidlee37101]

Could the human species have survived if instead of using reason and learning about how plants respond to the environment thereby introducing the concept of agricultural increasing food production, the pondered about how the plants feel, how i feel etc.

[@flypig698]

you my friend have run into the pseudoscience of Lysenkoism.

[@MANTARD]

Survived? No doubt about it. Ancient hunter/gatherer societies thrived on their extremely intimate knowledge of how, when, and where plants grew.

[@pkassies]

I've listned to the lecture of Stephen Hicks twice now. The first part is a history on filosophy and how they are the pre-cursor to Post-modernism. This is a great perspective for a filosophy noob like me. I like his analogy between decline of religion and decline of socialism, and the subsequent ways how filosophers deal with the conflict of their reasoning and the reality. Second part is all about the concepts that make up Post-modernism thinking and its way of argumentation. Listen until the end, where Hicks argues that PM won't be around for long, since it lacks substance.

[@AndyJarman]

So we can disregard the origins of our culture, our language and the tools we use to make sense of reality? We can just make up how we spell words as we go along, based upon how we are feeling? That's very Post Modern of you, how clever. Now, why should anyone place store in what you say? You clearly want to refute the foundations of our common understanding and childishly assume the petulant stance of a teenager on the spelling of the very word at the core of this discussion. How kool daddy oh!

[@M4ruta]

As much as I love this lecture, this part really seemed absurd to me: 33:58: "Hegel loved to capitalize Reason, it was always 'Reason' with a capital 'R'." Hegel wrote his books in German, a language in which nouns are always capitalized.

[@Legionary42]

Frаnк interesting, I took a look and it appears many translators of his work capitalize that word for him in their translations for emphasis.

[@marumakoto]

He (Stephen) used the "capital R" as an expression of emphasis.

[@scottcoston7832]

German nouns also have a masculine, feminine, or neuter association(der, die, das). It’s more of a style than a deep meaning type of thing. BTW, if you live in America it should have been Das wienerschnitzel, not Der... still had good hotdogs.

[@Individual_Lives_Matter]

I had a philosophy professor who translated Hegel, Lacan and other ‘continental’ philosophers. He had handouts (written by others) referring to capitalization of certain words in Hegel. I think there must be something to it because this guy loved Hegel.

[@danielbergmann7353]

Deconstructing this joke is very german😁

[@kellivanbonn4692]

Get rid of all individuals what's left? Nothing. Get rid of all groups, what's left? Individuals. Individuals are the fundamental unit, not groups.

[@johnnycrash5130]

from where individuals emerge? they're conceptualisations of ideas that could be raised in that symbolic space.

[@DWinegarden2]

Groups are made up of individuals thinking in different directions, reaching different conclusions, no?

[@Slu54]

@@johnnycrash5130 That's a pretty post-modernist thing to say. I think if anything is intuitive, the understanding of what an individual is probably ranks pretty high. To know who you are and where you end and where others begin is about as intuitive as knowing that the sky is blue or the sun rises from the east. To be productive, or to achieve some end, you should probably pick some essential things most can live with and proceed from there by reason. But again the purpose of postmodernism seems to be to challenge these essential things, which is fine, but to what end? It seems to be a purely intellectual exercise that for whatever reason folks are now trying to bring into the realm of practical matters like economics or politics. At least they have left the hard sciences alone, for now.

[@coinswaptrader2915]

exactly...groups are fictions where soulless individuals vicariously are able to feel connected and alive through the hive collective!

[@vermin5367]

@@Slu54 science is just the process of eliminating concepts that fit our narrow narrative of the universe, current science could be all wrong for all we know, after all, science can't be verified it can only be reinforced with what we think we know. - Post modern gang

[@Wingedmagician]

I here because of Jordan Peterson

[@mbw6785]

Rob Vel me too

[@temujinthekhan6233]

same

[@gregnyquist7714]

Same as well. However, after listening to this part of Hicks' lecture, I'm rather puzzled about Dr. Peterson's recommendation. Hicks is obviously smart and well spoken, but his little sketches of the philosophers he regards as forbears of post-modernism are deeply flawed, riddled with exaggerations and misinterpretations. Take Kant for example. While it is true that there are many very serious problems in Kant's philosophy, HIcks' treatment is little more than a travesty. Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" is not an attack on rationality or science or even "reason." No, it's an attack (admittedly, a rather confused and pedantic attack) on the rationalistic metaphysics of the scholastics and the followers of Leibnitz. Kant had been awoken from his rationalistic "dogmatic slumber" by David Hume's "Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding," an incendiary attack against rationalistic speculation and "school metaphysics." While Kant agreed with Hume's criticisms of metaphysics, he had qualms about Hume's wholesale attack on rationalism. In the "Critique" Kant attempted to describe the "limits" of reason, that is, where reasoning was important for discovering truth (e.g., Kant's categories) and where it had serious shortcomings (e.g., speculative metaphysics). HIcks ignores these distinctions and turns Kant into an enemy of reason and reality. That's not fair or just. If you want to condemn a philosopher, you need to condemn them for what they actually believe, not for what you mistakenly think they believe. Similar remarks could be made about many of the other philosophers Hicks talks about, including Hegel, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche. Hicks understanding of these thinkers is rather superficial, and his remarks about them, even when they contain an element of truth, are hyperbolic and partly false. I get the sense that Hicks has not really read these men; or if he has, he has not understood what he's read. His narrative seems to be driven by an agenda, rather than an all-consuming determination to be veracious and fair. It seems to me this is the wrong way to go about attacking postmodernism. How can Hicks criticize a belief system that denies the very possibility of honest and fair interpretation when he himself is not veracious or fair?

[@Somniostatic]

Greg Nyquist -- It's sad that people like us, who actually learned about these philosophers, are so fucking disappointed with stuff like this. Because, there's like.... 3 of us left.

[@antonioj123]

Just beginning to realize now that the Hicks, Harris, and Petersons are just creating grand narratives.

[@stevenleejobe]

I’ve read Hicks’ book on postmodernism. These videos are a nice refresher. You have to be at the top of your game to debate these post modern clowns because they have the tenor of the culture and the disposition of the times on their side. It’s just so easy to lay back and be “woke.”

[@jeffmaehre7150]

Hicks as at the bottom of his field. He publishes on illegitimate or at lest disreputable publishing houses. He doesn't understand medieval thought, the work of Immanuel Kant, modernism, and certainly not post-modern thought. His reading comprehension skills are questionable.

[@stevenleejobe]

@@jeffmaehre7150 Noted. I've seen a fair amount of criticism of what Hicks has said and written to the point where I'm looking into post-modernism myself, maybe get some of this figured out. But even though he may have made mistakes or was sloppy about this or that, I still agree with his assessment of what's going in in academia and the culture at large. Meanwhile, what credentials do you bring to the table? Who would you recommend I read?

[@jamzgilz]

So many intellectuals in this forum. The problem is that the average man wants to work hard, love his wife and kids, and enjoy some safety and stability. Questioning reality and objective truths seems to get you further from those goals, not closer. Life is hard and constantly pointing out all the reasons it is hard while rarely coming up with a better replacement just makes life harder for you and everyone around you. If you thought the problem was bad wait until you see our solution.

[@andrewmichaelschaefferXIV]

An excellent survey of our contemporary quagmire of ideas! Thank you for this upload.

[@Sportinglogic]

There is no quagmire of ideas, merely a lack of intellectual rigour.

[@MrMcWitt]

Damn, absolutely prophetic. It is unbelievable how pervasive this what I will call an ideology is, and how many people, who are under its spell and are not aware of it, as being so does not allow you to see it. It’s almost the perfect mind virus.

[@skyazrael5487]

Excellent lesson. Now I understand.

[@donaldclifford5763]

Refreshing summary. Thank you.

[@ProudlyIndian-]

Truly Enlightening.

[@susanmcdonald9088]

I also think the only way we can even do history at all, philosophical or otherwise, is because human nature has not changed on iota. If true, the ancient Greek dramatic author, Eripedes, 4th century BC, tells us all we need to know in his tragedies. Between Reason & Emotion, the latter wins, every time!

[@NatesBestLife]

Thank you for posting this! I wish the visuals weren't lost to the ages

[@KellyGerling]

www.stephenhicks.org/2013/10/28/defining-modernism-and-postmodernism-chart/

[@andrewdett]

Thanks for posting this new series of videos; very thought provoking.

[@webmelomaniac]

Fascinating! Look forward to listening to part 2

[@1polonium210]

Outstanding presentation!

[@korhankaya6637]

I'm not a quantum physicist but from what I understood when measuring either for the precise momentum or precise location of a particle, one is sacrificed for the other. My interpretation is there is only so much information revealed at any given moment or there is only so much you can know at any given moment. This doesn't mean the particle never had such a momentum or location though, or that the truth simply doesn't exist or is relative, it's more that the truth has a trade-off, or it's like a peephole, or almost a tedious quality about it, but it's still ultimately worth it.

[@DrEnginerd1]

This guy is awesome, I need more Stephen hicks videos!

[@elainesiu8843]

Cameron Believe

[@tuckerchris1111]

you nerd!

[@peterhunt135]

look at his "Explaining Postmodernism" -- it has charts for one

[@davidlloyd-jones8519]

sounds like a nutter. Yes the western model needs to be careful, maybe like a parent to a child and even humble. But to dismiss gravity for example and magnetism as if they were simply products of a male hierarchy and a wesern social construct is just insane

[@sgt7]

Non postmodernists typically explain postmodernism more clearly than postmodernists do.

[@11kravitzn]

By strawmanning it

[@sgt7]

@@11kravitzn really? In what way?

[@11kravitzn]

@@sgt7 Postmodernism isn't just Marxism in disguise, for example, as Hicks argues

[@Faeron1984]

​@@11kravitznWhy not?

[@11kravitzn]

@@Faeron1984 Nietzsche was an early postmodernist (maybe a pre-postmodernist) and he was not a Marxist in any sense.

[@ryanjames2673]

Amazing videos. Thank you for the invaluable information.

[@Havre_Chithra]

I've had the intense experience of having read Nieztche for the past 4 years. I haven't really read anyone more recent than Nietzsche to much degree, although I am acquainted with a few. I've taken what Nietzsche has said and have been actively trying to work it into my life, work out my own meaning, my our purpose, my own values - as much as I really can. Anyways, over the past year my life underwent a near total demolishion - my sense of identity was shattered much in the same way as when one loses their religion. I spiraled into nihilism! I began tearing it all down, destroying and making way for something new! Now that I'm in the process of rebuilding, I've been writing a lot. What amazes me is, writing in my own accord (in notes on my phone) I have managed to arrive at many of these conclusions. It feels so much more satisfying doing it more or less in my own, in my own way, than it does going to school and sitting in a lecture... Doing it my way, I can really live and learn.

[@JoshuaFinancialPL]

GREAT lectures. Great channel. Well done!

[@nickcarter4006]

“Postmodernism has replaced the concepts of objective reality, reason and individualism with relative feeling, social construction and groupism. And we like that, groupism. They say I’m a groupist, the greatest groupist they’ve ever seen. Nobody groups like I group! I’m a big time grouper, big time! Objective reality, who wants that? Get it the hell out of here!!!”

[@rmooreg]

"I think therefore I am...going think and conclude whatever I choose to , without adherence to logic and without regard to facts or evidence."

[@Rhygenix]

Post-Modernism is modern-day sophism

[@fubaralakbar6800]

Leftists: "Technology is trying to conquer nature and will destroy the planet!" Also leftists: "Here, have a condom."

[@mathewhale3581]

Yeah. I see it as the emperors new clothes. Only those smart and sophisticated enough (ie university educated) will understand the sophism involved. It’s a great wanky argument to prove your superiority by using bullshit to baffle, browbeat and belittle the uneducated (non university). It takes naivety to see past the lie. As Voltaire wrote “ those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities”.

[@iain5615]

No it is not. It is malicious nihilistic warfare against a society that these people detest and want to destroy. Sophism was never so nihilistic.

[@Rhygenix]

@@iain5615 Have you read hicks book?

[@iain5615]

@@Rhygenix no but I know what Sophism was and what post modernism is. The sophists were not nihilistic. They might not have liked the social hierarchy but were not hateful of every aspect and did not seek destruction for the sake of destruction driven by hatred.

[@keegster7167]

Sounds like in Literary Criticism, it’s just a simple case of hearing only what you want to hear and not really listening or reading at all

[@LA-kc7ev]

I have to note that medieval philosophy was not based only on "faith" and but on faith and reason, Aristotelian logic being the foundation of theology.

[@LA-kc7ev]

It comes to mind while listening that, regarding the above, it was the doctrine of the Logos that identified human reason with the Divine reason that structures the universe, hence the ability of the human being to attain true knowledge. The mystics go further: following the mind above the material plane "experience God through God Himself." Philosophy wrestles across the ages with the same problems, but the starting points, or premises, and end points, differ. Reason is never absent (except maybe in Postmodernism).

[@jamesbenchia3163]

I think Kant and Kierkegaard would horrified by post modernism - which is a philosophic cancer.

[@hanant6592]

James Benchia why do you think that? Postmodernism is an extension to the Skepticism that Kant pointed to in his philosophy. Even many considered both philosophers among the first generation of postmodernism.

[@yodrewyt]

If so, then would they recant? Haha

[@couldbe8348]

Why is it a cancer? What the hell is an "objective truth?"

[@elliotthovanetz1945]

@@couldbe8348 gravity is an objective truth. Or, if you think it's all in your head, just jump out a 20 story bldg. and see what happens... Maybe your 'truth' is you'd grow wings and fly?

[@portapotty69]

Perhaps they would be horrified by the fact they are counted among the godfathers of postmodernism. They couldn't have imagined their ideas evolving into the situation we have today. If a time-traveller showed Kant or Kierkegaard a montage of video clips of the modern Academy melting down, and explained that these toxic ideas trace their pedigree back to them, I'm sure either man would reasonably be horrified.

[@thunkjunk]

I'd like to hear about Postmodernism in political science.

[@ronjohnson4566]

considering Marcel Duchamp's, The Bride Stripped Bare, By Her Bachelors Even, would you consider his last piece, Given the Illuminated Gas and the Waterfall, 1968 Postmodern or maybe Kitsch?

[@paulharris3000]

@49:00 - Imagine even suggesting to a mafia loanshark that the money you owe him is merely a construct of a subjective system with no access to reality...:):):)

[@spindoctor6385]

Haha I know I am 2 years late replying but the Mafia man may suggest that your left leg is just a social construct with no more access to the rest of your body.

[@coinswaptrader2915]

he'd introduce you to his baseball bat to wake you up to some reality

[@natbrownizzle3815]

@@spindoctor6385 Jordan B Peterson said once and I am paraphrasing "Postmodernists, do not believe in objective truth, yetthey all died" XD

[@colloredbrothers]

Could someone tell me what that last question was? I couldn’t quite get it even after rewinding it.

[@pn5721]

www.stephenhicks.org/2018/01/06/peterson-hicks-discussion-on-pomo-transcription/ Jordan Peterson and Stephen Hicks diagnose Post-modernism. *The full blow-by-blow transcript of Jordan Peterson's August 2017 interview of Prof. Stephen Hicks, author of "Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism from Rousseau to Foucault."*

[@paulharris3000]

@40:00 - Why must there be a reason for existence?

[@Kali-k4z]

Brilliant!!!!

[@fubaralakbar6800]

So, the anti-SJW movement, of which I am very much a part, and which has lead to rise of Trump, Boris Johnson, Jordan Peterson, etc...is essentially a re-emergence of modernism.

[@citycrusher9308]

no. It's just men unable to deal with f3m1n1sm so they call it ''SJW'' and spin their wheels

[@stevenleejobe]

Fubar AlAkbar The neo modernists!

[@fubaralakbar6800]

@@stevenleejobe Yes! I like this! In fact I'm going to suggest it to Sargon of Akkad, as he actually mentioned giving a name to our movement in one of his videos.

[@stevenleejobe]

Fubar AlAkbar Yes, please suggest to Sargon. I’d be honored. Surely we need a name and a set of canonic documents just like back in the day with Locke and DeCarte.

[@triplea657aaa]

I would say it's a lot more complicated than that, but that is a part

[@DedeProduction]

what are the impacts upon feminism of postmodern theories and the concept of “intersectionality” of oppressions? What strengths and dilemmas for contemporary feminism have resulted?

[@vincentcoppola9832]

'one can not know reality by using reason', but I'll keep on talking about how I have figured out the truth of reality.

[@aluminiumfish]

really enjoyed listening to Hicks. Completely confirmed for me the validity of Post-Modernism.There are some zealotry on both sides but using the synthetic pyscho -babble of Nietzsche does'nt do him any favours nor his ideas.

[@mariconvongerm3269]

One hour of citation needed.

[@thegreatresearcher1681]

A question of Stephen Hicks - why Postmodernism was defeated in the area of its origin, namely Philosophy yet turned out to be extremely successful in other humanities?

[@discodynamitetnt2938]

Jordan Peterson brought me here

[@Jaredthedude1]

Peterson takes from Neitchie and criticises postmodernism.

[@Greg-xs5py]

ditto, starting to understand why JP hates PM.

[@LifeInZadar]

Sorry to hear that. But hey, he is only a product, a reaction and doesn't really have any new thoughts or anything to add to our collective body of knowledge. I can understand why some people may like some of the things he says, nobody's perfect. If folks need to go to church every Sunday to hear the same sermons and be reminded to do good, then there is a problem. However, if folks already do good and only go to church to socialize with other human beings and do good acts for others, then that is good, assuming they are not hurting others (ie Catholic church raping kids/nuns, etc.).

[@MLJohnsonian]

Quick question on Objectivist logic: What would the most basic premise in your philosophy be? The axiomatic foundation. This is a sincere question.

[@user936]

9:54 Modernism - a broad philosophical movement: 1/ What is real? (metaphysics) 2/ How do you know? (epistemology; human knowledge and the source of this knowledge) 3/ So what? (values, how these form society) 4/ Human Nature (our relationship to rational capacity, emotion, reality in comparing 1/ and 2/ including free will and causality, then the nature of 3/ inc social and moral ethics)

[@fordtoy2000]

Very stimulating. Thank you for sharing. I can't wait to listen to part 2 tomorrow or when I get time. Sounds like you have fans there, and I suppose it helps but it is a little political when that is the case, in my opinion. My unbiased response is that I am glad I spent the last hour listening. Again, thanks for presenting.

[@jeffmaehre7150]

You should learn about modernism and various schools of philosophical thought.

[@EmperorsNewWardrobe]

33:37 it can’t be the case that ‘contradictions should be embraced’ and ‘contradictions should not be embraced’ at the same time and the same sense. This demonstrates the law of non-contradiction that postmodernism tries to oppose.

[@jamzgilz]

Groups will flourish when Individuals are given the freedom to be individuals. Groups and individuals lose when legalism and conformity reigns.

[@Gunfighter13NEWT]

Excellent. This clears up what's happening in our culture. Thank you!

[@KatherineAnderson-lm8bw]

Building wealth involves developing good habits like regularly putting money away in intervals for solid investments. Instead of trying to predict and prognosticate the stability of the market and precisely when the change is going to happen, a better strategy is simply having a portfolio that’s well prepared for any eventually, that’s how some folks' been averaging 150K every 7week these past 4months according to Bloomberg.

[@ConnieGriffith-u4z]

That’s crazy, I’m just doing everything wrong with my portfolio.

[@brittanynicolette9473]

The US-Stock Mrkt had been on it’s longest bull-run in history, so the mass hysteria and panic is relatable considering we’re not accustomed to such troubled mrkts, but there are avenues lurking around if you know where to look. My wife and I are retiring this year with over $7,000,000 in tax deferred investments. up until 3 years ago we were 100% in the S&P. During bear markets we had a perfect plan. We got an investment manager in our corner and didn’t look at our portfolio for nearly a year

[@RyanContreras72]

Same here, 75% of my portfolio is in the red and I really don’t know how long I can stomach the losses. I’m beginning to reach a breaking point.

[@SophiaBint-wj8wn]

Patience patience patience. It's a cycle.... a sucky point in the cycle, but a cycle nonetheless.

[@alicebenard5713]

Wow, that’s stirring! Do you mind connecting me to your advisor please. I desperately need one to diversified my portfolio.

[@TheAtlasSociety]

Are you interested in Ayn Rand's novels and her philosophy of Objectivism? Come join like-minded individuals at the 2015 Atlas Summit. We've got scholarships for students! www.atlassociety.org/as/atlas-summit-promo-video

[@jamzgilz]

Philosophy literally means the love of wisdom I can't think of many people who are living happy, fulfilled lives that would ever contribute that to post modernism or socialism If you adopt a philosophy that results in chaos, destruction/deconstruction, then you don't love wisdom, you aren't in fact a philosopher, and in fact you are a fool

[@bkr_418]

Fantastic lecture. Any way of getting a copy of the handouts he's referring to in PDF format?

[@Vanguard521]

Good overview leading to post modernism. It would have been nice to see the charts he referred to. Are they in his book?

[@MrSpiritchild]

The answer is simple... When playing a game of chess with a cheater, you call them out. If they try to deny it, you take the chess board and beat them into the ground. These people are beyond dangerous, they are destroying the human heart, and given enough time, they will be responsible for the deaths of billions of people. Disclaimer, chess is a game, you don't really beat up cheaters while playing a game. But postmodernism is not a game, it's a tactic of war. A tactic that is designed to divide and conquer and subdue as many people as possible without firing a shot so as not to expose the evil nature of it's ideology. The problem with their ideas is that as much as they want us to believe violence is evil, violence is not as evil as convincing the masses to cut their own throats, while patting themselves on their own backs for the great favor they believe they are doing for the people.

[@germandohrmann7893]

Thanks you!

[@NYNCwasafuz]

Everyone should listen to this lecture

[@reptard6833]

Hicks doesn't understand postmodernism and misrepresents it. kzbin.info/www/bejne/e3nXp4d9lrWtfJY

[@MindyZielfelderArt]

I recognize some of this in my own thinking, and that makes me wonder how ingrained is this "philosophy" in people from X gen and up. And how to root it out... it's clearly very damaging and may be a contributing factor in my own nihilism and depression.... So, how do we get back to reason? A mind so trained in anti-reason...how to fix what is broken?

[@NotesForSpaceCadets]

Excellent lecture.

[@johndonne8657]

Really solid, thorough analysis. Enjoyed this.

[@mjbull5156]

The conclusion that because science cannot get to a perfect image of reality, there is no true reality is absurd. It is like saying that because a photograph of a tree is out of focus, you can deny the existence of the tree entirely if you want.

[@donaldthomann1613]

For the longest time, I've been struggling to really grasp post-modernism on a truly intellectual level, but I do know that when I hear its ideas laid out I feel like somebody kicked a hole in my soul and took a shit in it.

[@daviddastardar3751]

Donald Thomann lolll

[@LifeInZadar]

Enjoy exploring nihilism. National Suicide Prevention Lifeline Call 1-800-273-8255

[@reptard6833]

Hicks and J. Peterson don't understand postmodernism and misrepresent it. kzbin.info/www/bejne/e3nXp4d9lrWtfJY

[@Sportinglogic]

@Donald; Professor Hicks is well and truly out of his depts regarding any insight into Post-Modernism and one finds this in most universities all over the US. Mere eloquence does not replace rigor in thinking. I am in the process of concluding my postings on the topic, which can be followed here: vm.tiktok.com/ZMetvQcyE/

[@Jaredthedude1]

This is excellent, however I have read a fair bit of Heidegger and while I have to defer to Hicks as being an expert, there are definitely things that Heidegger said that contradict Hicks assessment.

[@rlpederson]

Anyone know where you can get the chart he is talking to?

[@w1cked001]

Wait, this lecture is from a quarter century ago????

[@Havre_Chithra]

I don't think people understand how important this whole lecture is.

[@harmona3691]

So no answer for that theory-laden question in the end. Who can refute "grounded theory"? Theory built on and based on data, educated researchers' reflections, criticism, and the inclusion and examination of the contextual and structural frameworks, many of which later followed by positivist.

[@ellieschmitz7837]

thank you professor Peterson for recommending Steven Hicks to figger out what postmodernism is about.

Whoops! That was dangerously close "nigure".

[@reptard6833]

Neither Hicks nor Peterson understand postmodernism. kzbin.info/www/bejne/e3nXp4d9lrWtfJY

[@henrik2518]

@@reptard6833 More importantly: Kant.

[@jeffmaehre7150]

Why wouldn't you look to a postmodern thinker to figure out what it's about? Do gross oversimplifications make you feel better?

[@scottcoston7832]

Well Done!

[@northwestpsychfest7329]

Post modernism is an evaluation and critique of modernism... nothing more, nothing less. Overstating its impact is ridiculous

[@arimendelson8875]

Is there a transcript of this speech available anywhere?

[@ronaldthomas6326]

www.amazon.com/Explaining-Postmodernism-Skepticism-Socialism-Rousseau-ebook/dp/B005D53DG0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1513182119&sr=8-1&keywords=steven+hicks

[@TheChristianAtheist]

What do YOU think? View The Christian Atheist playlist on KZbin here kzbin.infoplaylists It is our mission to uncover and speak TRUTH in the pursuit of meaning, no matter where that takes us. The Christian Atheist ... To believe or not to believe - that is the question.

[@jameseverett4976]

The Christian Atheist? - seriously? What does that even mean? Or is it a deliberate contradiction for the sake of mind games? Like "the dry blue ocean waves..." or "the believing, trusting skeptic".

[@banquesseuils]

Soon 2025, it's never been more up to date.

[@StuartTheunissen]

A little unfair on Kierkegaard perhaps. He didn't develop a 'system' (he abhored systems) and he wasn't writing on the nature of reality. Easily misunderstood / misused as he often overstated his case for effect.

[@Eagleonspeed]

Listening to this, I get the impression that the english translation of "Kritik der reinen Vernunft" has some major issues. What he is saying about the ideas layed out in this writing doesn't resemble what I've read. How could someone come to the conclusion that Kant was 'anti enlightenment'? Sapere aude!

[@StephenHicksPhilosopher]

It's a standard interpretation of Kant. E.g., this from Nietzsche: “As soon as Kant would begin to exert a popular influence, we should find it reflected in the form of a gnawing and crumbling skepticism and relativism.” (Friedrich Nietzsche, *Schopenhauer as Educator*, second Untimely Meditation).

[@dawnwise996]

Though I disagree with some of what Steven Hicks says, he does a good job.

[@paulharris3000]

After Wittgenstein, we might ask: "Why is the sky blue?" The answer in this context would be: "Because we all agree that it is blue, and we agreed when we were powerless to disagree..."

[@willimilliw]

You provide for my basic needs and I don't have to steal from you

[@anthonyodonnell8724]

I'm with Hicks on his critique of postmodernism, but he has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to the medieval mind. Yes, it was an age of faith, but the distinction between reason and faith was understood and affirmed. Medieval philosophy was, first of all, philosophy; it was also metaphysically realist, and utterly affirmative of reason. It was significantly a perpetuation of Greek rationalism.

[@mikehoot3978]

No. The medieval philosophy is centered in the believing of god. Then comes reason and all the rest. In greek and modern philossophy the center is the truth, at least the aspiration of it. Medieval age kill most of the ancient knowledge, only kept the part that did not disturb the imposition of faith.

[@LuxInTenebris458]

Is there someone constantly whispering in the background "ok...aha...ok....ok", or am I hearing voices?

[@vera1654]

I just heard it too lol

[@billnorris8457]

19m Yes the Enlightenment delivered good fruit or experience. Specifically in the American experiment where the prime good in innovation was improving the human condition. VIa free and fair and competitive consumer markets. Tocqueville.

[@billnorris8457]

But flourished primarily in the Anglosphere as over looking and guiding all the radical changed was the Judeo-Christain ethic and morality.

[@gemthomas]

So if one would want post modernist to review a novel where would one go to show them ?

[@priyans1020]

People become famous by challenging widely accepted beliefs. They gains followers if they successfully projects the flaws of the present beliefs. Then their theory becomes popular and widely accepted. The cycle continues. Unless ofcourse there comes a system where its inherent flaws openly accepted while integrating it to the society.

[@thedarkness111]

I can't get over that this was in '98.😲

[@socialjay3871]

You probably don't realise that postmodern philosophy began in the 1920's, peaked in the 1940's, had a brief revival in the 1960's and was out of vogue by the 1980's, either... you probably think it's the main school of thought right now because Jordan Peterson pissed his pants about it

[@TheJeremyKentBGross]

This reminds me of Neil Degrasse Tyson's Beyond Belief talk, in which he points out that the Islamic world was the cutting edge of leadership in scientific advancement and discovery until around 1070-1100 when Imams started preaching that Math was of the devil, and that their culture has failed to recover from that mistake even 1000 years later.

[@Patrick-hb7bk]

Maths .

[@jeffmaehre7150]

So you're interested in pop-culture versions of scientists, "philosophers." Have you ever read any real scholarship?

[@elboudali_hamza]

Just lies and misinformation

[@snoosebaum995]

So Exactly , What happened to Moderism ?

[@HWalla23]

Not that Stephen Hicks could tell you this--he's completely wrong about postmodernism in very simple and basic ways--but the emergence of fiat currency is regarded as the end of the "modern," at least by Baidou.

[@percsaturn6963]

@@HWalla23 so if Hicks is wrong about it then what is postmodernism

[@Sportinglogic]

Modernism is alive and well - however, Professor Hicks is well and truly out of his depts regarding any insight into Post-Modernism and one finds this in most universities all over the US. I am in the process of concluding my postings on the topic, which can be followed here: vm.tiktok.com/ZMetvQcyE/