Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 15:47:11 +0100
From: "steve.devos" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.com>
Subject: Re: Can the Postmodern survive


Jim

One thing I'm not clear on, following on from your statement, is whether
within the postmodern societies we exist within coexist with Modernist
societies. Or if the implication is that some stratas of the social are
postmodern and others modern, whilst still others contain elemets of the
fuedal. Do we as
subjects exist and move freely between the postmeodern and the modern or
is it a uniform state?

regards

steve.devos

JIm Powell wrote:

> One thing about Postmodernism, is that it co-exists with elements of Modernism and pre-Modernism.
>
> "steve.devos" wrote:
>
> > I am curious to see how readers of Baudrillard would respond to the below: given
> > David Schenck's unanswered post on the sleepy list... Any thoughts also on
> > Rorty's deeply american liberalism as a simulcra of politics..
> >
> > >
> > > To use the word postmodern is to state that the ancient dialectical tension
> > > between the ancient and the modern is complete, resolved even. This has been
> > > one of the ongoing themes, tensions, running through western society since the
> > > renaissance. This closure is normally considered through the political realm
> > > because the 'modern' has been closely identified with concepts such as
> > > progress, progress allied with political progress, avant garde etc, with the
> > > result that an historical trope has been declared. The postmodern throws this
> > > into question because it declares that 'Universality has collapsed'.
> > >
> > > The collapse of the religious and its gradual supplanting by the secular, by
> > > the probablistic and theory driven sciences is in risis because of this
> > > collapse of the universal. Religion and theology gains its meaning through the
> > > administration of the sacred and he supplying of common meanings.Within the
> > > postmodern this no longer functions and the inability of religion to supply
> > > morals, law giving, judgement, and ideological justifications leads to the
> > > collapse of religious.
> > >
> > > What lies behind the collapse is an ideal, philosophical, perhaps even
> > > metaphysical crisis - the lack of orientation which is verifiable in the
> > > ethical-political world - the crisis is so blatent that we constantly miss it
> > > in our everyday lives. At one time we would have happily accepted (for a
> > > weekend or two) that 'socialism equalled soviet power plus electrification'.
> > > But now we know that technology, production, ideology, religion can with a
> > > total lack of sympathy be designated as life or death  roducing: you cannot
> > > tell one from the other - for example it is not possible to easily tell when a
> > > theologian talks on TV  supporting morality and freedom whether they are not
> > > actually supporting immorality and repression.... Further the UK
> > > govenrment is currently thinking of re-investing in nuclear power to enable it
> > > to meet its UK carbon emissions decrease... can nuclear power server creative
> > > rather than destructive purposes... These examples aim to sow that
> > > postmodernism lies in the recognition of the oblique nature of being, in the
> > > postmodern divorce between the meaning and sense of propositions and
> > > resultant actions.... Religions crisis (in the administration of the sacred)
> > > in all this is the same as all the others... it is a symbolic, imaginary and
> > > simulated order which has no reality which it can be compared against, it is
> > > reality, there is no longer a  generalised acceptance of it being a metaphor
> > > for the symbolic other - as a consequence it can no longer claim to be able to
> > > function to administer the sacred.... We drop inexorably back to probability
> > > and ideology...
> >
> > > This cannot explain the horrors of the christian media - shudder (dr laura,
> > > ctv) - but religion on the media is a bit like the shopping channel...
> > >
> > > regards
> > >
> > > sdv
> > >
> >
> >   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Re: Postmodern Religions - crisis - ideological structure pt 2
> > Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 13:30:20 +0100
> > From: "steve.devos" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.com>
> > To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> > References: <e3.61ea71b.268400ef-AT-aol.com> <001101bfdcbd$13b01620$1308bd18-AT-hughbone> <3952CEB8.7362-AT-earthlink.net> <000f01bfdcc2$84815da0$d286aec7-AT-computer> <395366EF.D60D4835-AT-krokodile.com> <001101bfdd1b$de52ff60$5f95aec7-AT-computer> <000b01bfdd1d$8b7d54a0$5f95aec7-AT-computer> <3953AAB7.44BFF593-AT-krokodile.com>
> >
> > All
> >
> > Following on from the below proposal that religions primary function has
> > been as the 'administrator of the sacred', the crisis that religion, in
> > these postmodern times, is in derives from. It is arguable that the reason
> > for the collapse of religion as the administrator of the sacred and the
> > means by which humans deal with the abyss/death/sacred/spirtual derives from
> > the change in the society that postmodernity defines, the below hopes to
> > open out this issue...
> >
> > To use the word postmodern is to state that the ancient dialectical tension
> > between the ancient and the modern is complete, resolved even. This has been
> > one of the ongoing themes, tensions, running through western society since
> > the renaissance. This closure is normally considered through the political
> > realm because the 'modern' has been closely identified with concepts such as
> > progress, progress allied with political progress, avant garde etc, with the
> > result that an historical trope has been declared. The postmodern throws
> > this into question because it declares that 'Universality has collapsed'.
> >
> > The collapse of the religious and its gradual supplanting by the secular, by
> > the probablistic and theory driven sciences is in crisis because of this
> > collapse of the universal. Religion and theology gains its meaning through
> > the administration of the sacred and the supplying of common meanings.
> > Within the postmodern this no longer functions and the inability of religion
> > to supply morals, law giving, judgement, and ideological justifications
> > leads to the collapse of religious.
> >
> > What lies behind the collapse is an ideal, philosophical, perhaps even
> > metaphysical crisis - the lack of orientation which is verifiable in the
> > ethical-political world - the crisis is so blatent that we constantly miss
> > it in our everyday lives. At one time we would have happily accepted (for a
> > weekend or two) that 'socialism equalled soviet power plus electrification'.
> > But now we know that technology, production, ideology, religion can with a
> > total lack of sympathy be designated as life or death producing: you cannot
> > tell one from the other - for example it is not possible to easily tell when
> > a theologian talks on TV supporting morality and freedom whether they are
> > not actually supporting immorality and repression.... Further the UK
> > govenrment is currently thinking of re-investing in nuclear power to enable
> > it to meet its UK carbon emissions decrease... can nuclear power server
> > creative rather than destructive purposes... These examples aim to sow that
> > postmodernism lies in the recognition of the oblique nature of being, in the
> > postmodern divorce between the meaning and sense of propositions and
> > resultant actions.... Religions crisis (in the administration of the sacred)
> > in all this is the same as all the others... it is a symbolic, imaginary and
> > simulated order which has no reality which it can be compared against, it is
> > reality, there is no longer a generalised acceptance of it being a metaphor
> > for the symbolic other - as a consequence it can no longer claim to be able
> > to function to administer the sacred.... We drop inexorably back to
> > probability and ideology...
> >
> > A final example - the USA which I take to be a much more religious country
> > than in europe and as a consequence - religion occupies a stronger ideology
> > defining position - accepts the death penalty - currently very few european
> > states do so, this derives from the postmodern divorce between the meaning
> > and sense of propositions and resultant actions....
> >
> > This cannot explain the horrors of the christian media - shudder (dr laura,
> > ctv) - but religion on the media is a bit like the shopping channel...
> >
> > regards
> >
> > sdv
> >
> > "steve.devos" wrote:
> >
> > > All
> > >
> > > In the interests of stating precisly what constitutes religion...
> > >
> > > Dumezil - who in my opinion has been criminally ignored, hence the
> > > 'naming' is a theorist of comparative religion/mythology. I think it may
> > > be possible to place another set of options in a post which can open the
> > > Postmodern Religions discourse out still further. The question I would
> > > like to pose is  'what is the function of religion?' for which purpose
> > > I'm going to place a brief discussion post on the table.
> > >
> > > Three functions are proposed here - abundance and fecundity(judicial) ,
> > > physical force(warrior) and the administration of the sacred(religion),
> > >
> > > The first function can be unpacked and understood as the political
> > > function with the following boundaries - fecundity, abundance of humans
> > > and goods and so on, a further feature is that it is this function that
> > > has close affinities with geographic, topographic and ethnic bases of
> > > socities and the economy. It does not however have the abilities to
> > > justify itself - even in the worst excesses of the aesthticisation of
> > > politics in the last century the totalitarians always appealed to
> > > external discourses to justify their actions.
> > >
> > > The second function is that charged with physical force in combat,
> > > rebellion etc.
> > >
> > > The third function (religious) is responsible for morality, law giving,
> > > judgement, ideology. The function is responsible for the administration
> > > and re-adjustment of magical forces. This function contains the
> > > theologians, the philosophers who were and are responsible for the
> > > ideology that constructed sovreignty into its constituent parts - the
> > > religious and the juridicial. The juridicial being the first function
> > > and the third becoming the religious function. What I would suggest is
> > > that religion in both its magical and sacrificial aspects - and in its
> > > ideological and legitimatory aspects primarily exists to place a
> > > discourse that legitimises actions and constitutes and proposes
> > > knowledge of the world. The critical aspect of the administration of the
> > > sacred  is the responsibility for legitimation of the activities of the
> > > first and second functions.
> > >
> > > Why is this important? I believe it is interesting to try and address
> > > religion not from its relations to the individual subject, or the
> > > subjects needs to deal with their existential condition but from its
> > > effectivity across and within societies, in short what is its social
> > > function?  If religion is the legitimator of discourses and the
> > > justifier of imperial/soveriegn actions then it can not be regarded as
> > > innocent of the crimes which it has justified. If religion can no longer
> > > function as legitimation then what does? It has been proposed that
> > > science, technicity and of course philosophy have supplanted religion
> > > from this function..
> > >
> > > Thoughts responses?
> > >
> > > best as always
> > >
> > > sdv