File spoon-archives/lyotard.archive/lyotard_1998/lyotard.9812, message 19


Subject: Re: Paradigms Lost
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 10:27:53 PST


er, um <raising a shy hand in the back of the class>

what about donna harraway's notion of "situated knowleges"?  she is 
certainly a postmodernist, but doesn't at all believe "therefore 
everything is relative."  i don't have it handy now, but if you're 
interested in pursuing this, i'd highly recommend her book _simians, 
cyborgs, and women: the reinvention of nature_.  she does address this 
issue, if not in an essay with "situated knowleges" in the title, then 
certainly in passim.  i don't think postmodernism and "everything's 
relative" need go hand in hand, but it certainly seems an oft and easily 
made argument advanced by "anti-postmodernists."

cheers,
markisha


>Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 09:55:15 -0500
>From: Ed Atkeson <edatkeson-AT-earthlink.net>
>To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>Subject: Re: Paradigms Lost
>Reply-To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>
><Postmodernism is no-fault, there is no up or down, <right or wrong,
>it's all relative. I can become a devout Catholic because I like the
>music. I can throw myself into a career not because I think I'm doing
>good, or contributing, or saving the world, but because I think it's
>simply cool. I can even devote my life to something that I think is
>funny or incongruous, isn't this the "ironic immersion" I hear about?
>  <  Out on a limb, appreciate any comments, Ed Atkeson
>
>ES >>>I hope Ed won't take offense at this, but, Judy, this is exactly
>the view of the postmodern that I am protesting.  From paradigms to the
>view that everything is relative is a relatively short step.... Science
>is just paradigms, i.e. social construction ...therefore everything is
>relative...we make it all up as we go along (well, yes and no)
>------------------
>Somehow, science seems different. It's that nailed-down "subset of
>learning," verifiable facts about our environment. It's hard isn't it?
>Won't we always be building on it, or like you say, stubbing our toe? 
>There's the anthropic principle, and the knowledge that we can't 
analyze
>our own system very well (we're running applications). So our 
perception
>is limited, looking forward to more objective breakthroughs, but
>"Science is just paradigms and social constructions?" Are important
>thinkers saying this?
>
>thanks, Ed Atkeson
>
>
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005