Yep, nothing happened between the enlightenment period of the 1700's in France to World War I in the 1930s and mentally everybody perspective stayed the same from 1700's to After World War II in the 1960's United States with Bob Dylan, and computers were being made. Yep Nothing happened at all.
@@internetazzhole7592 Appreciate the comments but the video is meant to be a brief introduction and overview. More comprehensive information can be found all over the internet and in textbooks on all 3 periods. Thank you for your comments.
@@mihail263 No, I "don't". Becoming a lecturer wasn't easy, believe me. That said, every lecturer uses some practical sources to prepare for a lecture.
Thank you! You cannot possibly know how refreshing it is to me to be able to watch the short video and get the information I want out of it.… Versus listening to a really, really long one. I don’t mind long videos, but there are just so many that I’m trying to keep up with. I like how it shed some light on how people are thinking these days.… And how inconsistently they are thinking!
To be fair, these are not actually easy concepts to understand, and this is the vaguest video in the subject that i've seen. And i've seen an unreasonable amount of studies on the subject.
Well, not really. Modernism rejects traditional grand narratives in favour of novel/progressive grand narratives, while post-modernism rejects all grand narratives in favour of meaninglessness.
@@greglogan7706postmodernism = take something that's not broken and pretend It's need to be fixed to feed into a narcissism formed from gibberish dressed up as profundity. AKA, hipsterism philosophy. Useless in any practical sense. Nothing but style over substance for a left wing version of, dare I say... a QAnon level of typical Dunning Kruger drivel.
Ah ! post structuralism at play here which is central to the development of post modernism. Vincent here is a signifies the great painter who shot himself to death but it also is signifying some dude who wants to keep his memory alive by correcting a mistake which is indeed a signfier to vincent as he mistakenly shot his ear instead of head
Have a presentation about modernity and postmodernity in about 5 minutes, and god knows I am stressed, but this has helped me so much with building up my presentation. So honestly, thank you. This whole thing is great.
I feel like the presentation of information was messy and confusing. There was the initial presentation of modernism which then jumped into postmodernism, back into modernism and then presented the section on postmodernism. I also think that the visuals provided disappeared too quickly, resembling a random flash rather than a supporting image to be looked at and understood. I think it would have been better to present the info first as modernism, post modernism, compare and contrast, and then conclusion.
thanks so much for all your efforts. the videos aren't long, but are thorough and clear and provide great examples to help students of every level understand and review concepts the knowledge of and familiarity with which is often assumed.
YESSSS You won 1st prize,, Post mod is The New Paganists and The New Nihilists,,, Modernism is bland atheism, POst mod will lead folks down a path of not just ignorance but anti knowledge, anti books, antiunderstanding = nihilism is the only way to live NOTHING REALLY MATTERS = deathdeathdeath Even death does not matter,
The tide is turning against Postmodernism though. And will be definitive once Trump pulls America out of the Pars Climate Accords which signify the West;s complete lack of science and reason with respect to the actual size, impact and causes of ongoing very modest climate change.
Thank you so much, this video was well structured and informative I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard these terms thrown around in the last two years and I’ve only just know begin to understand
Thanks this has joined up some of the dots! I hadn't fully appreciated liberalism's development from the enlightenment, and haven't realised it can be thought of as a modernist ideology, which it is so clear to me now that is it. I think both modernism and postmodernism have some truth to them. I agree that people are too diverse and prone to tragedy to reach a perfect state of harmony. I also believe the best way we can get as close to peace and prosperity as possible is to push on with the fundamental tenets of modernism and imo liberalism.
Philosophically, the postmodernism served as a "new dress" for the failed socialist ideas, which even french cafe-communists were able to justify. And THAT says a lot. It is just REPREHENSIBLE.
Please allow me to point out a mistake in this video. Theodore Van Gogh was the brother of the famous painter Vincent Van Gogh. Theo was not even a painter, he was an art dealer.
It is actually relatively easy to understand Enlightenment, Liberalism and Modernism. It is very difficult for me to understand Marxism and Postmodernism because my brain is wired for rationality. The same is true with Crypto and NFTs. Of course, I am just too stupid to see the glaring truth behind these concepts.
Very understable. Thank you. I don't think quantum mechanics was initially the reason why postmodernists critiqued modernist and enlightenment grand narratives. Lyotard did this but also later expressed he did not understand the hard sciences well enough. Quantum Mechanics does not undermine reason and logic at all and those who think it does are usually not physicist. It does not undermine the possibility of a deterministic world either because the probabilistic nature can be easily summarized in simple and elegant statistics that actually predicts a "very" deterministic macro world. Otherwise something like a computer would not work.
It's not that quantum mechanics negates determinism, but moreso that the concepts of mutually assured destruction, the heat death of the universe, and the concepts of black holes make the foundation of science more exposed to critique than it had been in decades. Instead of asking "what can we learn from science" we ask "how did we shape science to ask questions we wanted the answers to?" Of course I'm using postmodern in a cultural sense than a philosophical sense here.
...or a car, planet, human-being or universe. Quantum Mechanics was discovered due to the Scientific Enquiry and subsequent Method developed from Modernism. As R states, if you put in the effort to gain a fuller understanding of it, it reinforces the Modernism ideals at a macro level. If you look at it with a nihilistic approach (ie, TL;DR) you will end up deducing that it is all too hard, cherry pick the bits that work for whatever argument you can come up with (and too be fair, this is QUANTUM MECHANICS - you can bend this any way you want...) and come up with ANYTHING you want to determine.
So where do we stand now? Are we still in the midst of postmodernism or has it run its natural course? If so what kind of future are we moving towards? What are its guiding principles? Or is that up to us to decide?
Faraaz Hussain we are in an unstable state, primarily because we have enough knowledge of people seek it out that can make a lot of life seem pointless and like we had no choice in our lives to begin with practically. (By the time you wake up enough to notice, it’s like your just glad you were able to pull your head out of your ass , better late than never). like I think if we ever explained how the world and people worked to kids in school early on, like half the guys would just give up and and then women might still go forward because they tend to be more agreeable but none the less, Heck , even love is just a evolutionary aspect of the attatchment system that gets us mating and tasing young, but it’s gives no shits about the quality of your relationships and actually programs a crap ton of traps to fall into that , again, we don’t educate people on.
This was pretty fair. Reminiscent of what we were taught in college where the emphasis was on the art and literature, not the deeply destructive subjectivism, relativism and nihilism that's led to identity politics, distortion and rejection of science, the paradoxical positions of leftists, and the legal bonanza wrapped in "social justice".
One of the drivers behind modernist development in music was the notion that the arts always had to proceed towards greater and greater complexity, this was a natural assumption given that the trend in the C19 was towards greater complexity, from Beethoven to Wagner, for instance. The problem with this was that human beings don't necessarily find music & poetry to be more expressive the more complex they are. So it happened that two of the greatest modernist artists, TS Eliot and Alban Berg had mentors who were ideologically pure modernists (Pound and Schoenberg) but were themselves equally influenced by more traditional approaches to their art, and both of these artists produced work of much greater significance and general appeal than their mentor. Post modernists in music and poetry, for example, are often just people who realize that the audience they are writing for are not robots and who have attempted to recover the emotional sources of art, a good example being Philip Glass.
This was interesting, but I think that the Vietnam War, negative reaction to American imperial agendas in that war, and the fallout from that in that there was no longer a belief that America was fighting wars for idealistic reasons, but instead for imperialist reasons, actually was a major influence on postmodern literature, art, and thought.
Great video, although I'd be wary of labelling Heiddeger a Postmodernist, he, alongside Nietzsche, was a heavy influence on Postmodernist philosophers, but he himself was not a postmodernist.
Modern artists in the 19th were reacting against the teachings and restrictions of the Academy. Modern artists sought experimentation in expression, depiction, and medium. By the 1970s modern art had lead down a cul de sac of minimalism, conceptualism, performance ar t,etc. Late 1970s early 1980s post modernism saw a return to painting on canvas particularly figurative art, an end to the dominance of an Avant-garde relentless experiment.
Nicely said. Would you consider the so-called "performance art" being a result of the idea of cultural relativism that allowed pretentious narcissist to legitimize their work? I speak for example about about Marija Abramovic or Adrian Piper, which seem to just TEST the audience whether they recognize the bull-"product" at all, or will pretend, like the entitled art-critics, to be watching "actual art"? (=where the is none)
How I read it ( literally too) Postmodernism calls into question the powers of reason, asserts the importance of nonrational forces such as sensations and emotions, rejects humanism and the traditional philosophical notion of the human being as the central subject of knowledge, champions heterogeneity and difference. “The Postmodernists' tyranny wears people down by boredom and semi-literate prose.” -Christopher Hitchens “Hell hath no fury like a coolly received postmodernist.” -David Foster Wallace, Girl With Curious Hair
Not gonna lie, I totally get what the postmodernists are getting at, it’s like you study human nature in and out and it’s like this gigantic “WTF! Why didn’t anyone explain the game to me earlier” And that happens in soo many places. Not that it can’t have it’s good sides too, just that we really have to find our own meaning in it and figure it out.
modernism in architecture needs clarity. modernism in architecture was a revolution in building materials (steel and plate glass) that largely liberated the architect from the standards of the past. classical proportion was thrown out the window.
In this video we regularly see quotes claiming what postmodernism means or what it is. But if you are going to put a quotation as if to suggest a precise definition, how can you not indicate who actual said it? According to whom are those definitions accurate?
Wow, after searching Wikipedia and other sources, THIS (finally) cleared up this subject/these subjects! Here is my take on pretty much the whole kit and caboodle: I feel that there are valid points to all of the above; the trick would be to incorporate the best of the best of EACH philosophy. I probably won't be able to fit all of my thoughts on this subject in this comment, but I'll give you a few salient points/conclusions I came to after watching this video: Now, to my understanding: The Enlightenment came in response to new understanding of the physical universe and ways to improve the human condition using science, technology etc. as opposed to SOLELY putting it in "God's hands" etc. If one were religious but ALSO a proponent of The Enlightenment, it might be a matter of a "God helps those who help themselves" type thing: with new understanding of technology and science, one could indeed potentially improve the lot of man, etc. (yet still holding one’s religious beliefs at the same time). So, we have technology and science moving ahead at a pretty quick clip… Now, the error comes in (indeed, why I think certain men and women created the ideals/ideas of POSTmodernism) where science and technology, etc. is utilized to do greater harm than good (i.e., technology utilized for wars, etc.). I suppose that could extend to the invention of firearms (which in and of itself might be fine, but the MISUSE (the keyword here!) of which causes issues. In a nutshell, “Using technology for evil.” So, what I've gathered here is that postmodernism is not an answer or "counter" to the modern era/The Enlightenment etc. but a response to the MISUSE of said technology, philosophy, etc! Now, those who have used Modernism to dictate the lives of other men (in a robotic fashion) - to try to "unify" everyone (I feel) erred. ALONG WITH science and technology, etc. they tried to create a situation where there is a "cookie-cutter" treatment of men and women (to try to make everyone EQUAL for what they FEEL is/was the greater good). This, unfortunately, reduces one's individuality and free-thinking. Along with wars, etc., I think this objection to individualism helped create POSTMODERNISM. Now, personally, I like a portion of a COUPLE of the ideas of postmodernism and think they have validity, such as how I feel art should be something allowed to be expressed organically and in an individualistic manner (not to "conform" to some narrative). I also believe that people should have the right to have their own viewpoint (even if it counters a scientific reality) as long as it's not used to harm others. If one sees an elephant and chooses to call it a dog, that's fine. But if that elephant, being treated like a dog suffers or certainly if others suffer, then there is an issue, LOL! (well, sort of LOL). To wrap up this very short comment (not!) all the above came pouring out just after watching this video (again, thank you for an amazing explanation that no other source to date has been able to accomplish as well). My nutshell take is that the original ideas & ideals of religious philosophy has its place. It's been proven that individuals without a lasting faith of some sort (in a higher power, spirituality, etc.) tend not to do as well. There, indeed for some, may be a place for prayer. There's a place for religion (as long as it doesn’t lean toward creating counter-productive situations, etc.). I also believe there is definitely a place for science and technology and some of the ideas of the modern era/The Enlightenment, etc. Lastly, I certainly also believe that a FEW of the points of Postmodernism have a validity: each individual should be allowed to have their own viewpoints (no matter how much they may counter the scientific narrative, evidence, etc.) as well as how one should be free to create art of ANY kind, as long as it doesn't overtly harm others, which comes from the individual and not forced from a cookie-cutter narrative, etc. Lastly, from my observation, one should use science, technology etc. sanely and for the greater good. I’m sure there are some that won’t agree with everything, above. And that’s cool :-)
@@shawnmarcum8078 life is not that easy... Technology trigger an obsession one that can only found in cults look at climate change and how we are dealing with it instead of attacking the real problem which is conspmtion we invented unreal goal to make conspmtion safe even when old natural morality proved itself right (nothing comes without price)... In fact the forces Behind technological progress was to be part of cult and looking Civil at the same time
Thank you for the upload, I quite enjoy learning about these 'ism's' as I fancy myself as something of a thinker and really get annoyed when some punk ask's a great question with a term I have never heard before, and most of the time it ends in ism. Maybe you could point me in the direction of your favourite summary on neo-classicialism?
very good content, but the video editing could have some improvements, everything fades to black too soon and stays in the black too long, this is disorienting when the narration is on the subject but the screen is black.
Post Modernism begun with the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. At this point all certainties and universal ideologies became meaningless in the presence of total annihilation. Truth became relative and reality, as a Modern concept, became ambiguous and transitory. There was no end point, everything was in flux - until the ‘end of History’ was erroneously declared at the end of the 20 Century. Post Modernism can be best described as ‘what’s the point?’. That’s not a nihilistic summary but a positive one - is everything valid? Unfortunately in some Western countries, Post Modernism has been superseded by solipsism, nostalgia and deceitful reactionary forces. Which is also what happened to Modernism.
I think this is a rather confused analysis. On one hand it describes both Modernism and Postmodernism as responses to The Enlightenment and then goes on to basically identify Modernism with The Enlightenment. I don’t this either Schoenberg or John Cage we’re trying to create “timeless pieces” that “advanced human progress with rationality”. People who responded negatively to modernist works of art, preferring Beethoven for example, weren’t “anti-Enlightment” or against rationality and progress. Something very different is at play. I came here as part of a larger quest to get greater clarity and precision about the distinction between Modernism and Postmodernism but this can’t be found by simply equating Modernism and Enlightenment.
An "ideal" of the enlightenment was not a belief in "certainty". It was the opposite, that doubt and scepticism were the path to truth. You are pissing people off already.
This was great. I agree whole heartedly with post modernity in it tells us that there is no objective truth. Or the objective truths that are cannot be correct because they aren’t. Post modernity argues for truths to only be discoverable once we go past the age of reason and into an age of enhanced spirituality
But there is. The distinction to make us in the objective and the subjective. In the exact sciences we have absolute truth, in ethics and certain perspectives we don't.
@@dekippiesip yeah but even in the exact truths for US, other organisms use that truth in a different way. It doesn't mean gravity isn't a fundamental truth for all organisms that use it to live, but they use it to live in different ways. But uhhh yeah for humans, gravity is an absolute truth, and I'm assuming for all animals on earth too.
Postmodernism means after - modernism. Not "after modern". That's what confuses a lot of students. The adjective modern is not the cultural concept of Modernism.
The Enlightenment is not just a period of history but a period of history based on an actual enlightenment and that enlightenment is 'I am here and you are there' and with it, peace of mind and spiritual absolution entirely rooted in concrete scientific fact i.e., perspective geometry.
A fascinating aspect of this, is that it identifies perspective geometry as a medium of factual knowledge and in fact the world is still based around this truth, for example civil engineering, CGI, GPS etc.
The Unifying Theory of Art scientifically proves that atheism has no philosophical basis whilst also proving philosophical doubt and this is done via applying the rules of perspective geometry to the visual field to which all artworks are subject, including all Modernist and Post-Modernist art.
Since TH-cam removed the dislike count I have to make a post about it. It’s not a bad video as far as content. But what’s wrong with the narrator voice? It’s is sometimes difficult to listen to because it was (sounds like) put through some sort of filter or a voice modifier, so it sounds almost it is disembodied somehow. Like someone spoke with their nose closed, maybe? It is also difficult to tell from the tone of some sentences whether something is accentuated, a statement, or a question. I just get confused in multiple spots by it.
learned a lot, I think i align with the modernist world view because of its ideal on Universalism. Universalism from a vedic perspective that is. And I'm an optimist regarding humanity
On truth, postmo is actually seeing that there is no truth at all. The subjective truth (still truth nonetheless) is already proposed by, for example, Max Weber and Alfred Schultz. Therefore, consequently, postmo has nothing to offer to the scientific endeavor since methodology is hoped to reveal (some) truth about a phenomenon.
post modernism is not to be confused with relativism. Overcoming monocausalism is not relativism but pluralism. Copernicus wasnt a relativis because he discovered that there are indeed more centers of gravity than the earth and that the earth is not even the most potent of them
I’m confused by the idea that postmodernism “doesn’t offer any real solutions”. There are plenty of people who reject the primacy of human reason for other central values.
dont understand the part where it says postmodernist like the anti-war hippy culture that believes in no structure would criticize concepts such as freedom and societal progress. isn't that contradicting?
As what i have understand post modernist oppose to the notion of universallity, same to the movement of existentialist. Is postmodernism link to existentialism?
Yep, that was totally incorrect. QM does not give up determinism under either the many-worlds interpretation or non-local realist theories like de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory. OP doesn't know what they're talking about in that regard.
I think what OP meant was that science doesn't give an existential answer to life and death which humans desperately need. Science asks more questions than it gives answers. That's why I think people gave up on science trying to give a model of the world and instead turned to relativist meanings.
i would explain it this way.. a better view of humanity would be to assume man was originally at the control and whim of higher powers and natural forces until mankind became more learned and was able to start to control things himself.. of which modernists in their ego and short shortsightedness credited themselves alone and thus isolated themself within their new limited enlightenment away from the original natural enlightenment they took for granted.
ayn rand is not an example. just a intolaront woman who insult everyone for been not like her (even milton friedman for god sake was an idiot in her eyes )
@@thatboii3094 well I understand "modernist" as someone who says their opinions about how the world should run are objective facts. Someone who believes that its possible for there to be a perfect "right way" to do something that is an objective discovery. And not just some asshats opinion that is intolerant of everyone not being like them. Ayn rand is like take that idea to a malignant level- essentially she really bought into the princapals of modernism thinking and went way further than anyone else did.
Why, at 1:00 , when you're speaking of the Enlightenment, are you showing us a painting of a medieval university? In fact the painting that you had before it isn't Enlightenment, either. It's a Victorian painting about the Renaissance. Why are you disrespecting art history and intellectual history this way? Why should I bother watching the rest of your video if, right out of the gate, you get something this simple so completely wrong?
But isn´t there are difference between modernist writers and Modernity? I don´t think that all modernisitc writers with their self reflective style would agree that humanity advances through rationality and science. Consider Freud´s ideas of his psychoanalysis, that the ego is bascially not the master of its own mind. This ideas were very prevalent by "modernist" writer such as Virginia Woolf , who tend to question the capactity of the mind. Thus, Modernity is more a broad, very fuzzy timeframe. But i think it does not do justice to all of its writer at that time who would not agree with the tradition of Enlightement. In that regard, the divison between modernism and Postmodernism seems to questionable as well. Bascially, Posthumanism needs this narrow defintion of Modernism in order to demarcate itself from a created construct. Same logic also applies for Humanism vs Posthumanism.
Still not clear on post modernism, except it holds the view there is no certainty or ultimate truth, so it leaves mankind floundering when it cannot accept there are ultimate truths and realities.What it does is set ourselves up for worst case scenerios which we like to think we are prepared for, just like this pandemic, it hints at just how vulnerable and fragile we humans are, and how potentially things can change in the blink of an eye.
The pandemic was a plandemic, designed and executed in a lab, with political goals. It is perfectly manageable, but similar to the flu for the weak...and curable, though the best strategies are being suppressed. Take off your mask, unless you are symptomatic, immune compromised or caring for the sick. Take it off when outdoors, and live an outdoor lifestyle, and go to bed early. Get sunlight for Vitamin D, enjoy a diet rich in selenium, zinc, vitamin C. If you are in a vulnerable group, consider preventive action to make sure the virus won’t have a chance to replicate. If you have symptoms of CV19, take anti-viral substances like MMS, CDS, HCQ, essential oils of oregano, oregano+thyme at the FIRST sign of symptoms. Learn which you should not take with/near the others, or stick with one. If you miss that window and get sick, CDS has been shown to facilitate oxygenation, key for low O2 saturation. Follow/evaluate upcoming treatments as they come out. Don’t take the vaccines, they are designed to mess with genetic programming - let someone else be the guinea pig. (Just think about those new polio vaccinations that gave polio to all those poor children in Africa recently). The tests are unreliable, fyi. We need to stop this lockdown nonsense and deal with it. We have the means to become resistant to getting very ill from this virus. We have the means to cut the infection short when our immune system‘s are not quite up to the job. We have the means to cut short a nasty case as well. Best strategy: build up your immune system, Have on hand the natural remedies that other people have been using for years for the nastiest bugs out there. If you can, have some HCQ on hand, which is available over the counter in most of the world (start nagging the United States to do the same). We don’t need to struggle with eternal truths at this point.… Although we probably should get back to our creator instead of trying to reinvent a very inferior wheel to run society.
No it just tells us that there is no objective truth. Or the objective truths that are cannot be correct because they aren’t. Post modernity argues for truths to only be discoverable once we go past the age of reason and into an age of enhanced spirituality
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
We appreciate your feedback. Let us know what you think and what subjects you're looking to have explained in understandable language.
University Quick Course modernism and post-modernism stems from CULTURAL MARXISM
Which is to destroy society.
Yep, nothing happened between the enlightenment period of the 1700's in France to World War I in the 1930s and mentally everybody perspective stayed the same from 1700's to After World War II in the 1960's United States with Bob Dylan, and computers were being made. Yep Nothing happened at all.
@@internetazzhole7592 Appreciate the comments but the video is meant to be a brief introduction and overview. More comprehensive information can be found all over the internet and in textbooks on all 3 periods. Thank you for your comments.
Can you please explain cartesian dualism
In other words, Post Modernism is Multiculturalism!
This is the most concise discussion of this topic that I have yet come across. Great job!!
Felt extremely vague about the two before this video, thank you so very much!
I'm a lecturer of sociology at a university and I benefit immensely from your videos. Thank you very much.
Don't you supposed to know very well all of this? How did you become a lecturer?
@@mihail263 No, I "don't". Becoming a lecturer wasn't easy, believe me. That said, every lecturer uses some practical sources to prepare for a lecture.
Postmodernism is pure evil
Thank you! You cannot possibly know how refreshing it is to me to be able to watch the short video and get the information I want out of it.… Versus listening to a really, really long one. I don’t mind long videos, but there are just so many that I’m trying to keep up with. I like how it shed some light on how people are thinking these days.… And how inconsistently they are thinking!
In a multitude of words, selfish & hateful ego hides itself.
@@johngraham1274 - Projection?
To be fair, these are not actually easy concepts to understand, and this is the vaguest video in the subject that i've seen. And i've seen an unreasonable amount of studies on the subject.
@@treeross - I'm not surprised. I find this happens in many areas of study. The deeper we go, the less we know, it seems.
@@bitrudder3792not really
Modernism: we reject traditional grand narratives. Postmodernism: we reject traditional grand narratives, and we mean it this time. 😁
Well, not really. Modernism rejects traditional grand narratives in favour of novel/progressive grand narratives, while post-modernism rejects all grand narratives in favour of meaninglessness.
@@TheGeneralGrievous19 fair enough.
@@TheGeneralGrievous19
Post-modernism = an even grander narrative and much more Progressive - but with color this time...
@@greglogan7706postmodernism = take something that's not broken and pretend It's need to be fixed to feed into a narcissism formed from gibberish dressed up as profundity.
AKA, hipsterism philosophy.
Useless in any practical sense. Nothing but style over substance for a left wing version of, dare I say... a QAnon level of typical Dunning Kruger drivel.
😊
Théodore van Gogh? He painted a little I believe, but it was his brother Vincent who was the famous one, right? Oh well.
Thanks, Vincent. Appreciate the correction. Yes, I meant Vincent
You're welcome, glad you didn't mind my comment!
is that a fedora i see m’fellow friend
@@co8ku Yes indeed! It's my dad's, but I think it suits me all the same.
Ah ! post structuralism at play here which is central to the development of post modernism. Vincent here is a signifies the great painter who shot himself to death but it also is signifying some dude who wants to keep his memory alive by correcting a mistake which is indeed a signfier to vincent as he mistakenly shot his ear instead of head
I hope this channel prospers.
Thank you so much! Really needed this. A concise and simple explanation. 💛 Hope this channel grows.
Have a presentation about modernity and postmodernity in about 5 minutes, and god knows I am stressed, but this has helped me so much with building up my presentation. So honestly, thank you. This whole thing is great.
Thank you, this definitely helped me grasp the concepts more. They are very difficult ones to grasp.
I have to present a seminar on this topic tomorrow! Thanks for helping with such a wonderful video.
Thank you so much for this video. Concise and to the point. Just enough information for me to begin to grasp this concept without overwhelming me.
I feel like the presentation of information was messy and confusing. There was the initial presentation of modernism which then jumped into postmodernism, back into modernism and then presented the section on postmodernism. I also think that the visuals provided disappeared too quickly, resembling a random flash rather than a supporting image to be looked at and understood. I think it would have been better to present the info first as modernism, post modernism, compare and contrast, and then conclusion.
Found the postmodernist in the thread! ^^^
Yes, interesting information but poorly organized.
Well this is the topic where you need to focus. It's not a video on Kardashian's biography.
I still don't understand & that was why I came to this video. Glad to see I am not the only one.
@@mihail263 bruh evidently they did pay attention the video just is poorly organized
thanks so much for all your efforts. the videos aren't long, but are thorough and clear and provide great examples to help students of every level understand and review concepts the knowledge of and familiarity with which is often assumed.
Postmodernism is leading people into a nihilistic world view that will cause destruction like never before.
Exactly Post-Modernistic "art" is rubbish.
It is more Colectivist Meaningless Propaganda than true Art.
YESSSS You won 1st prize,, Post mod is The New Paganists and The New Nihilists,,, Modernism is bland atheism, POst mod will lead folks down a path of not just ignorance but anti knowledge, anti books, antiunderstanding = nihilism is the only way to live NOTHING REALLY MATTERS = deathdeathdeath Even death does not matter,
Absolutely.
The New Nihilism and The New Paganisms, Both fastest growiung religions.
The tide is turning against Postmodernism though. And will be definitive once Trump pulls America out of the Pars Climate Accords which signify the West;s complete lack of science and reason with respect to the actual size, impact and causes of ongoing very modest climate change.
Thankyou, it really helped me to understand the core meaning of both modernism and post modernism
Watched a couple of videos of this topic and this was very clear and easy to understand!
Bring back modernism
Excellent. A very well done summary with practical explanations and examples. Unlike other readings on this subject.
Can you start making videos again? These are very helpful!
Thank you so much, this video was well structured and informative I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard these terms thrown around in the last two years and I’ve only just know begin to understand
Great explanation and clearly explained differences.
Thanks this has joined up some of the dots! I hadn't fully appreciated liberalism's development from the enlightenment, and haven't realised it can be thought of as a modernist ideology, which it is so clear to me now that is it.
I think both modernism and postmodernism have some truth to them. I agree that people are too diverse and prone to tragedy to reach a perfect state of harmony. I also believe the best way we can get as close to peace and prosperity as possible is to push on with the fundamental tenets of modernism and imo liberalism.
Philosophically, the postmodernism served as a "new dress" for the failed socialist ideas, which even french cafe-communists were able to justify. And THAT says a lot.
It is just REPREHENSIBLE.
Please allow me to point out a mistake in this video. Theodore Van Gogh was the brother of the famous painter Vincent Van Gogh. Theo was not even a painter, he was an art dealer.
Thank you, Desiree. Appreciate it.
I think this is the only video I've seen that actually manages to explain these two in a way that's understandable.
It is actually relatively easy to understand Enlightenment, Liberalism and Modernism. It is very difficult for me to understand Marxism and Postmodernism because my brain is wired for rationality. The same is true with Crypto and NFTs. Of course, I am just too stupid to see the glaring truth behind these concepts.
Very understable. Thank you. I don't think quantum mechanics was initially the reason why postmodernists critiqued modernist and enlightenment grand narratives. Lyotard did this but also later expressed he did not understand the hard sciences well enough. Quantum Mechanics does not undermine reason and logic at all and those who think it does are usually not physicist. It does not undermine the possibility of a deterministic world either because the probabilistic nature can be easily summarized in simple and elegant statistics that actually predicts a "very" deterministic macro world. Otherwise something like a computer would not work.
It's not that quantum mechanics negates determinism, but moreso that the concepts of mutually assured destruction, the heat death of the universe, and the concepts of black holes make the foundation of science more exposed to critique than it had been in decades. Instead of asking "what can we learn from science" we ask "how did we shape science to ask questions we wanted the answers to?"
Of course I'm using postmodern in a cultural sense than a philosophical sense here.
...or a car, planet, human-being or universe. Quantum Mechanics was discovered due to the Scientific Enquiry and subsequent Method developed from Modernism. As R states, if you put in the effort to gain a fuller understanding of it, it reinforces the Modernism ideals at a macro level. If you look at it with a nihilistic approach (ie, TL;DR) you will end up deducing that it is all too hard, cherry pick the bits that work for whatever argument you can come up with (and too be fair, this is QUANTUM MECHANICS - you can bend this any way you want...) and come up with ANYTHING you want to determine.
Who doesn't know it's Vincent van Gogh, not Theodore?
So where do we stand now? Are we still in the midst of postmodernism or has it run its natural course? If so what kind of future are we moving towards? What are its guiding principles? Or is that up to us to decide?
We are now in age of post-truth. It is beyond postmodernism, a subsect of post-postmodernism
Faraaz Hussain we are in an unstable state, primarily because we have enough knowledge of people seek it out that can make a lot of life seem pointless and like we had no choice in our lives to begin with practically. (By the time you wake up enough to notice, it’s like your just glad you were able to pull your head out of your ass , better late than never). like I think if we ever explained how the world and people worked to kids in school early on, like half the guys would just give up and and then women might still go forward because they tend to be more agreeable but none the less, Heck , even love is just a evolutionary aspect of the attatchment system that gets us mating and tasing young, but it’s gives no shits about the quality of your relationships and actually programs a crap ton of traps to fall into that , again, we don’t educate people on.
This was pretty fair. Reminiscent of what we were taught in college where the emphasis was on the art and literature, not the deeply destructive subjectivism, relativism and nihilism that's led to identity politics, distortion and rejection of science, the paradoxical positions of leftists, and the legal bonanza wrapped in "social justice".
I had no idea about these topics, but this video cleared all my doubts
One of the drivers behind modernist development in music was the notion that the arts always had to proceed towards greater and greater complexity, this was a natural assumption given that the trend in the C19 was towards greater complexity, from Beethoven to Wagner, for instance. The problem with this was that human beings don't necessarily find music & poetry to be more expressive the more complex they are. So it happened that two of the greatest modernist artists, TS Eliot and Alban Berg had mentors who were ideologically pure modernists (Pound and Schoenberg) but were themselves equally influenced by more traditional approaches to their art, and both of these artists produced work of much greater significance and general appeal than their mentor. Post modernists in music and poetry, for example, are often just people who realize that the audience they are writing for are not robots and who have attempted to recover the emotional sources of art, a good example being Philip Glass.
I can not understand why music is an important factor in human society
This was interesting, but I think that the Vietnam War, negative reaction to American imperial agendas in that war, and the fallout from that in that there was no longer a belief that America was fighting wars for idealistic reasons, but instead for imperialist reasons, actually was a major influence on postmodern literature, art, and thought.
this is great channel. sadly in today's youtube community video with actual content doesn't get much attention.
Great video, although I'd be wary of labelling Heiddeger a Postmodernist, he, alongside Nietzsche, was a heavy influence on Postmodernist philosophers, but he himself was not a postmodernist.
Modern artists in the 19th were reacting against the teachings and restrictions of the Academy. Modern artists sought experimentation in expression, depiction, and medium. By the 1970s modern art had lead down a cul de sac of minimalism, conceptualism, performance ar t,etc. Late 1970s early 1980s post modernism saw a return to painting on canvas particularly figurative art, an end to the dominance of an Avant-garde relentless experiment.
Nicely said.
Would you consider the so-called "performance art" being a result of the idea of cultural relativism that allowed pretentious narcissist to legitimize their work? I speak for example about about Marija Abramovic or Adrian Piper, which seem to just TEST the audience whether they recognize the bull-"product" at all, or will pretend, like the entitled art-critics, to be watching "actual art"? (=where the is none)
How I read it ( literally too) Postmodernism calls into question the powers of reason, asserts the importance of nonrational forces such as sensations and emotions, rejects humanism and the traditional philosophical notion of the human being as the central subject of knowledge, champions heterogeneity and difference.
“The Postmodernists' tyranny wears people down by boredom and semi-literate prose.”
-Christopher Hitchens
“Hell hath no fury like a coolly received postmodernist.”
-David Foster Wallace, Girl With Curious Hair
The last quote is pure gold.
you did an amazing job! great video, way to cover costs of history in 9min!
Not gonna lie, I totally get what the postmodernists are getting at, it’s like you study human nature in and out and it’s like this gigantic “WTF! Why didn’t anyone explain the game to me earlier” And that happens in soo many places. Not that it can’t have it’s good sides too, just that we really have to find our own meaning in it and figure it out.
modernism in architecture needs clarity. modernism in architecture was a revolution in building materials (steel and plate glass) that largely liberated the architect from the standards of the past. classical proportion was thrown out the window.
In this video we regularly see quotes claiming what postmodernism means or what it is. But if you are going to put a quotation as if to suggest a precise definition, how can you not indicate who actual said it? According to whom are those definitions accurate?
thank you for the video, short n sweet video with the simplest way of explanation.
Wow, after searching Wikipedia and other sources, THIS (finally) cleared up this subject/these subjects!
Here is my take on pretty much the whole kit and caboodle:
I feel that there are valid points to all of the above; the trick would be to incorporate the best of the best of EACH philosophy.
I probably won't be able to fit all of my thoughts on this subject in this comment, but I'll give you a few salient points/conclusions I came to after watching this video:
Now, to my understanding: The Enlightenment came in response to new understanding of the physical universe and ways to improve the human condition using science, technology etc. as opposed to SOLELY putting it in "God's hands" etc.
If one were religious but ALSO a proponent of The Enlightenment, it might be a matter of a "God helps those who help themselves" type thing: with new understanding of technology and science, one could indeed potentially improve the lot of man, etc. (yet still holding one’s religious beliefs at the same time).
So, we have technology and science moving ahead at a pretty quick clip…
Now, the error comes in (indeed, why I think certain men and women created the ideals/ideas of POSTmodernism) where science and technology, etc. is utilized to do greater harm than good (i.e., technology utilized for wars, etc.).
I suppose that could extend to the invention of firearms (which in and of itself might be fine, but the MISUSE (the keyword here!) of which causes issues. In a nutshell, “Using technology for evil.”
So, what I've gathered here is that postmodernism is not an answer or "counter" to the modern era/The Enlightenment etc. but a response to the MISUSE of said technology, philosophy, etc!
Now, those who have used Modernism to dictate the lives of other men (in a robotic fashion) - to try to "unify" everyone (I feel) erred.
ALONG WITH science and technology, etc. they tried to create a situation where there is a "cookie-cutter" treatment of men and women (to try to make everyone EQUAL for what they FEEL is/was the greater good). This, unfortunately, reduces one's individuality and free-thinking. Along with wars, etc., I think this objection to individualism helped create POSTMODERNISM.
Now, personally, I like a portion of a COUPLE of the ideas of postmodernism and think they have validity, such as how I feel art should be something allowed to be expressed organically and in an individualistic manner (not to "conform" to some narrative).
I also believe that people should have the right to have their own viewpoint (even if it counters a scientific reality) as long as it's not used to harm others.
If one sees an elephant and chooses to call it a dog, that's fine. But if that elephant, being treated like a dog suffers or certainly if others suffer, then there is an issue, LOL! (well, sort of LOL).
To wrap up this very short comment (not!) all the above came pouring out just after watching this video (again, thank you for an amazing explanation that no other source to date has been able to accomplish as well).
My nutshell take is that the original ideas & ideals of religious philosophy has its place.
It's been proven that individuals without a lasting faith of some sort (in a higher power, spirituality, etc.) tend not to do as well. There, indeed for some, may be a place for prayer. There's a place for religion (as long as it doesn’t lean toward creating counter-productive situations, etc.).
I also believe there is definitely a place for science and technology and some of the ideas of the modern era/The Enlightenment, etc.
Lastly, I certainly also believe that a FEW of the points of Postmodernism have a validity: each individual should be allowed to have their own viewpoints (no matter how much they may counter the scientific narrative, evidence, etc.) as well as how one should be free to create art of ANY kind, as long as it doesn't overtly harm others, which comes from the individual and not forced from a cookie-cutter narrative, etc.
Lastly, from my observation, one should use science, technology etc. sanely and for the greater good.
I’m sure there are some that won’t agree with everything, above. And that’s cool :-)
as long as science is made by kids who never grow out of their room of toys and scifi comic .it will be a tool for evil
This post is hegellian dialetic in a way. Use the good of the Enlightenment with the good of modernism, with the good of post-modernism.
@@shawnmarcum8078 life is not that easy... Technology trigger an obsession one that can only found in cults look at climate change and how we are dealing with it instead of attacking the real problem which is conspmtion we invented unreal goal to make conspmtion safe even when old natural morality proved itself right (nothing comes without price)... In fact the forces Behind technological progress was to be part of cult and looking Civil at the same time
Thank you for the upload, I quite enjoy learning about these 'ism's' as I fancy myself as something of a thinker and really get annoyed when some punk ask's a great question with a term I have never heard before, and most of the time it ends in ism. Maybe you could point me in the direction of your favourite summary on neo-classicialism?
I'm from India and understood very well your lecture thanks u..
Thankyou, really needed this
very good content, but the video editing could have some improvements, everything fades to black too soon and stays in the black too long, this is disorienting when the narration is on the subject but the screen is black.
I can finally understand it now, thank you for this no bullshit-straight to the point video!
What do you mean there was so much fluff in this shitty video I almost suffocated from it
Thank you. That was a great video.
Thank you so much, this is an incredible thing you do here.
Post Modernism begun with the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. At this point all certainties and universal ideologies became meaningless in the presence of total annihilation. Truth became relative and reality, as a Modern concept, became ambiguous and transitory. There was no end point, everything was in flux - until the ‘end of History’ was erroneously declared at the end of the 20 Century. Post Modernism can be best described as ‘what’s the point?’. That’s not a nihilistic summary but a positive one - is everything valid? Unfortunately in some Western countries, Post Modernism has been superseded by solipsism, nostalgia and deceitful reactionary forces. Which is also what happened to Modernism.
Don't say postmodernism offers no solution. Postmodern architecture has produced lots of solutions! It's everywhere!
Sorry but other than Vincent being the famous van Gogh, Heidegger was not a post-modernist...
I think this is a rather confused analysis. On one hand it describes both Modernism and Postmodernism as responses to The Enlightenment and then goes on to basically identify Modernism with The Enlightenment. I don’t this either Schoenberg or John Cage we’re trying to create “timeless pieces” that “advanced human progress with rationality”. People who responded negatively to modernist works of art, preferring Beethoven for example, weren’t “anti-Enlightment” or against rationality and progress. Something very different is at play. I came here as part of a larger quest to get greater clarity and precision about the distinction between Modernism and Postmodernism but this can’t be found by simply equating Modernism and Enlightenment.
Great course really helps get an overview!!
An "ideal" of the enlightenment was not a belief in "certainty". It was the opposite, that doubt and scepticism were the path to truth. You are pissing people off already.
Sir we wish keep on doing videos like this
This was great. I agree whole heartedly with post modernity in it tells us that there is no objective truth. Or the objective truths that are cannot be correct because they aren’t. Post modernity argues for truths to only be discoverable once we go past the age of reason and into an age of enhanced spirituality
But there is. The distinction to make us in the objective and the subjective. In the exact sciences we have absolute truth, in ethics and certain perspectives we don't.
@@dekippiesip yeah but even in the exact truths for US, other organisms use that truth in a different way. It doesn't mean gravity isn't a fundamental truth for all organisms that use it to live, but they use it to live in different ways. But uhhh yeah for humans, gravity is an absolute truth, and I'm assuming for all animals on earth too.
Thank you very much, have subbed & liked .
Postmodernism means after - modernism. Not "after modern". That's what confuses a lot of students. The adjective modern is not the cultural concept of Modernism.
Theodore van Gogh?
Actually Mozart`s music still sells as much as or more than most.
Debatable... Source?
Thanks for clearing that up.
Glad it helped.
The Enlightenment is not just a period of history but a period of history based on an actual enlightenment and that enlightenment is 'I am here and you are there' and with it, peace of mind and spiritual absolution entirely rooted in concrete scientific fact i.e., perspective geometry.
A fascinating aspect of this, is that it identifies perspective geometry as a medium of factual knowledge and in fact the world is still based around this truth, for example civil engineering, CGI, GPS etc.
The Unifying Theory of Art scientifically proves that atheism has no philosophical basis whilst also proving philosophical doubt and this is done via applying the rules of perspective geometry to the visual field to which all artworks are subject, including all Modernist and Post-Modernist art.
Wow my subject English Literature....thanks a Million💌💌🙌🙌👌👌🙏🙏💌💌
I'm afraid that you got a video in your ads, my friend
Since TH-cam removed the dislike count I have to make a post about it. It’s not a bad video as far as content. But what’s wrong with the narrator voice? It’s is sometimes difficult to listen to because it was (sounds like) put through some sort of filter or a voice modifier, so it sounds almost it is disembodied somehow. Like someone spoke with their nose closed, maybe? It is also difficult to tell from the tone of some sentences whether something is accentuated, a statement, or a question. I just get confused in multiple spots by it.
I think it was 'Vinnie' who did all those crazy paintings...
learned a lot, I think i align with the modernist world view because of its ideal on Universalism. Universalism from a vedic perspective that is. And I'm an optimist regarding humanity
great video!
Thanks, this is amazing!
Vincent not Theodore. Vincent was the painter.
this video is completely useful
This is a mix of obvious truths and complete falsehoods and the final recap of what Modernism and Postmodernism are is the best proof of it.
Very nice
On truth, postmo is actually seeing that there is no truth at all. The subjective truth (still truth nonetheless) is already proposed by, for example, Max Weber and Alfred Schultz. Therefore, consequently, postmo has nothing to offer to the scientific endeavor since methodology is hoped to reveal (some) truth about a phenomenon.
Thanks alot, very useful :)
post modernism is not to be confused with relativism. Overcoming monocausalism is not relativism but pluralism. Copernicus wasnt a relativis because he discovered that there are indeed more centers of gravity than the earth and that the earth is not even the most potent of them
I’m confused by the idea that postmodernism “doesn’t offer any real solutions”. There are plenty of people who reject the primacy of human reason for other central values.
dont understand the part where it says postmodernist like the anti-war hippy culture that believes in no structure would criticize concepts such as freedom and societal progress. isn't that contradicting?
I’m a proponent of new modernity.
Yeah, postmodernism and nihilism get pretty tiring.
@@rockycomet4587
Bunny Lebowski: Uli doesn't care about anything. He's a Nihilist.
The Dude: Ah, that must be exhausting.
Metamodernity combines the useful lessons of both
Thank you!
how is realism an impediment to social improvement?
As what i have understand post modernist oppose to the notion of universallity, same to the movement of existentialist. Is postmodernism link to existentialism?
yes, check out derrida
Thanks!
Thanks mate.
Thank You !!🙏
You completely missed significance and influence of invention of photography.
Bro please elaborate.
@@segasys1339Less need for realistic painting with a narrative.
Empirical truth is essential.
Any time someone brings quantum physics into philosophy it makes them kind of suspect
Yep, that was totally incorrect. QM does not give up determinism under either the many-worlds interpretation or non-local realist theories like de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory. OP doesn't know what they're talking about in that regard.
I think what OP meant was that science doesn't give an existential answer to life and death which humans desperately need. Science asks more questions than it gives answers. That's why I think people gave up on science trying to give a model of the world and instead turned to relativist meanings.
@@mehdiSupp agreed. I interpreted it the same way.
@@kateaye3506 very postmodernist of you
i would explain it this way.. a better view of humanity would be to assume man was originally at the control and whim of higher powers and natural forces until mankind became more learned and was able to start to control things himself.. of which modernists in their ego and short shortsightedness credited themselves alone and thus isolated themself within their new limited enlightenment away from the original natural enlightenment they took for granted.
Ohhhh. Ayn rand is a modernist. That helps so much.
ayn rand is not an example. just a intolaront woman who insult everyone for been not like her (even milton friedman for god sake was an idiot in her eyes )
@@thatboii3094 well I understand "modernist" as someone who says their opinions about how the world should run are objective facts.
Someone who believes that its possible for there to be a perfect "right way" to do something that is an objective discovery. And not just some asshats opinion that is intolerant of everyone not being like them.
Ayn rand is like take that idea to a malignant level- essentially she really bought into the princapals of modernism thinking and went way further than anyone else did.
@@Skinnymarks i think you are right
I find this analysis really lacking with regard to the postmodern movement, its motivations and its conclusions. There is so much more to it.
thank you
This lecturer sounds like the voice from 'Kissing With Confidence'.
i trust post modern more
So you should. Post-Modernism is bulls**t.
Why, at 1:00 , when you're speaking of the Enlightenment, are you showing us a painting of a medieval university? In fact the painting that you had before it isn't Enlightenment, either. It's a Victorian painting about the Renaissance. Why are you disrespecting art history and intellectual history this way? Why should I bother watching the rest of your video if, right out of the gate, you get something this simple so completely wrong?
mannnn thanks!!
But isn´t there are difference between modernist writers and Modernity? I don´t think that all modernisitc writers with their self reflective style would agree that humanity advances through rationality and science. Consider Freud´s ideas of his psychoanalysis, that the ego is bascially not the master of its own mind. This ideas were very prevalent by "modernist" writer such as Virginia Woolf , who tend to question the capactity of the mind. Thus, Modernity is more a broad, very fuzzy timeframe. But i think it does not do justice to all of its writer at that time who would not agree with the tradition of Enlightement. In that regard, the divison between modernism and Postmodernism seems to questionable as well. Bascially, Posthumanism needs this narrow defintion of Modernism in order to demarcate itself from a created construct. Same logic also applies for Humanism vs Posthumanism.
Still not clear on post modernism, except it holds the view there is no certainty or ultimate truth, so it leaves mankind floundering when it cannot accept there are ultimate truths and realities.What it does is set ourselves up for worst case scenerios which we like to think we are prepared for, just like this pandemic, it hints at just how vulnerable and fragile we humans are, and how potentially things can change in the blink of an eye.
Modernism can tell us how to fight a pandemic. Postmodernism allows us to ask why Americans were more worried about Ebola than Covid.
The pandemic was a plandemic, designed and executed in a lab, with political goals. It is perfectly manageable, but similar to the flu for the weak...and curable, though the best strategies are being suppressed. Take off your mask, unless you are symptomatic, immune compromised or caring for the sick. Take it off when outdoors, and live an outdoor lifestyle, and go to bed early. Get sunlight for Vitamin D, enjoy a diet rich in selenium, zinc, vitamin C. If you are in a vulnerable group, consider preventive action to make sure the virus won’t have a chance to replicate. If you have symptoms of CV19, take anti-viral substances like MMS, CDS, HCQ, essential oils of oregano, oregano+thyme at the FIRST sign of symptoms. Learn which you should not take with/near the others, or stick with one. If you miss that window and get sick, CDS has been shown to facilitate oxygenation, key for low O2 saturation. Follow/evaluate upcoming treatments as they come out. Don’t take the vaccines, they are designed to mess with genetic programming - let someone else be the guinea pig. (Just think about those new polio vaccinations that gave polio to all those poor children in Africa recently). The tests are unreliable, fyi. We need to stop this lockdown nonsense and deal with it. We have the means to become resistant to getting very ill from this virus. We have the means to cut the infection short when our immune system‘s are not quite up to the job. We have the means to cut short a nasty case as well. Best strategy: build up your immune system, Have on hand the natural remedies that other people have been using for years for the nastiest bugs out there. If you can, have some HCQ on hand, which is available over the counter in most of the world (start nagging the United States to do the same). We don’t need to struggle with eternal truths at this point.… Although we probably should get back to our creator instead of trying to reinvent a very inferior wheel to run society.
No it just tells us that there is no objective truth. Or the objective truths that are cannot be correct because they aren’t. Post modernity argues for truths to only be discoverable once we go past the age of reason and into an age of enhanced spirituality