The ID Politics (Virtue Signalling) Of Post/Meta-modernism & Philosophy
People are vehemently opposed (and some are posting here ) to post-modernism: I propose that alot of people A: do not understand the term "post-modernism" and B: try to substitute their own meta-philosophy on "how to do proper philosophy", as a way to do philosophy, and then insist that that isn't "post-modernism" to do as such; even though "post-modernism" is defined as "a reaction to modernism", in the simplest terms; and these attempts are simply more meta-philosophical ontologies in and of itself. (Also known as "post-postmodernism" - there is also classes for "post-post-postmodernism". See how this works?)
Thusly, the following blog argues against the very notion of it's own philosophy, (ha!) when it aims to discard other meta-philosophies on the token that they are "post-modern". I'd also like to note that the terms "post-modernism" & "post-modernist" are frequently misapplied in the regard that most proponents against "post-modernism" are talking about. "Post-modernity", ie, the era of time we currently occupy, and not the 'philosophy' of "post-modernism", is what most people seem to be referring to when discussing postmodernism.
The terms are conflated to have the same meaning, somewhat of a mistake that often is levelled at so-called "post-modernists" (ie, not post-modernists, but SJWs, Feminists, Gender Studies Gurus, etc, whom claim to be "postmodernist", because they took a class one day- it's that sample. And you can do the same thing. Or take a class in Meta-philosophy, or Experimental Philosophy) as being one of the major faults of "their ideology"- that they conflate everything into a massive patriarchal conspiracy (paraphrasing here about "They", for emphasis on the lack of understand the term "post-modernists" [ie, "They" are not of the postmodernist school of thought WITHOUT ideology; "They" is a term to denote the grouping of people whom work in their fields and whom extricate new and sometimes antithetical or critical work from "modernists", whom in turn were doing the same thing with their preceding (former) contemporaries works]).
Tut Tut, all in a days work of extemporaneous shilling (on the internet, in institutions, or otherwise) for causes thought up by strangers to one's self.
Post-modernism isn't a coherent philosophy in and of itself. So treating it like it should make sense of the world in full, isn't really helpful; but biological thought was (apparently) "rejected" by certain ostensible phenomenologists, whom quibble about the "pay gap" (so-called) and how they feel about certain ideas people get about their sexuality or persona.
Rejected "in theory", but not application.
PS: Postmodernism, as a school of thought, never did anything but inspire gender studies methodology...no one in said school of thought ever proposed "there should be more genders!" Not anyone who didn't insert themselves into said school through means of connotation, via 'gender studies'. But the point is, it's not one and the same, that's all. For example, Feminism; this started in the 1800s...that is pre-modernism, not postmodernism...so why conflate the two?
Just because feminism continues to this day, into postmodernity, and just because people can apply postmodern methodology to it, doesn't MAKE IT postmodernISM, per se...anyone can apply, say, let's just say...Marxist methodology...you can use such methods in anti-Marxism dialectic, if you want! That's just it, it's a methodology- you're permitted to use any such means to make arguments about the nature of reality; this doesn't mean you can take what you've applied such methods to and call that 'thing' the same thing as the methodology you're using. I can't call something Marxist (and by necessity say it's truly Marxism) just because I applied Marxist theory to something and changed it internally or it's view externally using the methodology...like say, capitalism; Marxist methodology can be applied here to "Marxify" capitalist systems- does this mean Capitalism suddenly has is "Marxism" counterpart? No, of course not. Same follows with postmodernism. Lovely catch all term to use for the age, though. But that's 'Post-modernity'. Let's just be honest here. It's the times we are living that we all know is fucked up, for sure. Not just anyone should say they are a "Philosopher". I prefer the term "Thinker".