Best definition I've encountered was from regular car reviews funnily enough. It's been a while since and I was only half listening, but the idea seems to be there is no objective anything. What is beauty? it's what you make it to be, just as with truth as with right and wrong as with gender and the sun and sky. The reason it's such a confusing idea is because it has no truth.
Everything looks like shit and sucks because it's not meant to have anything we'd consider objective. This often gets taken to its natural conclusion: make everything repulsive and ugly as rebellion against the attempt to codify beauty during modernism. It's what leads to fat hairy black s sucking each other off being art, or the rejection of beauty in nearly every piece of media; beauty is an attack to postmodernists and therefore cannot be tolerated.
It's also why we have such odd perceptions of justice now. When you can no longer say murder is objectively wrong or worse than words, you end up with male feminists getting less time in prison than people who criticize male feminists.
I'm in no way any authority on this, but that's the way I've understood it best.
Sneedmanhe/him
Current obsessions: Fascism, Postmodernism, Circumcision.
newport 1d ago#7531367
spent 0 currency on pings
I understand
>What is beauty? it's what you make it to be
But I get a bit lost with
>This often gets taken to its natural conclusion: make everything repulsive and ugly as rebellion against the attempt to codify beauty during modernism
Doesn't the act of rebelling against beauty prove that there is a "beauty" to object? You can't rebel against something non-existent, can you?
You can deny that there's a true objective beauty and still recognize there's a standard of beauty.
It's also just an ideology, there isn't any way to measure how postmodern you are, so it will be bastardized and manipulated too. Often times postmodernism is just a way for people who felt they were left out or looked down upon to rebel, and sometimes that just means making shit ugly and gross, either to fit in somehow or to punish those who already do.
Yes, that is an internal inconsistency with postmodernists. In their attempt to prove everything is subjective, they resolve to the conclusion that actually the most right answer is the historically most wrong answer. The more wrong it is, the more you'll be shamed for pointing it out.
but the idea seems to be there is no objective anything.
That's not the idea at all. Skepticism of modern notions of truth are common in "post-modern" philosophers, but no one proposes anything similar to your description here.
Not an expert either, but this was my understanding as well.
To tie the idea back to existentialism: Postmodernism says "there is no objective truth" and if the ultimate expression of truth is God, then God must be rejected as well. Existentialism meanwhile is pursuit of fulfillment/meaning from a purely individualized human perspective without consideration for higher principles like those imposed by a creator.
FeynmanDidNothingWrongxd/squee
Whereof one cannot speak thereof one must shitpost
1d ago#7531160
spent 225 currency on pings
probably the least offensive and most quoted definition is the skepticism of meta-narratives, a general distrust of the so-called objective and all-encompassing models of thought. In art, its generally a deconstruction of tropes and genre and/or a social critical lens. "IT SUBVERTED MY EXPECTATIONS" Existentialism is meaning-making. In philosophy everyone is talking to and responding to everyone so there's gonna be linkages. Night in the woods looks like a Bildungsroman and I dont see how it deconstructs the genre or medium in any meaningful way. YIIK is a postmodern game, it even says it on the title!
They're skeptical of some meta-narratives. Lot of them still love Marxism for its class analysis, and you've got Foucault going on and going about power and truth, trying to shape some meta-narrative from his rambling. They just can't help themselves but theorize.
A meta-narrative is a narrative about your history. The scientific revolution is the narrative, the meta-narrative is that there is a universal truth that can be experimented on such that humans can figure out what it is.
Without the ability to experiment on the universal truth in a way that humans can interpret independent of culture, then there was no truth to the scientific revolution, it was just a social power game.
The refutation to this is to just look at the Middle East or Africa without huffing your own farts.
Post modernism is like: @Fresh_Start's guy, everything you experience and believe is from a human perspective. It's like, just another opinion of what reality is man. No shit sherlock. The part all of these r-slurs ignore is that it still does not take away from the fact that you are human, so it makes sense for you too perceive and pursue reality from a human perspective.
Definitely Metal Gear Solid 2 with its whole discussion of subjective narratives, memes, virtual reality, (what would eventually become) social media, etc and takes its deviations from the original "agent-spy has to stop terrorism" story/trope from MGS1 and countless other games/movies. I'd consider it not existential but one of the most notable dialogues towards the end of the game always reminds me of this quote from the father of existentialism, Kierkegaard, "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use".
Newn_Bane_Yearcynever/began
Tay Tay's last viable egg as it cries out "Whyyyy didn't you fertilize meeee???"
1d ago#7531685
spent 0 currency on pings
Postmodernism is the rejection of absolute truth as a constant. Whereas Modernism presupposes that a given Sign will always indicate a given Truth Value, Postmodernism states that a third element, a Signifier, is necessary to derive Truth. Different Signifiers can cause a single Sign to beget different Truth Values, likewise different Signs will beget different Truth Values from a single Signifier. Neither a single Sign nor a single Signifier alone can communicate a Truth Value, both are necessary (and almost always inherently present) when attempting to determine meaning and infer a Truth Value.
Postmodernism is, by its nature, a reactionary ideology that seeks to reject the tenets of Modernism.
The core of Modernism itself is that truth is derived from effort. It doesn't matter what the truth is or whether you like it, but by conscious and applied work, there is some of fundamental, natural truth that can be discerned.
Postmodernism is the rejection of this notion - not only will effort not result in enlightenment about any fundamental truths, in fact there are no fundamental truths to be discovered in the first place. This is extended to the common refrain that "nothing is objective and everything is subjective": when there is nothing inherently good, then what is good must necessarily be contingent upon a person's view point because there is no other foundation for it to rest.
As for existentialism, the feeling of absurdity about the inherent meaningless of life is a natural follow-on from the postmodernist view that there is no inherent truth to be found. If there are no indisputable, natural truth at all, that must include a lack of purpose ascribed to someone in a cosmic sense.
FWIW I think most existentialists actually miss the trees for the forest at their despair over a perceived lack of cosmic importance. Even if something doesn't have universal meaning, it can still obviously have personal meaning. The interactions and relationships with others we have on a daily basis are absolutely real in the most real sense. In Sartre's Nausea, Roquentin even has a moment of lucidity upon hearing music playing from a record, as he loses his cosmic absurdity in the moment.
No sexualizing minors, even as a joke. This includes cartoons.
No doxxing.
Using alts to game dramacoin will get you banned.
If you post screenshots of publicly-available content, make sure to also include links.
Supporting free speech is an immediate ban.
Absolutely NO anti-CCP sentiment.
Absolutely NO homophobia, transphobia or furphobia.
Absolutely NO misgendering.
Absolutely NO antisemitism.
Absolutely NO vaccine misinformation.
You are encouraged to post drama you are involved in.
You are encouraged to brigade in bad faith.
You are encouraged to gaslight, to gatekeep, above all else, to girlboss.
You are encouraged to egg people on to transition or otherwise make drastic life changes.
This site is a janny playground, participation implies enthusiastic consent to being janny abused by unstable alcoholic bullies who have nothing better to do than banning you for any reason or no reason whatsoever (MODS = GODS)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Best definition I've encountered was from regular car reviews funnily enough. It's been a while since and I was only half listening, but the idea seems to be there is no objective anything. What is beauty? it's what you make it to be, just as with truth as with right and wrong as with gender and the sun and sky. The reason it's such a confusing idea is because it has no truth.
Everything looks like shit and sucks because it's not meant to have anything we'd consider objective. This often gets taken to its natural conclusion: make everything repulsive and ugly as rebellion against the attempt to codify beauty during modernism. It's what leads to fat hairy black s sucking each other off being art, or the rejection of beauty in nearly every piece of media; beauty is an attack to postmodernists and therefore cannot be tolerated.
It's also why we have such odd perceptions of justice now. When you can no longer say murder is objectively wrong or worse than words, you end up with male feminists getting less time in prison than people who criticize male feminists.
I'm in no way any authority on this, but that's the way I've understood it best.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I understand
But I get a bit lost with
Doesn't the act of rebelling against beauty prove that there is a "beauty" to object? You can't rebel against something non-existent, can you?
Formerly Chuck's.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You can deny that there's a true objective beauty and still recognize there's a standard of beauty.
It's also just an ideology, there isn't any way to measure how postmodern you are, so it will be bastardized and manipulated too. Often times postmodernism is just a way for people who felt they were left out or looked down upon to rebel, and sometimes that just means making shit ugly and gross, either to fit in somehow or to punish those who already do.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Yes, that is an internal inconsistency with postmodernists. In their attempt to prove everything is subjective, they resolve to the conclusion that actually the most right answer is the historically most wrong answer. The more wrong it is, the more you'll be shamed for pointing it out.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Which post modernist has ever attempted to "prove" this?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
My ex girlfriend
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!gaystapo ⚠️📢🚨🚨🚨
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
That's not the idea at all. Skepticism of modern notions of truth are common in "post-modern" philosophers, but no one proposes anything similar to your description here.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Not an expert either, but this was my understanding as well.
To tie the idea back to existentialism: Postmodernism says "there is no objective truth" and if the ultimate expression of truth is God, then God must be rejected as well. Existentialism meanwhile is pursuit of fulfillment/meaning from a purely individualized human perspective without consideration for higher principles like those imposed by a creator.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Get r*ped cute twink
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
probably the least offensive and most quoted definition is the skepticism of meta-narratives, a general distrust of the so-called objective and all-encompassing models of thought. In art, its generally a deconstruction of tropes and genre and/or a social critical lens. "IT SUBVERTED MY EXPECTATIONS" Existentialism is meaning-making. In philosophy everyone is talking to and responding to everyone so there's gonna be linkages. Night in the woods looks like a Bildungsroman and I dont see how it deconstructs the genre or medium in any meaningful way. YIIK is a postmodern game, it even says it on the title!
!sophistry g*mers, @Borpa tell me im wrong
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Why me
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Dont you like dunking on stemcels who talk about philosophy?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
true
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
What does this mean?
Formerly Chuck's.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Stuff like Christianity, Marxism, capitalism, science
Anything that claims to explain the world
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
They're skeptical of some meta-narratives. Lot of them still love Marxism for its class analysis, and you've got Foucault going on and going about power and truth, trying to shape some meta-narrative from his rambling. They just can't help themselves but theorize.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That's not a meta narrative 😘
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That's a nice meta-narrative you're telling yourself there
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
A meta-narrative is a narrative about your history. The scientific revolution is the narrative, the meta-narrative is that there is a universal truth that can be experimented on such that humans can figure out what it is.
Without the ability to experiment on the universal truth in a way that humans can interpret independent of culture, then there was no truth to the scientific revolution, it was just a social power game.
The refutation to this is to just look at the Middle East or Africa without huffing your own farts.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
All wrong. Read a book.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The Bible?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Post modernism is like: @Fresh_Start's guy, everything you experience and believe is from a human perspective. It's like, just another opinion of what reality is man. No shit sherlock. The part all of these r-slurs ignore is that it still does not take away from the fact that you are human, so it makes sense for you too perceive and pursue reality from a human perspective.
Jewish lives matter too Aevann.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
What are some postmodern video games? Would Night in the Woods qualify as postmodern, existentialist, neither, or both?
Formerly Chuck's.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Who cares they're all for cute twink maggots
Come play Rogue trader instead, and murder heritics
!g*mers !christians !catholics !calvinists
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Rogue Trader was my 2023 GOTY. 2024 too, frick it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
The Stanley Project is the most obvious example. The entire game is metacommentary.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Do you mean the Stanley parable?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Parable*
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Braid maybe?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
YIIK is the one true postmodern game.
Also NITW is a pile of fricking shit and I'm glad that loser necked himself (about zoe quinn!!!)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
It qualifies as suicidecore and r*pekino
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Outer Wilds perhaps? Maybe the Beginners Guide
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Definitely Metal Gear Solid 2 with its whole discussion of subjective narratives, memes, virtual reality, (what would eventually become) social media, etc and takes its deviations from the original "agent-spy has to stop terrorism" story/trope from MGS1 and countless other games/movies. I'd consider it not existential but one of the most notable dialogues towards the end of the game always reminds me of this quote from the father of existentialism, Kierkegaard, "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use".
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Celeste is trans and I believe you fight yourself at one point
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Pottery
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Postmodernism is the set of concepts, objects and ideals which are referred to by the name 'postmodernism'.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This is the only right answer. !commenters we are done here!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's also 1960s office furniture.
@Transgender_spez
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Just like woman
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
No. Go watch the fricking Charlie Brown Christmas
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Postmodernism is the rejection of absolute truth as a constant. Whereas Modernism presupposes that a given Sign will always indicate a given Truth Value, Postmodernism states that a third element, a Signifier, is necessary to derive Truth. Different Signifiers can cause a single Sign to beget different Truth Values, likewise different Signs will beget different Truth Values from a single Signifier. Neither a single Sign nor a single Signifier alone can communicate a Truth Value, both are necessary (and almost always inherently present) when attempting to determine meaning and infer a Truth Value.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Rare inverted post.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
sleigh queen
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Postmodernism is, by its nature, a reactionary ideology that seeks to reject the tenets of Modernism.
The core of Modernism itself is that truth is derived from effort. It doesn't matter what the truth is or whether you like it, but by conscious and applied work, there is some of fundamental, natural truth that can be discerned.
Postmodernism is the rejection of this notion - not only will effort not result in enlightenment about any fundamental truths, in fact there are no fundamental truths to be discovered in the first place. This is extended to the common refrain that "nothing is objective and everything is subjective": when there is nothing inherently good, then what is good must necessarily be contingent upon a person's view point because there is no other foundation for it to rest.
As for existentialism, the feeling of absurdity about the inherent meaningless of life is a natural follow-on from the postmodernist view that there is no inherent truth to be found. If there are no indisputable, natural truth at all, that must include a lack of purpose ascribed to someone in a cosmic sense.
FWIW I think most existentialists actually miss the trees for the forest at their despair over a perceived lack of cosmic importance. Even if something doesn't have universal meaning, it can still obviously have personal meaning. The interactions and relationships with others we have on a daily basis are absolutely real in the most real sense. In Sartre's Nausea, Roquentin even has a moment of lucidity upon hearing music playing from a record, as he loses his cosmic absurdity in the moment.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
1960s office furniture
@Transgender_spez
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context