Hi all! First off, thanks for watching, I hope you found the video engaging and informative in some way in spite of the atrocious sound etc! If you'd like to support me to make more videos like this (but better!) then I've just launched a Patreon. I'd really appreciate you checking it out and would be very grateful for your support! You can check it out here: www.patreon.com/tomnicholas

@alexanderpalmer3496

5 жыл бұрын

your a great help to struggling students :)

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Cheers for saying so Alexander!

@petepoli50

5 жыл бұрын

Considering the Bill Clinton and Hillary together formed the first postmodern Presidency I appreciate the irony in the fact that Hillary may have been out-PoMo'd by Donald Trump

@richgirod1133

4 жыл бұрын

great stuff....can you provide a video explaining covfefe-thanks[

@aishwariyasweety2433

4 жыл бұрын

@@alexanderpalmer3496 just out of curiosity what do you study

i paused to like this video when you said "vague net positive to society." that's all i really wanna be in life.

@channelname1019

3 жыл бұрын

The moment that he said that, in my viewing/listening, coincided with me reading your comment, so I made sure to do the same.

@kindlerashod

2 жыл бұрын

He sounded so genuine. Maybe I'm lured to his accent.

@domedin9894

2 жыл бұрын

You won't be let down but dream big dude.

@jmarsh5485

2 жыл бұрын

@@channelname1019 it seems to happen alot on KZread so I wonder whether it's built into the app experience where words thaat appear on the wall correlate with the video running and the script it contains

@channelname1019

2 жыл бұрын

@@jmarsh5485 They couldn't.. I .. They.. No. But.. Hmmmm... That's.... actually not so far fetched... Which means they almost certainly fucking are doing exactly that, the dirty fuckers.

I came to find out what post-modernism is I still don't know what post-modernism is

@steveanston4906

5 жыл бұрын

I agree - I was looking for a 'nutshell' or blagger's explanation to impress my friends.

@sabahfatema

5 жыл бұрын

@@steveanston4906 That ain't postmodernism

@MrWackywilson

4 жыл бұрын

@@steveanston4906 if u work it out bro... Let a bro know haha.... Cos I'm feeling pretty stupid

@chezlolxo

4 жыл бұрын

Enlightenment it is a very hard term to define. But if I had to condense it very much I would say that postmodernism is a complete rejection of universal or totalising conception of truth and ultimately reason, even those of emancipatory ideals Frederic Jameson in ‘postmodernism -or the cultural logic of late capitalism describes it as, “The way in which our entire contemporary social system has little by little begun to lose its capacity to retain its own past, has begun to live in a perpetual present and in a perpetual change that obliterates traditions of the kind which all earlier social formations have had in one way or another to preserve.” Following this is postmodernity where reason loses its fundamentality and also nature (aided by things such as our hyper reality and living in a world of mere representations and spectacle, advertisements and media saturated world etc). Where we basically become entirely anaesthetised with no ability for critical thought and have ultimately a vacant and submissive nature to imposed ideology

@snwbrdhb

4 жыл бұрын

In a way, @Snaps you understand perfectly! One of the primary goals of postmodernism is to distrust definitions/definitive answers. haha But to be more helpful to your question... One of the best examples I got was when someone says: "I miss the good ol' days!" and you ask them: "when was that precisely" and they might answer: -"Well... The 50s!" => to which you might say... well probably not for black people or women. -or maybe - "Well back when I had a high paying job" => to which you might say... "well for you maybe, but not for the people who missed out on getting your position." Another good example is: the color "red" that I see is different than the color "red" that you see. Which of us is *right* or *wrong* about the color "red"? -weird question right?! So instead of a block of all-one-color red (a modernist, meta-narrative), a postmodernist would want to make a block built of 1000 tiny pixels of "red" as different people see it. It's Truth (with a capital T - I call it the authori-T) vs truth as a collective impression. The point is: how we experience reality is subjective - which means it's different depending on who you ask - but each experience is equally valid.

Awwwwwwwwful audio here for which I can only apologise! Maybe we can pretend this was an intentional postmodern attempt to draw your attention to the representative medium?

@Harry-nl3ic

5 жыл бұрын

Nah mate your audio is just shit

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Yeah, fair enough.

@OBear07

5 жыл бұрын

it’s good of you to put the effort in, who would complain? another great video, imho.

@PinesProductions

5 жыл бұрын

As an audio engineer, I find it unbearable. However, this is good content my dude 👍🏻

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Haha, it's all made a thousand times worse by the fact that, in a former life, I spent two years studying audio engineering...

My contemporary theatre professor is in his 70's and doesn't know how to Zoom me into class so sends me incoherent notes on the subject instead...this quite literally saved my life.

Thank you so much for making this video. I just started a university course on Postmodernism from CS Lewis Through the Present, and my professor felt that the best was to start this course was to have us read 8 essays on postmodernism, spanning over 100 pages. Your description of text on postmodernism being "inaccessible" was right on the money. I'm usually great in my English courses, but I've been hitting a wall with understanding even the foundations of postmodernism. The information in your video gave me some groundwork to start from, so I don't feel so completely lost reading this week's 100 pages of essays. Thank you again!

I’m trying to decide whether, through watching this, I gained more brain cells than those I burned through trying to understand it. Thank you for a great video. I’ll be watching again... one day I’ll get it :) !!

@cyclenutter2715

Жыл бұрын

Sameee lol

@Crabbadabba

Жыл бұрын

The Scholar's Dilemma. At least, that's what I'm calling it. 🤷🏻‍♂️

@cyclenutter2715

Жыл бұрын

@@Crabbadabba hehe good one

@soren633

Жыл бұрын

Hopefully it’s a vague net positive ;)

@dylanquinn4031

Жыл бұрын

I feel your pain

You deserve high marks for effort, Post-Modernism is a rough topic. I'm surprised you didn't mention your videos on "Spectacle", either way, great job! I'm a grad student and Post-Modernism is always so hard to approach, yet you handled it well.

I love the fact that this video came up when I searched for postmodernism. Tom, you're a legend! Thanks goodness you've fixed the audio now.

Incredulity towards meta-narratives? That's me done for.

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Haha, this is probably the best comment I’ve ever had.

@manorothpitlordextraordina4041

4 жыл бұрын

Starczar his name is “spirit of Hegel.” Hegel was a philosopher- he liked meta narratives

@lukaskaltenmaier3808

4 жыл бұрын

Downvoted because hegel

@aishwariyasweety2433

4 жыл бұрын

@@lukaskaltenmaier3808 downvoted for downvoteing hegel.

@mikeexits

3 жыл бұрын

I have no idea what this means. Your second sentence makes no sense to me. Is it supposed to be read with an old english accent or something?

Thank you Tom for outlining that so concisely. This is the "gold standard" of the outline of the problem as I see it. You give us a lot of room to work with here. Aristotle measured our sanity by our steps of removal from "substance." Kant pointed out that we don't really have access to the "thing-in-itself." Gestalt psychology involves us in how our brains modify the data we get directly from our senses. The object of these nested simulacrums seems to be to get rid of the object in favor of the step of semantic removal from it that suits the reaction sought by the "meta-narrative." What it boils down to is the claim that gold is a "social construct" itself by eliminating the distinction between gold itself and its value. Gold is then denied to be identifiable by its perceivable attributes; shininess, malleability, etc., because its worth is determined to be more real to society than its tangible aspects. So "gold" becomes a metonym for gold; a substitute for the actual, any thing of value, and thus gold itself can then be exchanged for any term for a medium that represents wealth, gain, status, etc.

Brother, it's a simple and effective video lesson. Love from India fine and clear examples.

By far, this is one of the best explanations of post-modernism I've seen thus far! So many others seem to just jump to moral grandstanding and slamming the idea as dumb or concatenating it with wokeism and such, and only achieves in obscuring the entire point. Thanks so much for this description!!

I have enjoyed your videos before but this one really made an impression. I have watched countless videos today, trying to grasp Post Modernism. Yours is the first one to give it enough shape that I could begin to get hold of it! Thank you.

A "certain amount of gold" only has an "intrinsic value" because people say it does. In "reality", gold is just a rock dug out of the ground. Linking value to a rock is no more legitimate than linking it to pieces of paper or digits in a computer.

@Tom_Nicholas

6 жыл бұрын

Yes, absolutely. Sorry, perhaps (quite probably!) I wasn't massively clear here. What was important about the gold standard was that it quantified currency in relationship to gold primarily because gold is limited in supply rather than because gold has any inherent value. It therefore meant that the amount of currency in circulation in any one country was, to some extent, fixed or could at least only grow slowly on the accumulation of gold (in the same manner that Bitcoin operates around solved equations in order to allow circulation to grow but only gradually and with decreasing speed). This therefore also meant that exchange between currency had some consistency because each currency was similarly pinned to gold. Hope that clears it up a little! Many economists consider its abolition to be a good thing, I don't have a particular opinion, was just using it as an example. (Although, I would argue that gold at least has some use-value in comparison to numbers on a screen which can't be used for much at all).

@writingonthewall3326

5 жыл бұрын

I'd assert that gold does have an inherent value based on it's rarity, usefulness and malleability. I understand this is an argument of value so it's a deep rabbit hole, but if we just look at it for now as a 'reasonable vehicle of exchangeable currency' or 'barter' it's 'value' derides from the it's rarity in that 'people can't make the stuff (I know there's lots of stuff people cant make - it's not the point)'. That's why alchemy (one substance into gold/something else) is 'the holy grail' of science. Gold is the closest this on this planet we have to a perfect medium of exchange... It's limited, useful, malleable and corrosion proof. The economic argument for gold as nation's foundation is another argument entirely - no, I'm not a gold advocate as a foundational value system. But make no mistake, people will ALWAYS accept gold. Hope I didn't come off as a dick.

@robertcaseydavis

4 жыл бұрын

Except for the inherent scarcity of the rock. The problem with fiat is its core feature: that it has no limitation.

@TallicaMan1986

4 жыл бұрын

Gold is incredibly important for electronics at the moment.

@zr3755

4 жыл бұрын

Gold has value because it's a rare precious metal. Don't try and take the meaning out of everything

Stumbled upon this video in July 2021 and realized how much this channel has grown in quality. Very well done, Tom!

This was an excellent presentation! I'm a sociology graduate and I was struggling with many things after going through some parts of Lyotard's "The Post-Modern Condition". This cleared up a lot for me, as well as the fact that post-modernism should not necessarily be seen as a prescriptive condition, but as a descriptive one. I really think that the postmodern lens as a descriptive tool is of great value. A true eye-opener. Thank you sir!

I love how eloquently you dismiss the populist conception of the post modern etc. Makes me chcuckle everytime. Thank you for sharing valid knowledge with us Tom

You are an excellent example of syntheses and clarity. You should do a video on Jameson's critique of Postmodernism and another on Cognitive Mapping.

This is an amazing video. One of the best explanations for postmodernism I have ever seen!

This is one of the greatest videos I have ever seen on this website, thank you so much.

thank u for explaining it so well!!! you're really helping me with my socio class rn

I loved this video. Thankyou so much. I'm not highly educated but have always been interested in these topics I'd just love to see you cover these topics giving even more examples to drill it home

The way you pronounced US sounded like "You ass". Thank you for opening for me a new look at the beautiful name of this magnificent country.

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Haha, entirely unintentional and I meant no offence I promise!

@PyroNexus22

5 жыл бұрын

@@Tom_Nicholas it's fine, I'm not american d:

@sabahfatema

5 жыл бұрын

That is beyond perfect!

@katherinemorelle7115

4 жыл бұрын

Really? I definitely heard you ess not you ass. Though I also find Americans are weird with their a/e distinction. Like- how does Kerry and Carey sound the same? Or Aaron and Erin? Tara and Tera? Or the weirdest- Craig and Greg! I read a story where a plot twist hinged on someone misconstruing Aaron for Erin, and it just didn’t land for me- there were some that had figured it out, but as the two names sound completely different to me, I wasn’t going to catch on 😂

@tjcofer7517

2 жыл бұрын

@@Tom_Nicholas I'm American and I appreciate it

Hi Tom! Thanks a lot for the video. I just wanted to note that Lyotard introduced the term to the philosophical realm while it already existed in other spheres. Brian McHale, in his book The Cambridge Introduction to Postmodernism, states that already in 1973, postmodernism 'acquired its name.' McHale also notes that some literary scholars started to use this term in 1970 (he brings an example of Leslie Fiedler). So Lyotard didn't invent it, but without a doubt, he contributed a lot into the development of theory around postmodernism :)

Fantastic, mate! Thanks very much for that, I've been hunting for a decent attempt at an explanation.

Oh wow that audio. I love this video, hence being back, but it's jarring coming from your newer ones. Congrats!

thanks man! this will help me a lot for my university assignment

The audio on this one is a stark difference from your more recent work. Not complaining, but rather impressed with how much change has already taken place

I very much enjoyed your presentation. Thank you! You have given me pause for further thought.

Thank you for your videos! you are helping me understand the theories in law more than my tutor! Really grateful for your help!

An great, introductory presentation, thank you very much

Thank you so much. Brilliant straightforward explanation

Thanks for the video it's helping ne understand postmodernism and why it is such a target for the far right. Audio quality doesn't usually bother me but it was rough on this video, glad to see production has been so much better since.

First time viewer - well done for a short overview!!!

Thank you for your videos! You speak so clearly and I really appreciate that and your educational Content. It really helps with my studies and generally to broaden my horizon. Thank you 🙏

Hey! Thanks for the amazing video Tom - just amazed that you took all that effort to reply to so many people's comments and queries individually, in relative depth but yet coherently. It would be amazing if all KZreadrs were as dedicated to their viewers as you. Keep it up!

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Hey Daniel, glad you liked it! Chatting in the comments is definitely one of the things I like most about KZread. I don’t get quite as much time to do so anymore (or certainly not enough time to reply to them as quickly as I used to) as I get a fair few comments these days but I try my best still!!

Really great video. Thanks this is helping me with my Dissertation thank you

Great! Thank you so much. You did a real good job!

this was fantastic - subscribing. could you please spend some time talking about the relationship between postmodernism and neoliberalism? thanks for the skillful presentation of a complex topic, well done.

Big help in understanding: I like the idea that we have stereotypes and at some point there is an embrace of the stereotype over the reality, i.e., a professor told me that there was research being done to have real blueberry resemble the taste of blueberry flavoring used in candy because many people thought the artificial was the real flavor. In the US, the television cowboy doesn't look anything like way real cowboys looked but that becomes the vision. Thank you.

You are always interesting and informative.

Got it. You were entirely clear. Thank you.

Could you please do a video on deconstruction and Derrida? Also maybe Focault

@Tom_Nicholas

6 жыл бұрын

Deconstruction is definitely on my list! Was there any particular element of Foucault you’re interested in, there’s at least 4 potential videos there!

@hellojoechoe

6 жыл бұрын

Discipline and punish please!

Thank you so much Tom! I enjoyed this. I am interested to know what people who study etymology think of Wittgensteinian language game but could not find very much that links the two fields of study. If you have any idea, I would very much appreciate it if you let us know. Cheers!

@Tom_Nicholas

6 жыл бұрын

When Wittgenstein writes about language, he's talking much more about language as a functional communicative tool rather than being interested in the particular developments of each word so I'm not sure he'd have had much to say on the topic of etymology. However, it would certainly be interesting to read an etymologist's take on his work!

Please expatiate more on deconstruction especially how theory can be successfully be used in the practical analysis of the text by bringing to the fore the major tenets of Derridean terms like supplement, destinerrance, chasm, blindspot, the undecidability, linguistic reading, aporias and silences and the host of others I skipped.

Surprisingly good attempt at defining postmodernism and its ever shifting almost foundations....it will take a few more decades to standardize the common usages and supposed definition but we in da middle of it,for damn sure.

Absolutely amazing content, thank you

Really smashing work!

Thank you for this video! Really good information, really clear and concise, with good examples. Much appreciated!

This is such a great video and it is very useful in helping me to understand postmodernism. I feel like you have explained it in a good way that isn't too complex. I am studying postmodern theory in regards to contemporary dance in theatre. Could I please by any chance have a copy of the notes that you used for this video or any links for this theory for research please?

13:17 Your account of Bretton Woods is a little bit inaccurate here. It's true that other currencies were denominated in Dollars, but the Dollar was in fact still denominated in Gold. Part of the reason it collapsed is that in the 70s the US started printing lots of new dollars to help with Vietnam war debt, so each dollar corresponded to less of the US gold reserve, causing very high inflation in the Bretton Woods countries by devaluing their dollar reserves. (This is a major part of why western Europe had an economic stagflation crisis in the 70s, not excessive union power like the Tories always say) When Nixon wouldn't stop it, France and the UK threatened to simultaneously demand their entire dollar reserves' worth of gold from the US as was their right under Bretton Woods, which would collapse the dollar; and rather than either do so or stop the currency manipulation, Nixon just abandoned the Bretton Woods system altogether.

This is excellent! Thanks so much! Absolutely fantastic. Clear, well stated, beautifully made. Thanks so, so much!

Great video! Much appreciated!

Postmodernism formally arrived in 1961 with the publication of Michel Foucault's "History of Madness" (in the Age of Enlightenment); 61 years ago. Despite some initial success Pomo does not influence Western Philosophy, and we rarely hear about it from actual philosophers except when they dis' it. Yet pomo is firmly entrenched in Academia within various far left 'theory' disciplines. Where we find: Feminism, Queer studies, Transgenderism, Critical Race Theory, Anti-colonialism, Film Studies, media studies, leftisms, ... there we also always find pomo. Hand and glove. Pomo gives these disciplines or studies credibility. Most ideas from such 'studies' lack good empirical support; but pomo can legitimise them as Big Ideas! Ideas instead. Ideas which explain the world to the students of such 'studies'. The very "cultural logic of Western society", to cite Nicholas. The 'theorists' who teach such lefty studies never develop new pomo ideas. They use pomo as a weapon against their critics. Pomo is epistemically relativist; which means: it promotes skepticism of truth claims. Pomos say 'truth is myth', in the Foucauldian, and Derridean senses. 1. From Foucault we hear that 'truth' is established by regimes of power, and is used by such regimes of power to establish domination over us. So 'truth' is a tool of 'power'. 2. From the Derridean side, they tell us that every meaning associated with a sign (such as 'racism', for example) gets its meaning from a network of other signs; from the meanings of those signs which denote or connote 'racism'. Given people from different ethnicities, sexes, cultures, and identities disagree of the meaning of some signs, no two people are likely to give the same meaning for 'racism'. So there's no irreducible, stable, meaning to 'truth'. And many meanings are contested. As I already said, philosophers long ago refuted both these points made by pomo (above). But the modern academy is an istitution where academics don't need to listen to critics of their ideas. For example climate alarmists, say, non-alarmism is 'denialism', and they refuse to debate or listen to 'deniers'. That such 'deniers' cannot be allowed a platform to speak. The modern academy turned itself into a machine to manufacture bias and closed-mindedness. Q: Yet, given pomo is intellectually vacuous, why is Michel Foucalt now the most cited author in the humanities? A: Dispite its wrongness, pomo still does a job, or two. Pomo gives one a license: 1) to speculate. Pomos gives one a set of academically 'respectable' ideas to cite: books and papers. For example, one of these pomo 'masters' (Foucault) is cited more than anyone else in the humanities. Peter Boghossian calls 'idea laundering' the practice of getting a junk idea published in an academic journal and then having your friends and allies cite your publication in support of their own junk ideas. Furthermore, the production of vacuous speculation, founded on previous speculation is now a career path within academia. 2) to disregard one's critics and their evidence; and to celebrate closed minds and bias. "Postmodernism is the academic far Left’s epistemological strategy for responding to the crisis caused by the failures of socialism in theory and in practice" - Stephen Hicks: "Expllaining Postmodernism", in the chapter "Responding to socialism’s crisis of theory and evidence". Citations: 1. Idea laundering: www.wsj.com/articles/idea-laundering-in-academia-11574634492 2. "Expllaining Postmodernism" - free audio book! kzread.info/dash/bejne/o4WXsMyBfrvUdag.html, narated by its author 3. epistemically relativist: www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/epistemic-relativism/v-2

Video starts at 3:49.

Thanks again for the first time in the morning

great video, excellent insights.

Very clear and detailed video.

I believe the take away can be more accurately taken from the beginning and one can extrapolate upon it. The definition of post modernism is varying to the degree where it doesn't strictly have definition and is more an idea. Which means two things, it continues to be defined still. Also, those who use the term as a confident basis of reference are "full of it" (how I label) OR they have created their own firm definition based on their own journeys in thought that are solely their own which they typically do not share when using the term. In my opinion, the latter usually feels like it leads to nonsense or agenda. Great video! It's clearly unclear!! 😊🧐

Your understanding certainly takes you all over the map. Art, economics, political theory, theatre, literature. You are very busy!

Really good use of Baudrillard's notion of simulacra in relation to the ending of the gold standard! Thats one I haven't heard of before but works incredibly well in conveying the idea

Thank god you got a better mic in recent times!

Hi Tom. Great video. Do you have anything on postmodernism and the future of education? or educational futures?

Also there is a book by Christopher Butler called: Postmodernism A Very Short Introduction which I found pretty helpful. Page 29: “ Postmodernism thus involved a highly critical epistemology, hostile to any overarching philosophical or political doctrine, and strongly opposed to those “dominant ideologies”that help to maintain the status quo.” Edit: Oh I just realised you used the same source

Thank you, Steven

looking forward to the sequel videos on postpostmodernism and postpostpostmodernism!

Incredible video

Brilliant Tom.

You are one of my favorite simulacrum. 😊👍

An ideology that rejects ideology

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

I see what your trying to say and that's probably not a bad way of summing it up in a simple quip but, I think, to refer to postmodernism as an ideology is probably not quite correct precisely because of its inherent skepticism. We tend to use the term ideology to refer to worldview which is necessarily closed-off to other ways of thinking whereas postmodernism (as much as it can broadly be described as one thing) is definitively quite the opposite. Furthermore, postmodernism (for the most part and with some exceptions) isn't something that people subscribe to in the same sense that one might say "I'm a capitalist", "I'm a socialist" etc; in many, many regards, we're all "postmodernists" because our society is distinctly postmodern. (Sorry for replying to your pithy quip with a wall of text but if that doesn't sum me up as a human being I don't know what does...)

Brilliant. Truly brilliant.

Good intro. A question worth asking is whether Derrida´s conclusions are objective comment upon an object of interest to him (does he ever define it?) language, and its particular manifestations? is what he says about "binarism" true, or, false regardless of who does a deconstructuve analysis? will I arrive at the same conclusions about the ideological character of Aparthaid as someone else that may also do the same deconstrutive analysis of aparthaid? You can deconstruct any, and all texts: that is quite a universal application. So, there is something about his object of study that is truthful, and universal. Something that he was able to isolate about it that anyone else that may inspect it may also be able to detect. The issue of "undecidability" is from Godel which is interesting. Derrida´s dialectics are not so discombolulating if you read an intro to formal, dialectical logic, Russell, and Godel. They are not bad. But he and Barth decontextualize too much. As if correcting what you are saying, checking in order to see if what you meant was conveyed does not lead to a bit of an improvement. Authors check, and do drafts, and edit the book etc. So, yes behind every book there is a will to convey meaning, and they work hard at it. I do not see how doing away with the process of writting a book would help. Anyways, some thoughts.

Excellent video, I’m a bit let down by the lack of post-modern literary fiction. Still, great overview ~ I dare you to make a video on post-postmodernism!! Sub’d when I saw your modernism video pop up 👍🏻

Hi Tom! I just wanted to say I've really enjoyed a heap of your videos and have found them super helpful in getting my head around post-structuralism and post-modernism. Thanks!

@stephenpowstinger733

3 жыл бұрын

Lydia Line good luck talking to anyone about this video.

Great video! :) I have a question: Since, as I understood it, postmodernism is more of a way of looking at things rather than an era, could the legitimization of religious institutions be seen as a simulacrum? E.g. the bible is true because the bible says it is true? Which therefore gives arbiters like religious leaders the power that they have... And another question: If you were to question why all meta narratives have to be questioned, would that be postmodernist in itself or would we reach something else like post-postmodernism? Hopefully not too confusing ;)

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Heya, thanks! Your point about postmodern thought not necessarily having to take place within a certain period is a really, really good one. However, I'd say that the notion of something being a simulacrum tends to refer to it being devoid of meaning rather than not being backed up by solid evidence (and for something to have meaning to an individual or group, it doesn't necessarily have to be true). So, I'd suggest that the answer to your question about religion is probably no. In fact, religions are a really key example of meta-narratives as they are very thoroughly constructed totalising worldviews. To your second point, I'd suggest that you fairly aptly describes the state of contemporary discourse. However, I'd suggest that this more represents a return to modernist modes of thought than anything else (some have tried to forward the idea that, yes, we might call that postpostmodernism or "metamodernism" but I think that stems from some academics' desire to want to coin new terminology and sound incredibly intelligent than anything else.

Hi Tom, love your vlog! Do you have any videos on research methodology that relates to the arts? i'm 6months into my Phd and really stuck on my methodological approach, are there any good books that break down the technical jargon into something that a practitioner may be able to get?

@Tom_Nicholas

4 жыл бұрын

I think it would depend on what your particular discipline is. I'm sure there's book out there that will help you get your head around some of the terminology!

@kathoconnor4830

4 жыл бұрын

@@Tom_Nicholas i'm just one year in to a PT Phd which is practise based (which i understand is a method in itself). I've done a lot, a lot of reading into my subject area, animation and the uncanny and i've looked at a few books and websites but i really need an idiots guide! You know when you feel you just don't know enough to know what it is you don't know? I feel i'm very much at that stage.

Commenting for engagement so people find this and finally learn what postmodernism really is

All your videos are so beautiful and they will totally help me pass Literature Theory! Thank you

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for saying so Devanshi!

Thanks!

you are great, thank you very much :)

Saw the run time and groaned by the end i was annoyed it was ending so soon lol

Brilliant introduction to Postmodernism. I am doing post graduate studies in English Literature and this is very helpful. I have subscribed.

This meta-narations and simulacra is very well defined in post-colonized nations, such as Indonesia. I have observed there is a meta-naration and simulacra on hating the previous colonizers. Though if we see the case holistically, the colonizers did gave benefit in pre-Indonesia time, such as the construction of the city of jakarta, banking system, trading system etc.. But the citizens don't want to remember that and always go back to the meta-narative of an oppressed nation due to the colonizers. So this simulacra that the citizens of Indonesia believe to be truth, turn out is truth as far as the political interest goes. Because the meta-narative of hating the colonizers benefit parties in winning against the colonizers. Hence why this simulacra prevailed in post-colonized times of Indonesia. Whether the colonizers were truely evil or not, no one truely know.

Very Interesting.

Tom, is it possible to share the references for Jameson and Baudrillard please?

Interesting. The essence of postmodernism and the concept of a 'simulacrum' originates in Kant's observation of the 'ding an sich '.

I think there are some philosophical issues with the explanation of money and Baudrillard's model of simulacrum on a number of levels. On one level, yes, following a certain point in history the value of the dollar was taken off gold but it was transferred to an exchange or value based upon the price of oil and other commodities on the level of global international markets. As much as this occurs on a international macro economic level, then it similarly occurs on a micro economic level: as every time you take fiat paper currency which is not 'backed' by gold into a shop, it is effectively backed by the food and commodities any seller is prepared to exchange for it. All that has really changed is that the monetary system has proved it can function effectively: regardless of whether it is a licensed bank backing the promissory note with an exchange for a certain quantity of gold - or whether it is international or individual merchants exchanging it for other real world commodities such as corn, wheat, oil, newspapers, onions, tins of lager or cigarettes. The currency can be backed by either the official and unofficial or macro and micro economic sides as it were. It is never therefore a purely 'symbolic' form of exchange. Fiat currency therefore cannot be hyper-real or a representation of a representation in the Platonic sense that is often implied, because it is always immediately redeemable for physical products of some kind or another on both the macro and micro economic levels regardless of whether or not the fiat currency is notionally backed by a central bank and designated precious metal whose values themselves are tied to matters of faith and no objective value.

You are awesome, you saved me xD Thank you so much :D

You are amazing!

Great job, kid! It's amazing to see someone trying to do a serious job on such a subject!

@sensaiko

5 жыл бұрын

Again, after seeing your replies, amazing job!

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

Excellent

This was definitely better than a vague net positive.

Brilliant!

@Tom_Nicholas

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks, hope you found the video useful!

I would love to see this video remade with your current skills and expanded upon - made without the times constraints this video was made under

lyotard book is a good one. I got one when I was at college.

I love what you're doing -- keep it up!!

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Cheers, will do!

Kick ass opening theme.

Hey tom, communication student from Israel here, stumbled upon your channel upon studying for my exams. You explain the subjects in an interesting way, sending you love from Israel.

@Tom_Nicholas

5 жыл бұрын

Hi Alex, really glad you've enjoyed my videos, really appreciate you taking the time to say so! Best of luck with your exams!

@user-cm9ft5bg7i

5 жыл бұрын

Alex Kroogman shut up and get the f out of the middle east

I made an example to make sense of hyperreality hope it helps idk The wild west is built on not what originally was in the western states of America. But it is built on faces developed by what film makers and even Italians thought that part of the world was like based on stories from other viewers. These views are then churned through as the films created by the original film makers inspire and shape peoples views of the wild west and eventually it becomes extremely far detached from the reality. It becomes an extension of reality and not the truth. Therefore the wild west as we know it is more of a simulacrum than reality.