A Talk on Postmodernism

A place to discuss casual topics amongst spiritual friends.
Post Reply
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

A Talk on Postmodernism

Post by Virgo »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZGgglZX ... re=related

This series is from a Christain theologin, however, his presentation of premodernism, modernism, and especially postmodernism, structured around the central postmodern doctrine of relativism is an excellent presentation of the subject and really relates the secular attitudes that have influenced all religious beliefs and practice in the past, and today -- not just the Christianity that he focuses on. So while he presents it with a Christian outlook the talk is mainly on postmodernism and is an excellent presentation of it overall.

Kevin
Last edited by Virgo on Sun Mar 11, 2012 4:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Talk on Posermodernism

Post by tiltbillings »

Relativism must bad, given that quote by Mussolini you now have as your signature.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: A Talk on Posermodernism

Post by Virgo »

tiltbillings wrote:Relativism must bad, given that quote by Mussolini you now have as your signature.
:heart:


Kevin
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Talk on Posermodernism

Post by tiltbillings »

Virgo wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Relativism must bad, given that quote by Mussolini you now have as your signature.
:heart:


Kevin
Of course, I would not take my statement seriously, nor can I take your linked talk seriously.

What does this have to do with the Dhamma?
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: A Talk on Posermodernism

Post by Virgo »

tiltbillings wrote:
Virgo wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Relativism must bad, given that quote by Mussolini you now have as your signature.
:heart:


Kevin
Of course, I would not take my statement seriously, nor can I take your linked talk seriously.

What does this have to do with the Dhamma?
I would take your statement (about relativism being bad as Musollini takes it as a support) as absolutely true. However, there is always nuance of course (which does not mean there is always full blown relativism), and "relativism" is a blanket term, there are different species of relativism, some worse than others, and of course, situationally, sometimes applying a relativistic outlook is more or less harmful than others.

I understand that the person giving the talk keeps referring back to Christianity, but what it has to do with Dhamma is that, like Christianity, Dhamma is morally absolutist (though the two religions are of slightly different species), and we (Buddhists and Christians) both live in an increasingly relativistic postmodern society. Understanding what he says about Christianity and it's beliefs as it corresponds to the majority view in the secular world, corresponds to how Buddhism also fits in that same world.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Talk on Posermodernism

Post by tiltbillings »

Virgo wrote:I would take your statement (about relativism being bad as Musollini takes it as a support) as absolutely true.
But you make my point. My statement is not absolutely true, since I did mean to be taken that way.
However, there is always nuance of course (which does not mean there is always full blown relativism), and "relativism" is a blanket term, there are different species of relativism, some worse than others, and of course, situationally, sometimes applying a relativistic outlook is more or less harmful than others.
Ah. So relativism is relative. Absolutely.
I understand that the person giving the talk keeps referring back to Christianity, but what it has to do with Dhamma is that, like Christianity, Dhamma is morally absolutist (though the two religions are of slightly different species), and we (Buddhists and Christians) both live in an increasingly relativistic postmodern society. Understanding what he says about Christianity and it's beliefs as it corresponds to the majority view in the secular world, corresponds to how Buddhism also fits in that same world.
Who says Buddhism is morally absolutist?

though the two religions are of slightly different species
They are vastly different, coming from vastly different perceptions of reality.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: A Talk on Posermodernism

Post by Virgo »

tiltbillings wrote:
Virgo wrote:I would take your statement (about relativism being bad as Musollini takes it as a support) as absolutely true.
But you make my point. My statement is not absolutely true, since I did mean to be taken that way.
That's the whole thing Tilt. Whatever is the truth is the truth whether we believe it to be true or not. If fascism is an extreme result of relativism then relativism is bad, no matter what, especially no matter if Tiltbillings or Kevin believes it.

tiltbillings wrote:
However, there is always nuance of course (which does not mean there is always full blown relativism), and "relativism" is a blanket term, there are different species of relativism, some worse than others, and of course, situationally, sometimes applying a relativistic outlook is more or less harmful than others.
Ah. So relativism is relative. Absolutely.
Some relativists believe there are no absolute truths, it's all relative. What may be the result of the exact same actions by two different people (hypothetically) may be the different, simply based on what they believe the result to be. However, they also believe that somethings are absolutely always skillful or wise action while others are not. This view is far less detrimental than a true and extreme relativism. However, you will note, that there is a logical fallacy there-- if there are no absolute truths, there can not be some things that are always better morally.
tiltbillings wrote:
I understand that the person giving the talk keeps referring back to Christianity, but what it has to do with Dhamma is that, like Christianity, Dhamma is morally absolutist (though the two religions are of slightly different species), and we (Buddhists and Christians) both live in an increasingly relativistic postmodern society. Understanding what he says about Christianity and it's beliefs as it corresponds to the majority view in the secular world, corresponds to how Buddhism also fits in that same world.
Who says Buddhism is morally absolutist?
The doctrine of kamma? Take a look at the Brahmajāla Sutta it is full of absolutism. The view of eternalism is wrong. The view of nihilism is wrong, etc. Killing leads to birth in hell, or the animal realms, and when one is reborn as a human life is short (unwholesome results). Buddhism is absolutist in every sense.

though the two religions are of slightly different species
They are vastly different, coming from vastly different perceptions of reality.[/quote]
Their moral absolutisms are of slightly different species of absolutism. Their views are quite different than each other.

Kevin
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: A Talk on Posermodernism

Post by tiltbillings »

Virgo wrote:That's the whole thing Tilt. Whatever is the truth is the truth whether we believe it to be true or not. If fascism is an extreme result of relativism then relativism is bad, no matter what, especially no matter if Tiltbillings or Kevin believes it.
If . . . . That Mussolini appealled to relativism to justify his bad behavior hardly establishes a facism as resultuing from relativism. Anything can be pushed a dysfunctional extreme -- anything.
tiltbillings wrote:
However, there is always nuance of course (which does not mean there is always full blown relativism), and "relativism" is a blanket term, there are different species of relativism, some worse than others, and of course, situationally, sometimes applying a relativistic outlook is more or less harmful than others.
Ah. So relativism is relative. Absolutely.
Some relativists believe there are no absolute truths, it's all relative.
And where are these absolute truths?
What may be the result of the exact same actions by two different people (hypothetically) may be the different, simply based on what they believe the result to be. However, they also believe that somethings are absolutely always skillful or wise action while others are not.
In other words it is relative to one's point of view, according to you
This view is far less detrimental than a true and extreme relativism.
So, why push it to the extreme? You want to criticize extreme relativsim, but are you willing to criticize extreme absolutism?
However, you will note, that there is a logical fallacy there-- if there are no absolute truths, there can not be some things that are always better morally.
The only logical fallacy here is this claim.
tiltbillings wrote:
I understand that the person giving the talk keeps referring back to Christianity, but what it has to do with Dhamma is that, like Christianity, Dhamma is morally absolutist (though the two religions are of slightly different species), and we (Buddhists and Christians) both live in an increasingly relativistic postmodern society. Understanding what he says about Christianity and it's beliefs as it corresponds to the majority view in the secular world, corresponds to how Buddhism also fits in that same world.
Who says Buddhism is morally absolutist?
The doctrine of kamma? Take a look at the Brahmajāla Sutta it is full of absolutism. The view of eternalism is wrong. The view of nihilism is wrong, etc. Killing leads to birth in hell, or the animal realms, and when one is reborn as a human life is short (unwholesome results). Buddhism is absolutist in every sense.
The doctrine of kamma? Not by its basic defintion given by the Buddha. Does killing always lead to a hell realm rebirth?

kevin wrote:
Kevin wrote:though the two religions are of slightly different species
tilt wrote:They are vastly different, coming from vastly different perceptions of reality.
Their moral absolutisms are of slightly different species of absolutism.
Not that you have shown.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Post Reply