THOUGHTS ON POST-ONTOLOGICAL SOLIPSISTIC DISCOURSE (POST-LINGUSTIC)
(N)either either (n)or or and (n)either and (n)or both and either both or (n)either are valid forms of (a)logical discourse (in the abnegatory sense, of course).
(N)either either (n)or or and (n)either and (n)or both and either both or (n)either are valid forms of (a)logical discourse (in the abnegatory sense, of course).
posted by wolftrappe at 9:03 PM
1 Comments:
oooh! Look at those paradigmatic phrase regimens! Far more creative than any postmodern generator. I suppose when logic fails, parody remains. Good work.
I would like to see your response to my rebuttal of your rebuttal of my comments on Dawkin's piece on Intellectual Impostures ... at the very least so that we can get a sense of where the dialectic has taken us.
Indeed, it appears that I have made my case. Sokhal, et. al. have failed to be scientific in their "scientific" attack on postmodernism. And I have taken up the challenge of explaining and generalizing the aspects of Deleuze, in particular, with which I am familiar, thus proving Chomsky's assertion wrong that postmodernism (if Deleuze is to be placed in that box) cannot be generalized.
Now, to be fair, I'd like to see them, "the scientists," explain quantum mechanics or relativity theory to my grandmother! Yes, it's OK for them to admit defeat, saying nobody can understand it (as Feynman famously and rightly did), because, having access to The Truth, they can blame it on mother nature herself, ala the Copenhagen Interpretation!
Talk about meaningless! ;-)
Joel Morrison
spinbitz.net
Post a Comment
<< Home