Lyotard famously defines the postmodern as 'incredulity towards metanarratives,' where metanarratives are understood as totalising stories about history and the goals of the human race that ground and legitimise knowledges and cultural practises.
Is he the only coherent post-structuralist there is?
Is the meta-narrative just taking the mono-myth and trying to apply to real life? We fictionalize life and turn it into a story about a heroes triumphing over and restoring light to civilization.
>>318660
Foucault and Derrida are perfectly coherent. If you understand Lyotard you should be able to understand them.
This is post-modernism.
>
3
Can you tell who is behind it?
Lyotard is best post-modernist. His postmodernism is nothing like critical theory bullshit.
>>319866
Kek.
HYPER REALITY
>>318660
>coherent
LMAO
"incredulity towards metanarratives" is itself a metanarrative.
>>320146
No it isn't ...
>Lyotard famously defines the postmodern as 'incredulity towards metanarratives,' where metanarratives are understood as totalising stories about history and the goals of the human race that ground and legitimise knowledges and cultural practises.
We are clearly in a post-postmodern phase then.
>It's 2015! What aren't you in the Right Side of History™
>metanarratives
I like that.
It seems like that happens a lot here, a rationalising of present events from information about past events.
Is it a phenomenon or is it objective?
>>318660
The world is full of references. A functioning metanarrative would have to include every other metanarrative and all its references in both directions. Impossible!
