Stephen Hicks: How Postmodernism Ultimately Leads to Nihilism

Stephen Hicks is a Canadian-American philosopher who teaches at Rockford University, where he also directs the Center for Ethics and Entrepreneurship. In 2004 he wrote "Explaining Postmodernism: Skepticism and Socialism from Rousseau to Foucault"

--------------------
This channel aims at extracting central points of presentations into short clips. If you like the content, subscribe to the channel!

[FadiAkil]

“Postmodernism is the Enlightenment gone mad.”
― Stanley Rosen.

[jeeed]

I like the videogame analogy. It speaks to the notion that most postmodernists are summoning artificial emotions from previous generations. If a postmodernist/socialist lived in Stalinist Russia, moved to Mao's China, participated in western protests of the 60's, and then moved to Venezuela in the 2000's, it's understandable that person would experience the rage and depression of unfulfilled socialist ideology. However, an early 20's college kid reading about the failed socialist movements of the past and deciding to become enraged is utilizing his imagination to create a manufactured emotion. The current "burn it down" postmodernist just sat down to play the videogame. A stranger before him bought the tv, another stranger bought the console, and another person bought the game disc; the current postmodernist player has nothing personally invested, and nothing to lose. This may explain why the current wave of postmodernists seem to project a highly emotional dogmatic insistence on the way things "should" be. Has anyone in the movement articulated a plan of how postmodern socialism will finally come to fruition this time? And can one of these postmodernist crusaders map out what a typical day-in-the-life socialist would look like? Until they do, postmodern socialists are really just a fan club about socialism, who are unfortunately being bolstered by current political left-leaning governmental policies.
Back to our elderly Stalinist-Maoist-Chavez socialist traveler. I think this most committed socialist would have to eventually face the fact that there's something about human nature and groups allows pure socialism to exist in short spurts before quickly becoming corrupted. Read Animal Farm, After The Fall, and Reflections of the Failure of Socialism.

[DanielSMatthews]

Beware anyone who wields the oxymoron "creative destruction" as a justification for forcing change on others rather than on themselves.

[DainBramaged]

Postmodernism is hollow in that it relies so much on deconstructing the works of the past. That can be a useful, or at least interesting, exercise for a time, but eventually you have to either come up with something better upon which to build new interpersonal and societal norms and inspiring art, or you have to conclude that, on balance, much of the past is actually worth admiring and preserving.

[brandowhitemusic]

Deconstruction is a postmodernist's palatable euphemism for destruction.

[Fludded]

Dave Rubin is tweeting that this channel has falsely claimed ownership of his content. Oh dear...

[christopherhamilton]

Same old conservative rhetoric and tropes. Sigh….

[BoffinGrusky]

Does Mr. Hicks have a YouTube channel? I've looked and can't find one under his name.

[jasonwright]

He makes some assumptions right off that are either wrong or are unsupported claims. The stance on the Individual and respect for their Rights is not an automatic in any other civilization. In fact this is practically unique to the West. Hicks is usually more precise in his arguments, these positions are astoundingly weak.

[Krshwunk]

To be clear, the so-called "theologians" referenced here do not expect people to burn in hell for merely "disagreeing with them" but for "acting in a culpably immoral way." Just thought I'd correct the straw man there.

[CharlesGervasi]

Hicks does a great job rejecting the interviewer's premises and coming close to likening the interviewer's point of view to religious schadenfreude. I like how he rejects the interviewer's premises without attacking the interviewer.

[NoorUllah-gmed]

The interviewer mistaken the philosophy with psychology

[pn]

Word-for-word transcript of Jordan Peterson's Aug. 2017 interview with Stephen Hicks (author of Explaining Postmodernism):

[kirkbrown]

False false false. He describes our civilization, then says all ancient ones were the same. How about Aztec human sacrifice, or ancient Greek slavery?

[russiane.lection-hacker]

Just remember that "Tear down" simply means "destroy what other people have invested their time, effort, love, and devotion in building and maintaining", and that if it's legitimate to do that to them, then you also legitimize others doing it to you.

[ahighhorseman]

Who are these civilized people he's talking about?

[jonmcalister]

Capitalism and rationality can also lead to a kind of cruel and heartless ideology. In the 1990s, World Bank economists were discussing how sending toxic waste from rich countries to poor countries would be a good idea because poisoning a poor person from the developing world (instead of a person from a wealthy country) would have a lower overall impact on GDP.

[tetramegistus]

how does anyone take hicks seriously? he paints a caricature of what he calls "postmodernists" as kinds of supervillains. it's such a cartoonish psychology and characterization it's incredible to me so many people in the comments take this definition and framework at face value. If you actually read Hicks, his critique of postmodernism fails spectacularly to understand postmodern outside "bad things Hicks doesn't like", there's no consistency nor real analysis nor authentic insight gathered. It's simply demonization of something(s) he doesn't understand.

[FrankHarwald]

If one believes in nothing, one also doesn't believe in nihilism, so nihilism is ultimately self-contradictory or inconsistent, knowable fully a priori by just expanding on the definition.