From Structuralism to Poststructuralism

Structuralism was rooted in a theory that the meaning of words stems not from the differences in their objects, but their binary differentiation from other words. These binary distinctions are not equal, however, there is an (implicit) hierarchy within them. Poststructuralism, however, observes the radical instability of the model, because it also conceptualizes nothingness, and nothingness has the effect of devouring the claims of presence, being, authority, and truth that would be upheld in the language. In the end, it isn't only the author's words, but the author himself whose identity is destabilized by the structuralist view of language.

If the nineteenth century claimed with Nietzsche that God is dead, the poststructuralists, while agreeing, announced that so is the (human) author. Despite Descartes' belief that he had established the certitude of his own being through the cogito, all that he really established was that he was thinking. He had not established his own existence, let alone that of God (a 'transcendental signifier').

[espritdelescalier]

I've been looking for a solid source of information on postmodernism and poststructuralism. I think I found it. Your treatment is objective and free of the typical distortions surrounding tutorials on postmodernism, including both a mindless devotion to it or an undue antagonism toward it. Honestly, when I found this video I felt a bit like Howard Carter first peering into the tomb of Tutankhamun and seeing everywhere the glint of gold.

[elel]

37:26 purpose of language is to reverse status quo

[MilesP]

Thanks for the lecture! Found your channel while searching for info on John Donne. Recently been diving into the English Metaphysical and Romantic poets. Also slowly conducting a survey of the more mainstream aspects of modern/postmodern thought after several years of investigating what I now know to be referred to as the 'western esoteric tradition'. Your generously sharing your work is greatly appreciated Dr. Masson ❤‍🔥

[devonashwa]

Nietchze is proud of the fact that god is dead? Where is your proof of that. He is not saying it in a proud manner. This lecture became unlistenable after hearing this over simplistic comment.

[Werdna]

In my view, you need to let go of The Age of Pisces, and look to Jung's vision of a new iteration of the Deity, as a chthonic Phallo-Logos. You cannot declare that Derrida is not a serious scholar because you have chosen to BELIEVE something like Christianity, according to a book that MAY have been corrupted through political machinations. That's just an act of faith, and is non-determining of general and other people's realities

[johnbarlow]

I thought the commentary at the end was very insightful. The observation that they are now have power in the Academy is true, although I'm not sure if left to its own devices it will self destruct. I wonder if they will be pushing for mandatory university attendance in the future to prop up their work, either directly or via free university level education.

[lawrencemashiyane]

This felt like a lecture and a sermon. Perhaps if it were strictly theology but the Christian views really limit or take away from the analysis/lecture. Also, way to put Christianity on a false pedestal. Christianity has never been a driver of humanity and in fact it has too much blood and oppression on its hands to say that it’s from Christianity that we get ideas of freedom, human rights, and sanctity of life. Tell that to the project of colonialism which was advanced by Christian missionaries. In fact it seems ignorant of Christianity’s global legacy. This seems on purpose.

[claudette]

Your scholarly integrity is rare. Thank you for maintaining it.

[archadeinteriors]

i make the case that post structuralism doesnt really exist. This is based on the fact that it seems torn between being perceived, on one hand as a continuation or evolution of it, and on the other hand a revolt against it; my theory is that in general it seems to be adopting or imitating the relationship between modernism and postmodernism in a way that seems very natural, but to be frank is NOT. Its nearly a joke on all us philosophers -suffice to say i just dont think structralism ( is big enough to saying it) includes POSTstructuralism, to wit its just structuralism or it aint, -it might be late, collapsing, structuralism or it might be postmodernism, but poststructuralism is really just a useless word that at best, refers to a group or individuals who meditate on or reference structuralism somewhat after the heydey of its inception..(sorry my apostrophe key is broke)..

[douglaspackard]

Your math is bad. Any finite number "divided by zero" is infinity, not zero again. More precisely this operation usually just isn't defined, but when you let a divisor approach zero, the ratio gets arbitrarily large the smaller the divisor gets. We just don't usually do arithmetic involving infinity (it took until Cantor for someone to seriously try that).

[sittertal]

Unbelievable. I listened through the whole lecture. This gentleman hasn’t grasped what structuralism or post structuralism is all about but fights it as if it derived directly from hell. Towards the end it gets completely ridiculous.

[AleArek]

As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who is demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell him nothing, even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents and pictures. ...he will refuse to believe it... That's the tragedy of the situation of demoralization."

–Yuri Bezmenov [1983