The Baha'i Studies Listserv
Dear Stephen,

PoMo contradicts the Writings on more than PoMo's logical self-contradictions - 
it contradicts the Writings on epistemology, logic, ontology and metaphysics, 
philosophy of man (it denies that there is such a thing as human nature), 
philosophy of law,  science and a host ot other subjects. 

PoMo does indeed contradict itself in the same way nihilism does - but the 
adherents don't care because they don't believe in logic anyway. Logic is just 
another way to dominat or 'colonize' others so the very idea of universal logic 
must be undermined and destroyed along with rationalism and the Enlightenment. 
It's easy to show how all people and all cultures follow standard or 
Aristotelian logic even if they deny it or have other systems of logic. 
Unfortunately, they don't care about that either. 

The reason that PoMo, a lot (but not all) of feminism and nihilism continue 
because even though intellectually they are almost bankrupt, they have become 
foundational to various left and left-liberal political causes. Politics 
doesn't hav to be rational or consistent because politics is about persuasion - 
not truth - and about power, not integrity. 

Best,

Ian 


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Stephen Kent Gray 
  To: Baha'i Studies 
  Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 12:24 PM
  Subject: Re: Feminism and a Blog War



The Baha'i Studies ListservThat's a nice paper, but wouldn't just be easier to 
say PoMo contradicts itself the same way 
  Nihilism does.


  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_nihilism


  PoMo is the same as nihilism in that saying PoMo is true, includes or leads 
to PoMo is false.


  PoMo is inconsistent internally and externally, such that people can't be a 
PoMoist while being anything else, 
  while believe in known fact, or even while being a PoMoist.

  Sent from my iPad

  On Jan 27, 2013, at 20:05, Ian Kluge <[email protected]> wrote:



The Baha'i Studies ListservIf you are intyerested in a detailed critique of 
postmodernism in regards to the Faith, see my "Postmodernism and the Baha'i 
Writings" in "Lights of Irfan", Vol. 9, 2008" or at 
http://www.bahaiphilosophystudies.com/articles/?p=24 

    Bst wishes,

    Ian 
      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Stephen Kent Gray 
      To: Baha'i Studies 
      Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 5:28 PM
      Subject: Re: Feminism and a Blog War



The Baha'i Studies ListservI should have added some more to the first email, 
but I will wait for question to answer them.

      Sent from my iPad

      On Jan 26, 2013, at 0:19, Stephen Kent Gray <[email protected]> wrote:



The Baha'i Studies ListservNot the best subject title, but the least worst 
rather.


        
http://arationalfaith.wordpress.com/2013/01/19/bahai-feminism-women-and-the-universal-house-of-justice/


        That's the link to my correspondence with A Rational Faith blog. 


        It's real complicated to summarize the topic, so I'll just have you 
read the blog and the comments. 
        The comments deal with various topics.


        The issues of feminism, sexism, free will, individuality, theory versus 
practice, moral responsibility, etc.
        They and many more issues are brought up and dealt with.


        The author is a Bahai who subscribes to a combination of Marxism, post 
colonialism, and post modernism. 
        He always phrases everything in terms of theory. He believes theories 
are intrinsic and unqualified goods.


        I'll share a criticism of Post Modernism.


        Pomo robs people of hope that society is eliminating its prejudices and 
progressing towards truth. 
        It leaves people doomed to a world of perpetual blind prejudice, with 
well educated people able to point
        out other people's prejudices but not their own.


        Now for Marxism!


        Marxism says society is run by evil vampires, anyone who Marxists don't 
like, and that violent revolution is the 
        inevitable, mandatory, solitary, etc. result.


        While I never said anything about metaphysics in the piece. He 
constructs a straw argument in I argued for 
        radical un constrained free will as existed and atomism. He uses the 
negation of said argument to possibly
        go to the opposite extreme of determinism. I've already pointed out the 
flaw of PoMo.


        Actually, I've never had a developed metaphysics of free will, I 
heavily leans toward Oriental Compatibilism. I also
        refer to evolutionary psychologist Steven Pinker.


        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will
__________________________________________________
You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[email protected]
Unsubscribe: send a blank email to 
mailto:leave-685291-27401.54f46e81b66496c9909bcdc2f7987...@list.jccc.edu
Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [email protected]
Or subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
Mail - mailto:[email protected]
Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st
News (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st
Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

Reply via email to