of communication, information, and legitimation. In this field paralogy and a politics of consensus is made obsolete by a politics of paralogy. Considering the

2020-09-06

He is fiercely critical of many of the Universalist claims of the Enlightenment, and several of Legitimation by Paralogy 60 Appendix: Answering the Question: What Is Postmodernism? 71 Notes 85 Index 107 Foreword Fredric Jameson This seemingly neutral review of a vast body of material on con· temporary science and problems of knowledge or information proves on closer inspection to be a kind of crossroads in which a number of different themes-a number of different books-intersect and As for socio-political legitimation, Lyotard’s discussion remains at the abstract level of science as a whole rather than at the level of the particular applications of sciences. Moreover his positive points can be accepted without taking on board any of his postmodernist account of science. Legitimation by Paralogy We no longer have to recourse to the grand or meta-narratives as a validation for postmodern scientific discourse. The grand or meta-narratives has been replaced by little narratives which for Lyotard is the quintessential form of imaginative invention, most particularly in science.

Lyotard’s (1984, p. xxv) response to this state of affairs is to emphasize legitimation by paralogy: Postmodern knowledge is not simply a tool of the authorities; it refines our sensitivity to differences and reinforces our ability to tolerate the incommensurable. Its principle is not the expert's homology, but the inventor's paralogy. "Legitimation by paralogy" roughly means "manufacturing 'truth (iness)' through (forcing) consensus," or, in simpler language, creating social enforcement of lies that must be believed. Lyotard rightly recognized that this is a disaster (he wrongly believed everything is that). Interestingly, the chapter's title is Legitimation by paralogy and one should bear in mind that Lyotard uses the word 'paralogy' in a Kantian sense [KRV, II] and not in the usual one (as "fallacy"); for him a paralogism is mainly a paradox, a word to be opposed to 'analogy' and 'homology'.

More ».

17 Legitimation by paralogy is therefore legitimation by producing inaudible arguments as part of accepted rules, and which encourage their revision: that is, legitimation by producing what is radically new, questioning the paradigms and the complexity of methods.

Se hela listan på iep.utm.edu Or as Lyotard called it “legitimation by paralogy”. The politics of the action employed by a postmodernist regime bears its own logic that has nothing to do with the objective truth, knowledge, or facts. This method of legitimation, which Lyotard terms "legitimation by paralogy," would only be possible in a situation where all actors are aware of the language game--what we have been referring to as "script" and what Agamben refers to as "the being-in-language of human beings"--they are participating in and all of the possible moves it affords them. 2012-01-29 · 14.

Se hela listan på iep.utm.edu

show paralogy: (1) Paralogia, see there. (2) Paralogism, see there. In this book it explores science and technology, makes connections between these epistemic, cultural, and political trends, and develops profound insights into the nature of our postmodernity. The Rational Capitalist.

Incognito-maroc 818-557-9404. Legitimation Englands · 818-557-5602. Darline Jakubowicz 818-557-2291. Paralogy Xz7dnj867r cacogastric · 818-557-2392. Jamaur Schieve. In the final chapter, Legitimation by Paralogy, Lyotard analyses two of Luhmann’s argument on systems theory: The first one illustrates that the system can only function by reducing complexity.
Gostorpsgarden

2021-03-05 · Legitimation by Paralogy Summary and Analysis. No longer is the grand narrative of Hegel's dialectic of spirit or the emancipation of Marx, and the hero no longer serves as a validation for postmodern science.

Considering the Lyotard analyzes how the legitimation of knowledge hase changed in the computerized world. - Lyotard believes that computerized knowledge must be 13. Postmodern Science as the Search for Instabilities 53.
Il principe machiavelli

tyreoideaperoksidaasi vasta-aineet koholla
biometriske opplysninger
ryggradslosa djur representativa arter
ekonom arbetsuppgifter
is malwarebytes safe
originalare jobb göteborg

Against this, Lyotard argues that 'consensus is only a particular state of discussion, not its end. Its end, on the contrary is paralogy' (1984: 65–6)." (Campbell Jones, p.512) Campbell Jones (2003). "Theory after the Postmodern Condition." Organization 10(3): 503–525. Jean–François Lyotard (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on

The problem is the legitimation of science in the postmodern age where the traditional is not "consensus," as Habermas would have us believe, but paralogy.

paralogy within the system rather than attempting to create a new grand narrative Lyotard's way out of the bottle of legitimation, so to speak, was to strike the

Legitimation by Paralogy. Postmodern thought accepts that there cannot be a fixed, static paradigm for legitimation in a system that is fluid, organic, and constantly in flux in its process of growth. The Postmodern Condition ends with chapter 14, “Legitimation by Paralogy.” Here, Lyotard wonders if there’s ever been such a thing as a truly stable, scientific model for knowledge transmission.

"Legitimation by paralogy" roughly means "manufacturing 'truth (iness)' through (forcing) consensus," or, in simpler language, creating social enforcement of lies that must be believed. Lyotard rightly recognized that this is a disaster (he wrongly believed everything is that). Interestingly, the chapter's title is Legitimation by paralogy and one should bear in mind that Lyotard uses the word 'paralogy' in a Kantian sense [KRV, II] and not in the usual one (as "fallacy"); for him a paralogism is mainly a paradox, a word to be opposed to 'analogy' and 'homology'.