Heidegger was the first post modern philosopher. - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Heidegger was the first post modern philosopher.
in Philosophy

By piloteerpiloteer 368 Pts
Post modernism cannot make a moral argument against racism, war, slavery, eugenics, or genocide. Perhaps the paramount reason for this is because postmodernism was created by an avid nazi party promoter.



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
33%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • AlexOlandAlexOland 274 Pts
    I mean, the reason that specific person held this view might have been what you mentioned - I wouldn't know. But I do not think that was what gave birth to post modernism. 
  • piloteerpiloteer 368 Pts
    @AlexOland


    He questioned the validity of any script or text, which is definitely a huge aspect of post modernism. Post modernism argues that any and all literature is subject to the authors feelings, worldviews, and agendas. Beyond that, any potential interpretation of that text is subject to those same phenomena, therefore, any and all literature is subjective. He also argued that no arguments on what constitutes "being" is rooted in objectivism. So he introduced relative notions to philosophy. That's another huge aspect of post modernism. He also introduced deconstructionism into philosophy, which is another aspect of post modernism that Derrida  used extensively. He pointed out many ideas that have always been taken for granted as fact, and demonstrated how they were just social constructions. All of the French philosophers who are now considered to be the founders of post modernism were very well read in Heideggers philosophy, and they built theirs, not as a retort to his, but as if his was their framework. Many people believe he was the first postmodernist philosopher. Nietzsche was the influence, but Heidegger actually built it.
  • AlexOlandAlexOland 274 Pts
    @piloteer "Perhaps the paramount reason for this is because postmodernism was created by an avid nazi party promoter." I was talking about this part when I said "that" in my second sentence. Sorry, I could have been clearer. I do not think post modernism is how it is right now because some nazi wanted to remove moral arguments against what they did. The man you mention may have started it (not claiming he did or did not, I just don't know) but I do not think the main reason behind it was to - as I said before - remove moral arguments against their inhumane actions. Maybe his actions affected his way of thinking but this does not mean that those actions are what gave birth to that idea. 
  • piloteerpiloteer 368 Pts
    edited July 7
    @AlexOland

    In all fairness, postmodernism doesn't remove morality, it just sticks it into that "relative" zone, and any arguments of an objective morality is just relegated to a social construction, but postmodernism and Heidegger are in no way arguing that morality doesn't exist or should be removed. Just so we're clear, I'm not harping on postmodernism here, I love postmodernism. I'm also not saying that Heidegger constructed it purposefully for the nazis to legitimize thier dickheadedness, I'm not actually even sure if Heidegger was associated with the nazis when he wrote his first book in 1928. There's actually a serious lack of political insight when it comes to postmodernism, or even existentialism, and German philosophy as a whole.

     The true meaning of this discussion is me trying to point out the lack of moral objectivism in postmodernism which bleeds into western thought. I find it fascinating how the nazis embraced the philosophical foundations that the beatnik, and the Woodstock generation also embraced. I'm just trying to point out the dark roots of where postmodernism came from, and how it can easily be turned on humanity to be an argument for misanthropic ideas, but it can also be used to inspire long haired unshowered hippies to stick flowers into the barrels of the cops who are pointing the guns at them for protesting inhumane treatment. Whether we know it or not, we all speak the language of postmodernism. Conservatives love to harp on it, but they do so by using postmodern reasoning and linguistics. Reagan and Margerate Thatcher both embraced postmodernism and how it can be translated to be an argument for laissez faire, or anarcho capitalism. Yet, the philosophers who are credited with creating postmodernism were unapologetic communists. Heidegger was a socialist just the same as the nazis, and socialism is just down the road from communism.

    Like I said, I love postmodernism. I love it because of its dedication to art, and it legitimizes forms of art that would never have been considered art before hand. It tries to lend credence to the idea that art is in the eye of the beholder. It does so by pointing out relativism in social thought, but I question at what cost, because it lets that relativism bleed into all aspects of humanity, and it seems to do so without thinking of the consequences for humanity. One thing I love about postmodernism is that it's totally in its nature to let people cherry pick which aspects of it that applies to them. So that means I can consider objective philosophers to be the best at political thought, but I can also think Kafka and Andy Warhol are among the greatest artists of all time regardless of their embrace of surrealism. It means that just because I love Ayn Rand and Friedrich Hayek, doesn't mean I don't get to play along with the posties games. 
    AlexOland
  • AlexOlandAlexOland 274 Pts
    @piloteer Oh, I just misunderstood you then. I agree with your last comment but I still have no position on who the first post modern philosopher is. I think it is pretty hard to draw a straight line and say "this is where post modernism was born".

     But if your main object was to explain that the relativism which post modernism brings causes people to have this certain relativistic (if that is a word) view about other things as well, then you have explained your position pretty clearly. 
    piloteer
  • piloteerpiloteer 368 Pts
    edited July 8
    @AlexOland

    If relativistic is not a word, it "F"ing should be. But I think it actually is. You are correct when it comes to drawing a straight line to define philosophical categories, but correct to a certain point. Postmodernism is just the name we use to describe a certain philosophy, and all the postmodern philosophers rejected that title and denied they had anything to do with it, but all of the basic framework was in place for all those peoples books, and all of it can be traced back to Heidegger. It's really just because the word postmodernism didn't exist when Heidegger wrote his first books in the 20s and 30s, and throughout WWII. But regardless of a lack of the name postmodernism, all the ideas espoused by postmodernism were most certainly present in Heideggers work. It can be demonstrated how his work differed from philosophers before him, but how they were similar to philosophers after him. Nietzsche prophesied the philosophy of the "final man"(man being plural in this case), and he described a lack of a central point of thought. I believe Heidegger and the French postmodernists had a sycophantic thing going on with Nietzsche, even to the point of proving his prophecy was correct by creating the very philosophy he described. We now call that philosophy postmodernism.

    https://www.stephenhicks.org/2009/11/30/heidegger-and-postmodernism-ep/
    AlexOland
  • AlexOlandAlexOland 274 Pts
    @piloteer Welp, I am sold.
    piloteer
  • WinstonCWinstonC 27 Pts
    @piloteer "In all fairness, postmodernism doesn't remove morality, it just sticks it into that "relative" zone, and any arguments of an objective morality is just relegated to a social construction"

    Is there really any functional difference between relative morality and amorality?
    AlexOland
  • piloteerpiloteer 368 Pts
    edited July 12
    WinstonC said:
    @piloteer

    Is there really any functional difference between relative morality and amorality?
    Yes there is! Relative morality means that what is considered morally wrong by some, may not be considered morally wrong by others. It just means there's no fixed morality that blankets all of society, but still a moral code exists with them all, even if each has a different set of moral ideals. Moral peoples may not have a set moral code, but they all have one thing in common with others who have a moral code, and it is just that. They have a moral code.

     Amorality would be a total lack of a moral code, even among different people. Amorality is covered under nihilism. Nihilistic people deny that anything exists, let alone moral codes. So an amoral, or nihilistic person would not consider themselves or others to have any value in life. Some people get to nihilism by way of philosophy, there's even a "positive nihilism" trend going around. But the majority of nihilists get there because of hopelessness and internal suffering, and they probably don't even know what nihilism is or that they are nihilistic. They are devoid of morality, and consumed by suffering.

    The difference between amorality and immorality is amoral is a lack of a moral code, or nihilistic. Immorality is when people do things that they know others would consider morally wrong, or they do things that they themself consider morally wrong. Subjectivity comes in here too, because some may consider amorality worse than immorality, and some may think it's vice versa. 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch