|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: sirblob2sirblob2 Date: Apr 20, 2008 16:15
why does he have a go at the postmodernists for doing tabula rasa when
that's all art/literary rhetoric has done for milleniums? why doesnt
he have a go at dante, donne, cervantes, socrates, plato and not just
at rousseau? why stop at virginia woolf when you can have a munch at
anything from dewey to jesus to alexandria's great-library to
economics to law to chemistry to advertisments all the way to sheep-
shagging scotsmen?
is it cuz he thinks that'll get his book accepted by the masses-
hungering editors, to please a capitalist mass that's been just as
inclined as the next at doing tabula rasa social engineering?
|
| |
|
| | 24 Comments |
|
|
Author: ImmortalistImmortalist Date: Apr 20, 2008 21:50
> why does he have a go at the postmodernists for doing tabula rasa when
> that's all art/literary rhetoric has done for milleniums? why doesnt
> he have a go at dante, donne, cervantes, socrates, plato and not just
> at rousseau? why stop at virginia woolf when you can have a munch at
> anything from dewey to jesus to alexandria's great-library to
> economics to law to chemistry to advertisments all the way to sheep-
> shagging scotsmen?
>
Post-modernism and romanticism were major movements and excellent
places to start a critique on theories of human nature and instinct.
Whatever boundries that confined Pinker to begin with these two
movements is probably not for sales mainly. But please point out what
you specifically agree or disagree with. If you have read the entire
book it seems like you would see that he covers about everyone in his
"dogmas-R-us" approach; Marx to Frued to....
- Post/Modernism is Based on False Theory of Human Psychology, Beauty
is Dirty Word
|
| Show full article (17.13Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: sirblob2sirblob2 Date: Apr 20, 2008 22:39
On 21 abr, 06:50, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:>> why does he have a go at the postmodernists for doing tabula rasa when
>> that's all art/literary rhetoric has done for milleniums? why doesnt
>> he have a go at dante, donne, cervantes, socrates, plato and not just
>> at rousseau? why stop at virginia woolf when you can have a munch at
>> anything from dewey to jesus to alexandria's great-library to
>> economics to law to chemistry to advertisments all the way to sheep-
>> shagging scotsmen?
>
> Post-modernism and romanticism were major movements and excellent
> places to start a critique on theories of human nature and instinct.
> Whatever boundries that confined Pinker to begin with these two
> movements is probably not for sales mainly. But please point out what
> you specifically agree or disagree with. If you have read the entire
> book it seems like you would see that he covers about everyone in his
> "dogmas-R-us" approach; Marx to Frued to....
>
> - Post/Modernism is Based on False Theory of Human Psychology, Beauty ...
|
| Show full article (1.86Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: sirblob2sirblob2 Date: Apr 20, 2008 22:41
On 21 abr, 06:50, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:
> romanticism
and as for Romanticism, what does more tabula rasa? the greeks or the
judeo-christians? come on.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: sirblob2sirblob2 Date: Apr 20, 2008 22:46
On 21 abr, 06:50, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:>> why does he have a go at the postmodernists for doing tabula rasa when
>> that's all art/literary rhetoric has done for milleniums? why doesnt
>> he have a go at dante, donne, cervantes, socrates, plato and not just
>> at rousseau? why stop at virginia woolf when you can have a munch at
>> anything from dewey to jesus to alexandria's great-library to
>> economics to law to chemistry to advertisments all the way to sheep-
>> shagging scotsmen?
>
> Post-modernism and romanticism were major movements and excellent
> places to start a critique on theories of human nature and instinct.
> Whatever boundries that confined Pinker to begin with these two
> movements is probably not for sales mainly. But please point out what
> you specifically agree or disagree with. If you have read the entire
> book it seems like you would see that he covers about everyone in his
> "dogmas-R-us" approach; Marx to Frued to....
>
> - Post/Modernism is Based on False Theory of Human Psychology, Beauty ...
|
| Show full article (2.12Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Apr 21, 2008 09:46
Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:
>Babies prefer consonant musical intervals over dissonant ones
Me, too, gaga.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: James WhiteheadJames Whitehead Date: Apr 21, 2008 10:04
>
>Modernist and postmodernist artists and critics fail to acknowledge
>another feature of human nature that drives the arts: the hunger for
>status, especially their own hunger for status.
Wrong - plenty of examples from Picasso through Van Gough (changed name for
US consumption) to our Damien-
"I cant wait to get into a position to make really bad art and get away with
it.."
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: sirblob2sirblob2 Date: Apr 21, 2008 11:11
On 21 abr, 18:46, David Oberman wrote:
> Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:>>Babies prefer consonant musical intervals over dissonant ones
>
> Me, too, gaga.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: sirblob2sirblob2 Date: Apr 21, 2008 11:12
oh every1s been doing that- including those cicero quoting
''enlightened humanists'' and biologists for thousands of years
On 21 abr, 19:04, "James Whitehead"
somewhereovertherainbow.com> wrote:>>Modernist and postmodernist artists and critics fail to acknowledge
>>another feature of human nature that drives the arts: the hunger for
>>status, especially their own hunger for status.
>
> Wrong - plenty of examples from Picasso through Van Gough (changed name for
> US consumption) to our Damien-
>
> "I cant wait to get into a position to make really bad art and get away with
> it.."
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: Apr 21, 2008 11:51
>>>Babies prefer consonant musical intervals over dissonant ones
>>
>> Me, too, gaga.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
