Hypermodernism as Deceleration, Re-stabilisation and Reconciliation

Marcin Trepczyński
{"title":"Hypermodernism as Deceleration, Re-stabilisation and Reconciliation","authors":"Marcin Trepczyński","doi":"10.14394/edufil.2018.0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In view of the claims of some thinkers that we can speak about “the end of the postmodern”2 or that postmodernity “is over”,3 it is reasonable to ask about the dominant indicators of today’s times and to ask whether it is accurate to describe them using concepts and labels developed to define the last decades of the 20th century. Such reflection is an element of a broader consideration of the human situation. It is important from the point of view of such questions as: how do we live and think, where do we go, who are we. From this perspective, reflection on the situation of individuals and societies has great philosophical significance. In this article I will try to address the main diagnoses and concepts concerning our times provided by thinkers referring to notions such as “postmodernism”, “the postmodern”, “after modernity” or “liquid modernity”. I will show that, at least today, they are insufficient and inadequate. I will also try to point to present attitudes which should be taken into account in any description of our times and to offer a proper name for them. Finally, I will briefly sketch how it is combined with the philosophical questions mentioned above.","PeriodicalId":365492,"journal":{"name":"Edukacja Filozoficzna","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Edukacja Filozoficzna","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14394/edufil.2018.0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In view of the claims of some thinkers that we can speak about “the end of the postmodern”2 or that postmodernity “is over”,3 it is reasonable to ask about the dominant indicators of today’s times and to ask whether it is accurate to describe them using concepts and labels developed to define the last decades of the 20th century. Such reflection is an element of a broader consideration of the human situation. It is important from the point of view of such questions as: how do we live and think, where do we go, who are we. From this perspective, reflection on the situation of individuals and societies has great philosophical significance. In this article I will try to address the main diagnoses and concepts concerning our times provided by thinkers referring to notions such as “postmodernism”, “the postmodern”, “after modernity” or “liquid modernity”. I will show that, at least today, they are insufficient and inadequate. I will also try to point to present attitudes which should be taken into account in any description of our times and to offer a proper name for them. Finally, I will briefly sketch how it is combined with the philosophical questions mentioned above.
作为减速、再稳定与和解的超级现代主义
鉴于一些思想家声称我们可以谈论“后现代的终结”2或后现代性“已经结束”3,我们有理由问一下当今时代的主导指标,并问一下用定义20世纪最后几十年的概念和标签来描述它们是否准确。这种反思是对人类状况进行更广泛考虑的一个组成部分。从这些问题的角度来看,它是重要的:我们如何生活和思考,我们去哪里,我们是谁。从这个角度出发,对个人和社会处境的反思具有重要的哲学意义。在这篇文章中,我将试图阐述思想家们对我们这个时代的主要诊断和概念,这些概念涉及到诸如“后现代主义”、“后现代”、“后现代性”或“流动现代性”等概念。我将表明,至少在今天,它们是不够的和不充分的。我还将试图指出在描述我们的时代时应该考虑到的当前的态度,并为它们提供一个适当的名称。最后,我将简要描述它是如何与上面提到的哲学问题相结合的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信