Post-everything最新文献

The ‘post’ in literary postmodernism 文学后现代主义中的“后”

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00015

H. Bertens

引用次数: 0

Lost in the post 迷失在邮局

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00014

Edward Baring

引用次数: 0

The tradition of post-tradition 后传统的传统

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00017

S. Turner

{"title":"The tradition of post-tradition","authors":"S. Turner","doi":"10.7765/9781526148179.00017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526148179.00017","url":null,"abstract":"According to its Google Ngram, the term ‘post-traditional’ arrives at the turn of the twentieth century, but only begins to be widely used after 1960, probably as a result of its appearance in a subtitle of a book by Robert Bellah,1 after which its use has continued to increase geometrically, up to the present. There is a core problem with the term which is signalled by this citation pattern. It can be understood as a novel theoretical concept which applies to the last half of the twentieth century, telling us something about the meaning of our own time. The term, however, has a problematic relation to a much deeper, older and more pervasive set of distinctions, involving modernity and the larger trajectory of European society from the medieval period on, the Enlightenment, democratization, capitalism and industrialization, urbanism, and ‘rationalization’ and differentiation. It also followed, and resembled, a long-running discussion of the prospects for a new kind of society, based on a new or revised spiritual order or new values, that paralleled this discussion. Although there is a vague connection to the classical sociological literature, there is a sharp break between the ‘posttraditional’ literature and the ‘spiritual order’ and new values literature. The new literature neither engages nor cites it. Yet these literatures closely resemble one another, and share the same themes and much of the same anti-liberal, anti-individualist normative orientation. This poses a problem for writing an intellectual history. Why was there so little textual continuity or engagement with the earlier literature in the discussion of these topics? Did they identify something genuinely novel with the term, as they claimed? Or did they unwittingly reproduce the distinctions made in the past? These turn out to be less questions of intellectual history – though there is an important historical fact that bears on them – than questions about the concept itself. Does it capture something new? The question can’t be answered without getting a clear understanding of the concept itself. In what follows, I will focus on explication, and The tradition of post-tradition","PeriodicalId":249094,"journal":{"name":"Post-everything","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125363903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Index 指数

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00022

引用次数: 0

Defining the old, creating the new 定义旧的，创造新的

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00010

A. V. Veldhuizen

引用次数: 0

Busting the ‘post’? 破坏“柱子”?

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00019

引用次数: 0

‘Our post-Christian age’ “我们的后基督教时代”

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00008

H. Paul, A. V. Veldhuizen

引用次数: 1

The death and rebirth of ‘postcapitalist society’ “后资本主义社会”的死亡与重生

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00011

Howard Brick

引用次数: 0

List of figures 数字清单

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00003

引用次数: 0

Post-Keynesian Post-Keynesian

Post-everything Pub Date : 2021-07-17 DOI: 10.7765/9781526148179.00013

Roger E. Backhouse

{"title":"Post-Keynesian","authors":"Roger E. Backhouse","doi":"10.7765/9781526148179.00013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526148179.00013","url":null,"abstract":"For John King, author of A History of Post Keynesian Economics since 1936, post-Keynesian economics is ‘a dissident school of thought in macroeconomics’.1 His book traced post-Keynesian economics back to 1936, the year when The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, by John Maynard Keynes, was published. This was important to establish the legitimacy of the dissenting tradition he represented, demonstrating that the economists who formed the subject of his book were the true heirs of Keynes and that the dominant interpretation of Keynesian economics, which he chose to call the ‘Grand Neoclassical Synthesis’, was ‘a travesty of Keynes’.2 Such histories often overlook the fact that the term post-Keynesian has a much more complicated history.3 When first used, in the early 1940s, it had a strictly temporal connotation. For the next two or three decades the term was generally used to denote ideas that had been developed on the basis of the theories found in Keynes’s book, with no implication that these were in any way unorthodox. The term was embraced by architects of the ‘Grand Neoclassical Synthesis’ rejected by King and other modern postKeynesians. It was not until the middle of the 1970s that the term was used to denote a newly emerging school of thought dissenting from the main body of economics. At this point it is worth noting that one source of dispute among economists who identify as post Keynesian has been whether the term should be hyphenated, the presence or absence of a hyphen being used to denote different meanings of the term. In quotations, I have preserved whatever the author wrote, but in my own writing I have chosen to treat ‘post’ as an adjective and to use a hyphen where the term ‘post-Keynesian’ is used as an adjective, and to omit the hyphen where it is used as a noun, unless I am talking specifically about someone who identified as a Post Keynesian (without the hyphen).4 The frequency with which the term was used is indicated by Figure 5.1. It Post-Keynesian: A post-concept in economics","PeriodicalId":249094,"journal":{"name":"Post-everything","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129968839","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0