What disturbs me most about Derrida and Foucault's postmodernism/s: their non-psychological stance worries me most. I now see what Derrida's "decentering" of language and the identity of the subject is supposed to achieve. He is trying to get away from playing into the hands of right-wing literalists and traditionalists. However, by ignoring the importance, the reality and the necessity of the psychological, he also severs humanity (or at least those who take him up on his creed) from their roots.
In shutting off the avenue towards investigating (and thereby possibly healing) a negative and pathological consciousness, Derrida's philosophy also shuts off an avenue that is life-enhancing, that resolves unconscious conflicts towards a genuine integration into society, and that gives centredness and meaning to life.
The generally positive eccentricities of shamanism, with its modalities of spontaneous ecstasy, have been rendered in a bad light. In the absence of shamanism, there is only the remaining possibility of a form of regression that is compulsive and negative -- such as the manner of finding one's masculine identity at the expense of female suffering.
Postmodern conceptualizations, intended as antidotes to right-wing bigotry, may have in fact been instrumental in causing the disease that it has been designed to cure. To the degree that it blocks a retreat into positive ecstasy (shamanism), the ideology denies an important route to regaining psychological health.
3 comments:
Bingo!
Yes, SIC, I think it's the demons in the rice crispies that causes us to hate.
Yes, but all can be blocked out with a simple pointy tin foil hat. With that, then one is devoid of string pulling Demons and becomes infallible, a conduit for all that is holy.
lol
Like Me!
Post a Comment