Saw this a few weeks ago and thought it generally insightful. However, I found myself wondering about deeper ideologic context and hypocrisy. For example, he cited the prevailing liberal make-up of TED's audience, but what does that really say? GE, one of TED's chief funders, is one of the world's largest producers of military hardware.
Another aspect that didn't sit too well with me was his tacit post modernism. It isn't enough to say people have different ideas. All ideas are not equal. So if we've got pockets of asymmetrical understanding the solution isn't necessarily compromise. This line of analysis reminded me of Ken Wilber and his integral science...
So far as I know, there are different applications of post modernism, but they all derive from the same set of assumptions: a systemic doubt for the existence of objective (etic) reality and a universalized relativism.
The lens works fine for some applications, but all ideas and truths are not equal, and PoMo has fallen into disrepute with many critics and scholars. Ken Wilber, for example, has published several devastating critiques of the model in his exigesis of Integral Science.
To tie this in with the OP, he was essentially reframing PoMo rather than addressing the validity of different epistemic positionalities.
Comments 6
Another aspect that didn't sit too well with me was his tacit post modernism. It isn't enough to say people have different ideas. All ideas are not equal. So if we've got pockets of asymmetrical understanding the solution isn't necessarily compromise. This line of analysis reminded me of Ken Wilber and his integral science...
Reply
*"Another aspect that didn't sit too well with me was his tacit endorsement of post modernism."
Sorry for the confusion and/or redundant comment.
Reply
Reply
So far as I know, there are different applications of post modernism, but they all derive from the same set of assumptions: a systemic doubt for the existence of objective (etic) reality and a universalized relativism.
The lens works fine for some applications, but all ideas and truths are not equal, and PoMo has fallen into disrepute with many critics and scholars. Ken Wilber, for example, has published several devastating critiques of the model in his exigesis of Integral Science.
To tie this in with the OP, he was essentially reframing PoMo rather than addressing the validity of different epistemic positionalities.
Reply
Leave a comment