Postmodernism and Its Significance

Author : Sharon White
The issue of nature and time when postmodernism appeared and was introduced is still very debatable. Only the fact that postmodernism appeared as artistic phenomenon is beyond the question. New post modernistic forms appeared in the 50s of the past century in the United States in such areas of culture as architecture, sculpture, and painting. Later this movement and art tendency has spread rapidly in music and literature. The following style features are characteristic for postmodernism: deliberate orientation on eclecticism, irony, diversity, parody comprehension of traditions, repulsion of art division into elite and mass art, breaking the barrier between the art and everyday life.The Russian economist Kondratiefff's first talked of the cyclical way of economic life by which roughly every fifty years society experiences the birth of a new technology that becomes its driving force and supports a steady growth over an extended period of time. When looking at the theoretical development of industrial sociology over the last century one can notice a similar cyclical pattern. It appears that every 15 years, give or take, a new theory on industrial sociology tends to surpass the existing one and that scholars put all their focus on this new theory. This process of advancement in knowledge has followed in lines with the Popperian "theoretical conjecture/empirical refutation" course of action, that originates from the Enlightment, when Man's faith, if not reverence, for reason and science began. Indeed, during the Renaissance, when the light of reason and logic shone upon the "Dark Ages" Mankind became entrenched with the notion that reason and logic were virtually untouchable upon the pedestal upon which they had been set, that this notion has become the driving force of our societies virtually in every aspect of it: intellectual, social, and political.However, although Man has reaped great benefits from modernity, "the comprehensive designation of all changes, intellectual, social and political, that bought into being the modern world, with exponentially increased living standards being an obvious example, not everyone blindly accepted this New Era. Indeed, the first people to voice their concerns over the nature and the effects of modernity were, not surprisingly a group of people who were less constrained by the omnipotent laws of reason and science, as say Emile Durkheim, who at the time was formulating his theory on suicides by using very scientific methods of research. This group is, of course, the artists. Baudelaire, a French poet of the 19th century is an example of how these people began, inadvertently perhaps, modernism, "a cultural critique of modernity that occurred in he West at the end of the 19th century". Baudelaire would have lunch every day at the Eiffel Tower's restaurant, not for his adulation of the monument, which in it's symbolism is very similar, not only to the dashing trains in Tennessee William's A Streetcar Named Desire, but also the world of modernity: cold, metallic, and deprived of life, but more for the view. However, he did not want the table with a view for the traditional sense of being able to look at Paris from a birds-eye view, but rather because it was "the only darn place in Paris from where you don't see this bloody monster of a tower."Baudelaire is a mere example out of many possible, but the anecdote illustrates quite
Well that not everyone espoused modernity with arms wide open. This criticism of modernity and its grand postulates is also apparent in industrial sociology. Indeed, when looking at a very schematic representation of the theoretical developments in industrial sociology, colloquially a time line, one notices that the last major theory is one called postmodernism. This "theory", a term used here with extreme hesitance, marks a clear break with the previous development of industrial sociology (previously solely based on the "theoretical research/empirical refutation" tenet. This reluctance to use the term is quite clear when one sees the vagueness of the definition of a term that in its meaning defies such clustering:Moreover, Kumar writes "Contradiction, circularity far from being regarded as faults in logic are in some post-modern theories celebrated." Clearly the opposing nature of these two strains of thought has led to wide debate and the proponents of the earlier theoretical developments in industrial sociology dismiss postmodernism believing that it's chief significance is subvert the Western rational tradition of scholarly research and scientific enquiry". This essay will discuss the legacy of modernity's reason/logic paradigm and its effect on the theoretical development of industrial sociology, and then study whether or not and to what extent Goldthorpe's statement has any "meat" to it or whether it is perhaps a reactionary reflex, to a serious development in the field of industrial sociology.When taking an overview of the implications of modernity's reason/logic paradigm on the theoretical development of industrial sociology one must take into account the work of Karl Popper. In the preface of Conjectures and Refutations Popper lays down
the direction of his book, a collection of essays and lectures on the fundamentals of the rationality of science. The main thesis that he exposes in this brief introduction is that "we can learn from our mistakes". Although, the phrase itself seems simple enough there is much deeper signification to this statement. Of course we can learn from our mistakes, that is the learning process in a nutshell, but Popper is talking of the "Theoretical conjecture/empirical refutation" theory he sets out to describe in his book. He states that our scientific knowledge is based on assumptions that are more or less guesses, attempts to solve our problems, in sum conjectures. These conjectures are then open to various tests that try to disprove it (refutations). Even if the assumption is not discredited by the tests, it can never be definitively justified. Perhaps a conjecture may remain unchallenged for centuries, but time does not give it any more validity (ibid) .The classic example of this heliocentrism: the church maintained for centuries that the Earth was at the centre of the universe, not the sun. Copernicus proved that it is in fact the Sun that is at the centre of the universe. Indeed, for Popper, the fact that none of these conjectures can be definitively justified, and that they all have a critical state by which we can and must argue to solve our problems, is the essence of the rationality of science.In the introduction of Goldthorpe: Consensus and Controversies Jon Clark outlines the main characteristics of Goldthorpe's views and methodology. He can very much be seen as a Popperian with a firm belief in the abovementioned rationality of science. Clark restates how Goldthorpe seeks to advance knowledge in the social sciences by formulating theoretically important propositions that can then be empirically tested. Moreover, Goldthorpe sees data free analysis as word spinning lacking substance, and that an understanding of the surrounding world is only possible "with more and better material on which to feed". Goldthorpe's meticulousness with regard to detail in his research is furthermore congratulated in the 21st chapter of the same book. When conducting his research on class structures in the United Kingdom he paid very careful attention to the correct measurement and specification of the variables measured, but also in the choice of the independent variable. His careful choice of measurements enabled him to construct a theory-driven classification of the class structure in the United Kingdom, one that today is still very much the standard instrument when conducting research in the field.The two examples above illustrate the core of modernity: knowledge is only to be gained by a combination of theory building, data collection as well as formal methods of data analysis. Only once a theory has been empirically tested, can it claim to be an improvement over the existing one. Bacon, and Descartes (and later on Popper) believed that with the help of their knowledge, and perception Man could discern the truth from falsehood. It is from this premise that Descartes wrote his famous quote "Je pense, donc je suis (I think, therefore I am)".However, post-modernists remain sceptic to such a view: "[postmodernism shares] a deep suspicion of any theory that claims to a vantage point of knowledge or truth, a self assured position of scientific method from which to criticise the various forms of ideological "false seeming" or commonplace perception" (Norris, 1990).
Indeed, for postmodernists there is no commonly acknowledged universal Truth. They view no matter how justified and truthful some scientific finding maybe, it is still not Truth in such. Although it maybe validated by a group of scientists, they maintain that this validation still remains very claustrophobic and "inbred". In Sociology and Organisation Theory John Hazard explicit the view of Keneth Gergen on the issue. Gergen states that the results obtained by the process of theoretical conjecture and empirical refutation do not increase an accurate correspondence with reality. (Hassard,1995) The research that is carried out is from a whole community of scientists who share the same discourse: the evidence that results from this criticism of the conjecture is most likely to be read and interpreted by this very same community of scientists, using the very same language. This claustrophobia for Gergen is a "process of professional self justification" rather than a quest for the Truth.Along the lines of Gergen, another social; scientist Thomas Kuhn elaborated his idea that science did not live up to the omnipotent image that had been upheld of it by philosophers for the past 200 ears. Indeed, in his 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions he asserted that science did not deal with given facts, but rather created its facts. "The man who is striving to solve a problem defined by existing knowledge and technique is not just looking around. He knows what he wants to achieve, and he designs his instruments and directs his thoughts accordingly." In such a mind-frame, Kuhn maintained that novelty was not easily accepted as the scientists of a certain paradigm, which he described as essentially a collection of beliefs shared by scientists, a set of agreements about how problems are to be understood, would not want their set of beliefs to be discredited. However, when finally this novel theory would gain recognition a new paradigm would succeed the previous one. The name of his book stems from this idea of the history of science being a succession of paradigms, which automatically, according to Kuhn, renders talk of advance in knowledge impossible as there is no way of comparing the results produced by two different paradigms. Indeed, there is no neutral way of verifying results and the paradigm that retains the most influence is the one that, in a very Darwinian way, attracts the most supporters.The article was produced by the member of masterpapers.com.
Sharon White is a senior writer and writers consultant at term papers. Get some useful tips for thesis and buy term papers .
Keyword : postomernism, sociology, characteristics of postmodernism