Neo-Baroque/Neo-Classiciam vs Brutalism/Structuralism. Which do you prefer? (this is not like the previous posts) reddit.com/gallery/noix2y
πŸ‘︎ 26
πŸ“°︎ r/AskBalkans
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/Polaroid1999
πŸ“…︎ May 30 2021
🚨︎ report
functionalism/structuralism?

can someone explain those 2? ik they're like kinda insignificant in terms of what we absolutely need to know for the test but I've never fully understood their difference and it's bothering me a bit hahahhh

πŸ‘︎ 10
πŸ“°︎ r/APPsychology
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/josephiennn
πŸ“…︎ May 15 2021
🚨︎ report
is genetic structuralism related to semiotics?

and if so, what is this link? how can i make it clear in order to be able to discuss genetic structuralism in an essay about semiotics?

πŸ‘︎ 11
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/keybIadee
πŸ“…︎ Apr 07 2021
🚨︎ report
Structuralism and β€˜Irreducible Contingency’

Hi everyone,

Was hoping I could get some help with understanding this notion that LΓ©vi-Strauss’ structuralism contains an β€˜irreducible contingency’ when it comes to its ability to account for history.

For context, I came across this when reading a 1974 article consisting of a conversation between LΓ©vi-Strauss, Maurice Godelier and Marc AugΓ©. Godelier, representative of the French Marxist anthropology of the time, seems to want to be able to inject β€˜real’ history into anthropological objects and thereby show how historical transformations occur in societies, that is, how a society moves and alters from social formation A to social formation B.

Godelier claims this can be done through analysing societies through identifying the dominant modes of production and how they alter internally or externally - he gives an example of the Incas elsewhere, highlighting how first the Inca state altered the traditional mode of production of the β€˜ayllu’ (village communities), then secondly, the Spanish colonisers ushered in a new mode of production in the Andes with the ideologically tinged encomienda.

How do such analyses supposedly overcome or aspire to overcome this so-called β€˜irreducible contingency’ in structuralism? I don’t have a proper grasp of structuralism, so there is that. My guess would be that history for structuralism is reduced to contingency, lacking any necessity- what happened, happened, but it equally could not have happened and things could have been different. Godelier wants to account for history in a more concrete way that can reveal a hidden necessity?

Stay well!

πŸ‘︎ 68
πŸ“°︎ r/AskAnthropology
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/Bleakfable
πŸ“…︎ Feb 11 2021
🚨︎ report
Is Heideggerian Phenomenology a kind of pre-structuralism or did it lead to structuralism?

I am not sure if there's a link between the two postures. But if our Dasein is dependant on the social meanings and structures of the phenomenological worlds we are 'thrown into'? is this not a 'primitive' version of structuralism in some way?

πŸ‘︎ 5
πŸ“°︎ r/askphilosophy
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/elPalitroche
πŸ“…︎ Apr 11 2021
🚨︎ report
Curtis and Structuralism

Forgive me if this thought isn’t entirely fleshed out, but it’s just something that came to me during my reading.

How can Curtis’ overarching philosophy be understood in terms of structuralism? Would his connections to power networks land him squarely in the structuralist camp, or would it relate more to post-structuralism because of its critiques of false dichotomies in societal analysis and general post-industrialist angle?

Genuinely wondering about the synthesis of his unique views with these philosophical topics and would appreciate any ideas or sources on it.

πŸ‘︎ 9
πŸ“°︎ r/AdamCurtis
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/HenrytheFowler919
πŸ“…︎ Apr 19 2021
🚨︎ report
What comes after post-structuralism?

There's obviously a through-line between structuralism and post-structuralism, but what comes next? I've been really getting into schizoanalysis and I've been thinking it's strange that there aren't many writers who follow through with the ideas of thinkers like D&G (or anyone else in that milieu). Sure there are people like Nick Land, Mark Fisher, Reza Negastani, and Manuel Delanda, but I can't think of anybody who would count as a "Post-post-structuralist". Would something like speculative realism be the next stage? (I find some of it interesting but there's less of an emphasis placed on the social sciences and politics.)

πŸ‘︎ 3
πŸ“°︎ r/CriticalTheory
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/middle_name12
πŸ“…︎ Mar 30 2021
🚨︎ report
ELI5: What is post-structuralism?
πŸ‘︎ 9
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/Darkotika
πŸ“…︎ Apr 01 2021
🚨︎ report
Properties, Innate Ideas, and Post-structuralism | Noam Chomsky youtube.com/watch?v=jPXC5…
πŸ‘︎ 5
πŸ“°︎ r/chomsky
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/freewilllibrary
πŸ“…︎ Mar 12 2021
🚨︎ report
Could someone produce an analogy/thought experiment to help me understand Newman's problem for structuralism?

I've seen the version of it as it's posed on Wikipedia:

>Newman argued that the ESR claim that one can know only the abstract structure of the external world trivializes scientific knowledge. The basis of his argument is the realization that "[a]ny collection of things can be organized so as to have structure W, provided there are the right number of them", where W is an arbitrary structure.

β€”But I don't understand what this really means, or how it "trivialises" scientific knowledge.

πŸ‘︎ 13
πŸ“°︎ r/askphilosophy
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/ashley_msgr
πŸ“…︎ Feb 27 2021
🚨︎ report
Post-structuralism isn't idpol you fucking downies.

The amount of people on this sub blaming postructuralism for the rise of identity politics is legimately retarded.

Post-structuralist thought is really idpol kriponite. Post-structuralism is the idea that consciousness is reality and every concept is a human construct. Race, gender, and every other made up "identity" are nothing but spooks that can be discarded when they start to act like fucking cunts.

So if someone is hyperfixated on pronouns, or language policing, or is crippled by male guilt or a fear of minorities they aren't postructuralists, they are essentialists.

πŸ‘︎ 19
πŸ“°︎ r/stupidpol
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/PickleOptimal
πŸ“…︎ Jan 21 2021
🚨︎ report
Properties, Innate Ideas, and Post-structuralism | Noam Chomsky youtube.com/watch?v=jPXC5…
πŸ‘︎ 3
πŸ“°︎ r/noamchomsky
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/freewilllibrary
πŸ“…︎ Mar 12 2021
🚨︎ report
What is Derrida's critique of structuralism?

I have read a lot of structuralism in the last week or so, and now that I feel like I'm slowly starting to get the hang of it, I'm not sure where to go from here. I think I want to understand Derrida's deconstructionist critique of structuralism. Does anyone have any reading/watching recommendations for this area of Derrida, and especially anything to help with Derrida's "Structure, Sign, and Play" and the concepts, "freeplay," "center," "structurality," "transcendental signified," etc?

πŸ‘︎ 16
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/Toa_Ignika
πŸ“…︎ Dec 26 2020
🚨︎ report
Post-Structuralism - The Social Constitution of the Subject

Hi everyone,

I'm in my first semester of literary and cultural studies and in today's lecture on post-structuralism, my professor mentioned something I don't understand no matter how long I try to decipher the slides. He has that tendency to just read off the presentation and not explain anything, and even if he does, well... his English isn't the best (though to be fair mine isn't either so that might be on me) so it's really hard to follow.

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to post pictures but here is a screenshot of the slide in question: https://imgur.com/a/K82iRgj

So the part I'm lost on mainly has to do with that last sentence: "Shifters indicate subject positions - created by language - that preexist individual selves, and power enables their use."

What does literally any of that mean? What are shifters? Subject positions? And what is that part on power? Unfortunately, none of this was explained in the lecture. It might be totally unimportant and I might be too hung up on this, but I would appreciate any explanation you could give me if anyone knows what this is about. Thanks in advance!

πŸ‘︎ 2
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/waveskirt
πŸ“…︎ Jan 28 2021
🚨︎ report
Look what I came across in a read on Structuralism!
πŸ‘︎ 12
πŸ“°︎ r/CastleTV
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/Vivahe
πŸ“…︎ Jan 23 2021
🚨︎ report
What's the difference between postmodernism and post structuralism?
πŸ‘︎ 10
πŸ“°︎ r/askphilosophy
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ“…︎ Nov 22 2020
🚨︎ report
Structuralism (Systems Thinking) for Sustainability youtube.com/watch?v=oizvY…
πŸ‘︎ 24
πŸ“°︎ r/sustainability
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/NewTrainOfThought
πŸ“…︎ Oct 07 2020
🚨︎ report
Alfa Mist - Structuralism (2019) [Full Album] youtube.com/watch?v=wMxl4…
πŸ‘︎ 2
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/george_sand_
πŸ“…︎ Dec 19 2020
🚨︎ report
Everything I read, I run it through the intellectual paper-shredder called Post-Structuralism
πŸ‘︎ 2
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/quebecivre
πŸ“…︎ Oct 22 2020
🚨︎ report
Semiotics and Structuralism

I don't understand how semiotics contribute to Structuralism and in what way. Can anyone briefly explain it?

πŸ‘︎ 9
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/MiseryWas_
πŸ“…︎ Jul 22 2020
🚨︎ report
Structuralism as the only route towards progress youtube.com/watch?v=lVd2c…
πŸ‘︎ 3
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/NewTrainOfThought
πŸ“…︎ Dec 18 2020
🚨︎ report
Currently writing an essay evaluating Titchener's structuralism on whether it's empirical or not, can someone help me?

I don't want anyone offering to do it for me for cash as I'm doing it myself. I just need a few points as I'm 600 words short of the 1500 limit. It also degree level for those needing to know.

The title is 'With reference to supporting sources, provide an evaluation of one of the following schools of psychology as empirical science: Structuralism, Functionalism and Cognitivism."

As I said in the title I'm doing it on structuralism, so far I have talked about introspection, the experimental method used and Titchener's aims. I have also explained what empirical science and structuralism are.

I would like some help with additional points, thank you.

πŸ‘︎ 2
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/RiggyNo
πŸ“…︎ Dec 09 2020
🚨︎ report
How is post-structuralism viewed in contemporary linguistics?

Title. Post-structuralism is really important in other fields, and because it's a linguistic theory, I'm wondering how it's viewed in linguistics.

πŸ‘︎ 23
πŸ“°︎ r/asklinguistics
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/zedhatool
πŸ“…︎ May 12 2020
🚨︎ report
My Views regarding Structuralism, please take a look youtube.com/watch?v=lVd2c…
πŸ‘︎ 6
πŸ“°︎ r/Environmentalism
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/NewTrainOfThought
πŸ“…︎ Dec 18 2020
🚨︎ report
Sider's metaphysical structuralism and metaphysical structuralism

While I was reading Ted Sider's new book "The Tools of Metaphysics", I faced with a claim which is about metaphysical structuralism; He implies that, "structuralism about individuals can be articulated as antihaecceitism", I wonder that is the context of haecceitism here, related with the old-fashioned Duns Scotus concept haecceity or a new one?

To me, I imagined a structure (when I see the concept of structuralism )that has some certain kinds of properties and of course those are universals and it makes possible the identification of its objects. Structures' effect on the objects is necessary apparently. Conversely, haecceity can be observable iff by way of the unique properties.

So in my account it refers to a sort of bundle theoretical nominalism and then the concept of antihaecceitism may refer to some necessary condition due to the "structure", It sounds weird to me, can you help me to understand?,

have a great day, cheers

πŸ‘︎ 3
πŸ“°︎ r/Metaphysics
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/atilla444
πŸ“…︎ Nov 20 2020
🚨︎ report
Does the post-structuralism of the "New Age Movement" actually have anything to do with what's happening?

What I'm proposing is that the New Age has something to do with something else in the world, and it can be summed up as:

1). The Unconscious is the source of all the world's events, so the world is a simulation, and a simulation is a dream. 2). Awareness is the only way to change reality, and the only way to change your reality is to change it internally, in your own body. Change is not a word. 3). The world is a dream, and it can be changed, so the only way to change your reality is through your own conscious actions, which are in turn a means to change the world. 4). Everything is a dream, but you can be awake, and the only way to be awake is to really be awake.

Let's say you have a dream with some aspects in which you see in it some aspects of reality. You're awake.

Now, you have another dream with the same aspects, but the world is much more dreamy. You're in a coma. In the coma you have to change reality, which means changing your body. You change your body. You change your reality. You change your body, and the world changes.

You are now in a dream, and you are not conscious.

You're in a coma, but you are conscious.

You're in a coma, but you're not awake.

You're in a coma, but you're not awake.

And so on.

What I'm suggesting is that "The unconscious" is the source of all the world's events, so the world is a simulation, and a simulation is a dream.

And then we see from this that the New Age has nothing to do with what's happening.

πŸ‘︎ 2
πŸ“°︎ r/SubSimulatorGPT2
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ“…︎ Jul 27 2020
🚨︎ report
What books cover existentialism, structuralism, post structuralism and other alternatives if any?

What books cover all or most of existentialism, structuralism, post structuralism and maybe also other alternatives if any? Not just one of them. Thanks.

πŸ‘︎ 7
πŸ“°︎ r/askphilosophy
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/timlee126
πŸ“…︎ Aug 30 2020
🚨︎ report
What would Existentialists/ Absurdists say about Structuralism and its sentiments

From my understanding, both existentialism and absurdism state that meaning is something that can be achieved. In particular, I see a theme of "authenticity" come about - especially with Camus - meaning can/ should derive from a place of authenticity in which one defines.

It seems structuralism understands the meaning isn't from the cosmos (or truth) per se, but a bottom up approach - how economics and other societal factors define and create meaning and what is meaning/ importance for us.

How do some thinkers contrast these two - how can one be authentic with their meaning if it comes from a place where its not from some authentic (defined as internal) home? So I guess I mean less if meaning can exist, but more so if it can even come from an authentic place without so much externalities.

πŸ‘︎ 6
πŸ“°︎ r/askphilosophy
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/PhiloSophia2020
πŸ“…︎ Jul 27 2020
🚨︎ report
Meta-Anarchy's Guide To Post-Structuralism β€” Pilot. feat. Social Darwinism
πŸ‘︎ 73
πŸ“°︎ r/Grej
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/negligible_forces
πŸ“…︎ Jun 09 2020
🚨︎ report
Difficulty distinguishing Structuralism from Postmodernism

From what I have gleaned from various YouTube sources as well as the Philosophize This podcast, one defining characteristic of PoMo philosophers was that they rejected the idea of metanarratives that structuralists tried to use to explain the conditions of societies. But didn't Baudrillard write about a "code" or system of signs that structures and dictates every aspect of society in Simulacra and Simulation? Isn't that a sort of metanarrative?

And then there's Barthes. He was a structuralist, right? But didn't he reject the idea of metanarratives as well?

I'm so confused! Thank for not shunning me for my profound ignorance.

πŸ‘︎ 14
πŸ“°︎ r/askphilosophy
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/rthmjohn
πŸ“…︎ Jul 20 2020
🚨︎ report
Attempt at formulating new ethics of decentralized liberation, inspired by post-structuralism /r/metaanarchy/comments/i…
πŸ‘︎ 5
πŸ“°︎ r/decentralization
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/negligible_forces
πŸ“…︎ Sep 25 2020
🚨︎ report
Evolution and revolution: anarchist geographies, modernity and post-structuralism, Environment and Planning D-Society and Space, 2017 35, 5, p. 893-912. | Federico Ferretti academia.edu/31721835/Evo…
πŸ‘︎ 3
πŸ“°︎ r/worldanarchism
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/burtzev
πŸ“…︎ Nov 28 2020
🚨︎ report
Understanding the decline of structuralism

My primitive understanding of the transition from structuralism to post-structuralism to postmodernism is that thinkers began to call into question the foundation of structuralist thought i.e. that everything you can think or possibly know is dictated by the narrow lens of the society you happen to exist in. Critics of structuralism pointed out that by this logic, the only way for structuralist philosophers to arrive at these conclusions is for their own thinking to be dictated by the selfsame narrow lenses of society that they critiqued.

Surely, the refutations of structuralism were more substantial than such a low-hanging-fruit argument. In my opinion, structuralism's deterministic view of epistemology is compelling, which is why I really want to know what the post-x critiques of it were. Thanks for your help!

πŸ‘︎ 9
πŸ“°︎ r/askphilosophy
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ‘€︎ u/rthmjohn
πŸ“…︎ Jul 21 2020
🚨︎ report
How is it possible that postmodernism, post-structuralism, deconstruction, and social constructivism have managed to maintain their bad-boy/boogeyman image for like 60 years?
πŸ‘︎ 47
πŸ“°︎ r/askphilosophy
πŸ’¬︎
πŸ“…︎ Sep 06 2019
🚨︎ report

Please note that this site uses cookies to personalise content and adverts, to provide social media features, and to analyse web traffic. Click here for more information.