The Problems with Stephen Hicks

[Extreme Z7]

This is in response to @Leo Gura's endorsement of conservative intellectual Stephen Hicks and his book, "Explaining Post-Modernernism".

I'm not a big fan of Post-Modernism myself and while I do like Hicks's general takes on the dangers of socialism and the valuing of Enlightenment ideals, there's still some aspects to him that I found rather 'iffy' while listening to him.

And after listening to his talk, I took a look at the title of his book/audiobook and remembered there actually was a leftist critique of it made a few years ago. I think it's a good critique that exposed some major problems with his book.

What I found iffy about Hicks was that he just seemed like the kind of person who likes to dogmatically and simplistically preach "Objectivity" and "Rationality" with very little self-reflection. It's good to point out the atrocities of Socialism but that's not an excuse not to self-reflect on the bullshit of Objectivism.

Here's a short list of things that makes me exercise caution when listening to people like him:

- He's a fan of Ayn Rand, that on its own is already a big red flag.
- Despite preaching "Objective Reason" and "Critical Thinking" his own book is not actually academically-approved and has gross errors and mis-readings (see video).
- Fear-mongers that "Irrationality is trying destroy Rational Society". (There is truth to this but MAGA and Neo-Nazis come to mind, not college professors whining about bigotry)
- Knee-Jerk reactions against Quantum Mechanics disproving objective reality
- Trying to conflate Post-Modernism with Radical Feminism
- At the end of the day, I doubt he cares much about existential matters

Though, despite all this I would still describe his narrative on the historical explanation for Post-Modernism as "surprisingly intelligent". Sure, there were errors in his historical accounts on philosophy but I do think there is some truth in his statement that Post-Modernism may have originated from the failures of socialism and communism. I'm skeptical as to whether Post-Modernism is an ideology that can actually sustain a nation. It'll probably remain something useful only on an individual basis, maybe only most useful for existential ponderings, creative works, and spiritual pursuits. Granted you know all the nuances and trickiness of Relativism.

Edited November 26, 2023 by Extreme Z7

[Leo Gura]

Just because post-modernism is problematic does not mean modernism, materialism, and objectivism are the answer.

Edited November 26, 2023 by Leo Gura

[Rafael Thundercat]

@Leo Gura if both are not the answer what is the the metaview of going beyond both entails? A good 3 hour video on it would save a lot of time coming up into the Forum looking short little tweets here and there. He

[Girzo]

@Rafael Thundercat meta-modernism could be the answer, you just need to help building it, heh, because it’s not fully existent yet in philosophy and social science

[Leo Gura]

@Rafael Thundercat Tier 2 Spiral Dyamics is the answer.

[Ash55]

 

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Just because post-modernism is problematic does not mean modernism, materialism, and objectivism are the answer.

well its kinda the same as how stage bellow modernism view modernism, but for sure the limitation are important to study