
The Unfortunate Fallout of Campus Postmodernism - jseliger
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-unfortunate-fallout-of-campus-postmodernism/?wt.mc=SA_Twitter-Share
======
elipsey
It’s weird how much this is not my experience with academia.

I spent _way_ too long getting my BS at a state school, then I worked for
Cornell as a programmer in an engineering grad school for several years, and
now all my friends are grad students, instructors, and post-docs. Like there
was literally no one else at my last barbecue, but I don’t know anyone who
talks like this, and I have never seen protests or commotion on campus.

I guess it might be because I mostly know engineering students, but I’m having
trouble locating this epidemic of societal breakdown everyone seems to be
talking about...

~~~
praisewhitey
I did my undergrad 10 years ago in a very large US college. Now I'm back doing
grad in a different very large US college. The people the author is talking
about _do_ exist, but I would estimate there's about 100 of them in my college
of ~39,000. And even then, how many of them will still be that way 5 years out
of college?

~~~
eximius
100 people showing up en masse at relevant events can cause quite a stir and
wield an absurd amount of influence if they are loud.

------
maldusiecle
Articles like this seem to deliberately blur categories so as to describe
large portions of academia as uncharitably as possible. "Postmodernism" has
never been a term with a consistent definition, but even given that, certain
claims in this article are contradictory or outright nonsensical.

"Postmodernists have tried to hijack biology, have taken over large parts of
political science, almost all of anthropology, history and English," Maitra
concludes, "and have proliferated self-referential journals, citation circles,
non-replicable research ..."

What would it even mean for English research to be "non-replicable"? In fact,
the replication crisis has struck social psychology harder than any of the
fields mentioned.

The implication throughout is that students are passive here: activism is
something that their professors talk them into. This was not at all my
experience at university, and it doesn't match what I've read about many
contemporary protests. I'd be curious whether it matches the experience of
anyone here on HN.

I'd argue that most of these students who supposedly think there is "no truth"
have very specific views of what is and is not true, and that their views are
violently opposed to those of the author. The last time there was intense
campus protest, the issues were civil rights and the Vietnam war. No doubt, in
today's climate protesters engaging on those issues would be likewise
condemned as postmodernists believing in "no truth."

------
linkregister
I upvoted this article because it describes a problem on college campuses that
I have only become aware of recently.

That said, it misrepresents the Berkeley riots in a deceptive way. The rioters
were not students; they were masked, black-clad members of Antifa and a
movement called Black Bloc.

I sympathize with journalists’ struggle to provide a coherent narrative, but
rewriting history only serves to weaken the author’s point by anyone with
first or secondhand knowledge of the events described in the article.

------
vowelless
Just FYI, the author is Michael Shermer, founder and Editor in Chief of
Sceptic Magazine, which also includes Richard Dawkins on its editorial board
(along with some other intellectual heavyweights ).

------
forapurpose
I think we should be careful about getting caught up in empty rants against
the boogieman du jour, even if many people here feel like the author. It would
be great to read a serious critique and defense of postmodernism, and if
someone wants to allege that it has a widespread following on campuses, and
that the sort of anecdotes in the editorial are widespread and that they are
connected to postmodernism, they should present serious evidence of it. If we
want to read about postmodernism, let's exercise our intellectual curiosity
and learn about it, good and bad.

I'm disappointed in Scientific American for publishing a piece so lacking in
any serious basis or reasoning. It's a rant of anecdotes; I'm not sure the
author knows what postmodernism is - they seem to attribute to it 'everything
liberal that I don't understand'. Such low-quality outbursts reinforce among
people in the sciences ignorance of the humanities.

Someone famous once said: 'Dogs bark at those whom they do now know.'

------
hypersoar
This article makes its case very poorly and misrepresents a few things. It's
not at all clear who the "postmodernists" are; it appears to be any professor
not in a STEM field. It goes through a bunch of unconnected anecdotes that,
yes, illustrate a pattern and then says "this is bad, and it's due to
postmodernism".

In the parts where it attempts to make an argument, it misrepresents:

>> _This is a shift in Marxist theory from class conflict to identity politics
conflict; instead of judging people by the content of their character, they
are now to be judged by the color of their skin (or their ethnicity, gender,
sexual orientation, et cetera)._

I hear this talking point a lot, but that argument is a straw-man. The
argument is not that people should be "judged by the color of their skin". The
point is that they _already are_ , frequently in subtle ways. You therefore
have to address these things explicitly if you're to have any hope of
counteracting them. If you don't, you're perpetuating the status quo without
addressing how we got to it or what its problems might be.[1]

>> _Students are being taught by these postmodern professors that there is no
truth, that science and empirical facts are tools of oppression by the white
patriarchy, and that nearly everyone in America is racist and bigoted_

Are they actually being taught that "there is no truth"? I suspect that it's
more like "The way we frame and talk about 'truth' is itself the result of
political and social forces, and that framework of conservation is worth
examining critically." I haven't read enough postmodernist philosophy to be
sure. Neither, I suspect, has the author of the OP.

As for the "everyone is racist" thing, this is, again, frequently
misrepresented. It conjures up images of professors telling their students
that everybody is throwing around racial slurs behind their backs. The
_actual_ point is that our society suffers from _systemic_ racism, and
everybody living in it plays a part, and it's important to be conscious of
that part.

Listen, maybe you disagree with all of this. You're allowed. But if you want
to argue, you should argue against the strongest points being made, rather
than the points drawn from articles written by people whose goal is to point
and laugh. Recognize that, if you've never opened up a book on gender theory
or literary criticism, then you are _maybe_ not qualified to reject the entire
fields out of hand.

[1]([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36FbHXsEuzM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36FbHXsEuzM)),
a clip from the noted philosophical work _Adventure Time_.

~~~
eximius
> As for the "everyone is racist" thing, this is, again, frequently
> misrepresented. It conjures up images of professors telling their students
> that everybody is throwing around racial slurs behind their backs. The
> actual point is that our society suffers from systemic racism, and everybody
> living in it plays a part, and it's important to be conscious of that part.

Have you considered that "everyone is racist", while a misrepresentation of
what is said, is what is taken away by some students?

------
forapurpose
Talking to a few professional academics I know, my impression has been that
postmodernism is out of fashion in academia. I was disappointed because it
seems like exactly what we are missing now (and in fact I thought the
abandonment of postmodernism might be a cause of our problems):

A fundamental rejection of the supremacy of ideologies and absolute truths,
and recognizing that at all their foundations are flawed human perceptions and
self-serving assumptions. And the acceptance that yes, that includes the
person in the mirror and their cherished beliefs.

------
dogruck
Makes me think of the recent headline where a Professor of Math Education
supposedly claimed that basic math concepts perpetuate "white privilege."

[https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10005](https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10005)

~~~
jdpigeon
This website really seems to have an agenda and isn't a source I would qualify
as good journalism.

For anyone who's interested in the story, here's an interview with the
professor. Admittedly, from an interviewer who's pretty on board with her
ideas.

[https://theeducatorsroom.com/mathematics-political-post-
sess...](https://theeducatorsroom.com/mathematics-political-post-session-
rochelle-gutierrez/)

~~~
dogruck
Thanks for the link -- I had not seen that before.

Still, it does not look like she backs away from her statements. For example,
she says:

> So, just like, there’s not a lot of incentive for Whites to interrogate
> Whiteness as the norm and as the right way to have society set up, there’s
> not a lot of incentive for mathematicians and math teachers to interrogate
> this unearned status that mathematics has in society.

Do you disagree? Do you think the original article that I linked
mischaracterized the Professor's statements and opinions?

~~~
jdpigeon
No, I was actually pretty surprised by how ridiculous some of her statements
sounded. Still, encouraging traffic to a site like campusreform.com makes me
feel queasy.

~~~
dogruck
This might be the most wacky quote from the interview:

> For instance, in Papua New Guinea they have a base 16 system and … it’s the
> body … the body is the calculator…so, when somebody’s counting it’s the body
> that’s being enacted. So, what does that mean when we receive a singular
> version of mathematics both from the point of view of European mathematics,
> but also from the point of view of what counts as school mathematics.

~~~
AstralStorm
And we have base 24 and base 60 on clocks. Straight from Babylon.

So what? Base 10 is not a modern invention either.

School mathematics teaches mostly about white people because a lot of actually
written down math was for by them. (By them we still use a bunch of theorems
and notations invented by Chinese and Arabs. Some Indian too.) The problem is
related to other people not using written media as much and/ or taking a back
seat during 18th through early 20th century. This is changing again, where
Chinese and Indian mathematicians are getting well known again.

Why not say Zimbabwean? Answer is trivial, economics and wars.

------
taylodl
The more interesting question is what role did the recoil against
postmodernism play in the election of Donald Trump? You can't reason with
postmodernists since they eschew science and evidence-based reason as tools of
oppression. They are quite literally unreasonable. This is not a trivial
concern - since they can't be reasoned with I know of several people who took
a _" Fuck it. Burn it."_ approach to the election of Donald Trump (I don't
agree with that strategy, but that's another matter). That's purely anecdotal,
but it does make one wonder what role it played on sending Donald Trump to the
White House and what role it might play on his staying there in 2021.

~~~
hmschreck
It seems like the article goes from talking about the reasonable parts of
modern liberal belief (LGBT people have the right to exist, racism is still
something that exists and happens to minorities, etc) to going dangerously
close to the redpill minefield when they start using extreme examples
("cissexual heteropatriarchy" is a phrase I've literally never heard) and the
idea that one instance where fighting against things I think we can all agree
are bad (racism, sexism, etc) were taken too far means the entire idea of
fighting those things is reprehensible.

It seems like that's the real problem now - it's not whether or not these
problems exist, or whether they're worth fighting, but rather to what extent
they should be fought.

~~~
creaghpatr
If you haven't been to a college campus in awhile you would be shocked at the
recent gap between 'general' liberal beliefs (legalize pot, gay marriage,
increased welfare) and 'post-modern' liberal beliefs, which boil down to
increasingly abstract accusations of structural racism/sexism/transism/other
isms.

That you don't recognize the phrase 'cissexual heteropatriarchy' seems to
suggest this, because that's a term that many college administrations
recognize, accept, and dole out punishments on, and even questioning that
logic will put your education in jeopardy. Basically it's cultural extortion.

~~~
QAPereo
How about some concrete examples of all of that? If it’s that common you
should be able to reference them like crazy. Show me evidence of this growing
pattern.

Edit: downvote away, but show me the evidence.

~~~
remarkEon
Just finished grad school at Big State University. Almost weekly both prior
and after the election there were rallies and protests (some related to Trump,
some not) where the demonstrators would wax on about “systemic white
supremacy” and “cisheteropatriarchy”. White students would ceremoniously
“acknowledge their privilege” by publicly declaring themselves an ally. They
even had someone with an excel tracker to note who was declaring themselves an
“ally” (probably collecting emails for future organizing, I would guess). At
one of these things, a female student took the mic and talked about the pain
she feels for being “white passing”, which I took to mean that people don’t
see her as a minority but as White merely because of her _skin color_ \- a
startling claim. Professors were starting to put “safe space” stickers on
their office doors (I have pictures), and people were wearing safety pins
after the election to signal that they are a “safe” person to interact with.

This is absolutely a cult now, and an increasingly a mainstream one. It’s hard
for me to gauge exactly _how_ mainstream it was there but it was localized, it
seems, to the undergrad institution.

~~~
forapurpose
The comment lists several ideas, but doesn't really what the problems are. It
just presumes that the problems are self-evident.

> "systemic white supremacy” and “cisheteropatriarchy”

For example, the idea that there is systemic white supremacy in the U.S. is
hard to challenge - the evidence is overwhelming - nor is the proposition that
many white people are unaware of it (the 'privilege').

Cisheteropatriarchy means, based just on reading the word here, merely the
obvious fact that politics is dominated by heterosexuals whose gender
identities are 'near' the stereotypes (i.e., they are not transexual, etc.).
It's hard to name anyone in power who doesn't fit that description.

I'd love it if we could talk about the ideas, and had some curiosity about
them, rather than just dismissing it all as a "cult".

> safe spaces

That doesn't sound objectionable on its face, and in a society with a lot of
racism and sexism, it might be a good idea. I've talked to black people who
say they very often feel vulnerable - they never know what someone might do,
and if something happens the black person often will get the blame (and be
fired, arrested, kicked out of the restaurant, etc.). The Weinstein Company
could have used some safe spaces. What harm is it doing?

~~~
remarkEon
Sorry, I don’t believe in this new religion. This idea that white supremacy is
“systemic” is not at all self evident, and pretending that it is portends that
individual white people have some kind of original sin, forever, for past
racial transgressions. I do not buy this, and it’s dangerous to teach people
this. It’s dangerous because immediately people attribute personal failures
and successes, at least in part if not in whole, to external immutable
factors. It denies individual agency.

As for safe spaces, intentionally insulating people from “triggering” things
seems like the exact opposite thing to do if you’re trying to build a society
of resilient, dynamic individuals. I’m sorry your friends have experienced
racism in real life. That’s awful. However, I fail to see how safe spaces have
anything to do with either diagnosing or treating the problem. How would a
safe space have stopped Weinstein, exactly? I have no idea.

~~~
saynay
The argument for systemic racism isn't anything like some sort of "original
sin" for white people. Black people were legally second-class citizens, denied
access to the education and employment of white citizens. The consequences of
segregation did not evaporate with the civil rights movement. It will take
several generations to escape that shadow.

That is the 'systemic' part of systemic racism. The opportunities that I was
provided were in part based on the opportunities that my parents were
provided.

Yes, people will blame 'systemic racism' for their personal failures; people
will blame God, or the weather, because people will blame anything for their
failures. I don't think that is an argument to ignore reality.

As for the "triggering" thing, I somewhat agree. On the one hand, you are
going to math class to learn math, not to have flashbacks to past trauma; on
the other hand, it seems absurd to slap an "ingredients" label on social
interactions so people who are allergic to certain topics can steer clear. I
think this is an area where society is still refining its tools, and the
current 'safe spaces' wont be the way we collectively settle on dealing with
these issues.

~~~
remarkEon
>It will take several generations to escape that shadow.

How many? Because this ideology most certainly doesn’t put an expiration date
on white privilege and “systemic” white supremacy. There’s no way anyone would
agree on a date, and even if they did it would be necessarily arbitrary so as
to be rendered meaningless.

>The opportunities that I was provided were in part based on the opportunities
that my parents were provided.

And the lesson to be gleaned from this is to work hard so you can provide a
good life for you and yours, not make people feel bad (which is what
inevitably happens) for their prior generations’ successes.

>Yes, people will blame 'systemic racism' for their personal failures; people
will blame God, or the weather, because people will blame anything for their
failures. I don't think that is an argument to ignore reality.

It’s not a reason to ignore reality, and it’s also certainly not a reason to
invent new ones. The _last_ thing we need children thinking today, with all
the external stimuli they get from social media, is that they did or didn’t
achieve something because of their privilege or lack there of.

~~~
forapurpose
Calling it an ideology is an easy way out and baseless. There is plenty of
fact and research to support it.

> How many [generations]?

I don't see the point of predicting it. It's happening now. Ignoring the
problem or denying it won't fix it.

> the lesson to be gleaned from this is to work hard so you can provide a good
> life for you and yours

The opportunity to do that is what people are after. Many minorities don't
have that opportunity. The government provides poor schools, they are
discriminated against by the justice system, the job market, and throughout
society.

> invent new [realities]

Widespread discrimination against minorities is in no way new and does not
need to be invented; again the facts and research are overwhelming.

> The _last_ thing we need children thinking today, with all the external
> stimuli they get from social media, is that they did or didn’t achieve
> something because of their privilege or lack there of.

The last thing we need is for that to be true. We should work to create the
society you envision, rather than just insisting it exists.

------
biggestlou
What these articles invariably fail to do is name even one single "postmodern
professor."

------
dcre
There is no content here, only moral panic of precisely the kind the author is
claiming to denounce: "Students are being taught by these postmodern
professors that there is no truth, that science and empirical facts are tools
of oppression by the white patriarchy, and that nearly everyone in America is
racist and bigoted, including their own professors, most of whom are liberals
or progressives devoted to fighting these social ills."

The college students and professors who are supposedly descending into
frenzied irrationality are actually spending their days talking, writing, and
thinking about these issues in sophisticated ways. The moral panic about such
people is just political maneuvering.

~~~
namlem
Given the quality of most of their publications, "sophisticated" is not a word
I would use to describe their work.

~~~
dcre
Who is "they"? Name one person.

------
DonbunEf7
I'm ashamed to be a postmodernist because of these assholes.

Postmodernists supposedly say "there is no truth." But that sounds an awful
lot like a truth! Anybody who thinks only Sith deal in absolutes is going to
have a bad time.

Postmodernism still works once logic and critical thought are applied, but it
stops being an excuse for bullshit.

~~~
creaghpatr
Postmodernism is still a useful philosophical concept-the idea of fluidity is
important when debating abstract ideas. it's when hard maths and science are
literally changed as a result of perceived injustices that society becomes
destabilized

------
Floegipoky
>> 12 of the 13 academics at U.C. Berkeley who signed a letter to the
chancellor protesting Yiannopoulos were from “Critical theory, Gender studies
and Post-Colonial/Postmodernist/Marxist background.” This is a shift in
Marxist theory from class conflict to identity politics conflict; instead of
judging people by the content of their character, they are now to be judged by
the color of their skin (or their ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, et
cetera).

So Yiannopoulos' critics object to his identity as a white gay man, rather
than the hate speech he proliferates? Nice try

