The Financial Crisis and Postmodernism
A Raleigh Philosophy MeetUp Discussion
Vana Prewitt, Ph.D. , Facilitator
Within constructionist thought, a social construction is a concept of practice which may appear to be natural and obvious to those who accept it, but in reality is an invention or artifact of a particular culture or society. Social constructs are generally understood to be the by-products (often unintended or unconscious) of countless human choices rather than laws resulting from divine will or nature.
“The piecemeal, atomistic, analytical approach, which so often goes in conjunction with the technological fix does not work in relation to complex wholes such as the human being, society, the ecological habitat” (Henryk Skolomowski, 1994. The participatory mind)
Modernism / PostmodernismLogic, objectivity / Uncertainty, subjectivity, wholeness
Reality can be tested / Reality cannot be known
Measures of certainty, prediction / Measures of understanding
Control, order / Chaos and complexity
Either-or / Both-and
Progress / Fluctuation
Precision, predictability / Ambiguity, uncertainty
· How does our belief in the wealth of intangible possibilities create that wealth? Is the modern capitalistic economy a global ponzi scheme? And is Alan Greenspan the architect?
· Americans have come to view their homes as investments instead of a place to live. Likewise, individuals have entered the stock market in a large scale, tying up their personal assets in business transactions rather than banking. Savings is at an all time low. What does this predict in an age of postmodern economies?
· The shift from modern/industrial to postmodern/postindustrial work changed all of the assumed rules about 20-year careers, pensions, and retirement at sixty-five. How does a postmodern perspective inform our understanding of global finances? What realities may we need to embrace?
Martin Heidegger claimed that Western philosophy has, since Plato, misunderstood what it means for something "to be," tending to approach this question in terms of a being, rather than asking about being itself.
Has this philosophical shift in the last 2,000 years put too much emphasis on doing and not enough on being? If so, how does one go about reclaiming the essence of being?