Post-Structuralist Contradiction or Complementation

Certain aspects of a post-structuralist perspective are very cohesive and useful for analysis.  But how can post-structuralism prematurely claim we cannot discover truth about the world without stating this as its discovered truth?  Perhaps this might be perceived as a play on words, but doesn’t every theory attempting to explain the world indulge itself in some proclamation of truth?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Poststructuralism, Questions. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Post-Structuralist Contradiction or Complementation

  1. Tyler Pace says:

    That’s a tricky bit about post-structuralism to which I’ll attempt to supply a couple of defenses.

    1) Post-structuralists aren’t worried about coherence. They can contradict themselves because they don’t believe in truth claims. Your rational mindset is merely trying to apply reason to the unreasonable and finding contradictions that either don’t exist or don’t matter.

    2) The establishment of master narratives (objective truth claims) is a long cycle of power and domination. The desire to find coherence (#1) is part of this repressive cycle.

    3) Local narratives replace the master narratives. Local narratives are small accounts of a particular setting and a particular context with limited generalizability over space and time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s