Postmodernism Research Paper Example

This sample Postmodernism Research Paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need help writing your assignment, please use our research paper writing service and buy a paper on any topic at affordable price. Also check our tips on how to write a research paper, see the lists of research paper topics, and browse research paper examples.

Ever since its ideas first took hold in the 1980s, postmodern theory has had a significant influence on the social sciences.  At  the  time,  social theory  imported  certain theoretical  concepts  from  literary criticism,  including deconstruction and other discourse-based theories of textual interpretation. It is best, however, to refer to a postmodern  “turn”  within  contemporary  social science, because many academics influenced by these intellectual trends abjure the term postmodernism. Nevertheless, many contemporary  social scientists acknowledge a  debt  to deconstructive methods of textual interpretation and to deconstruction’s (or poststructuralism’s) rejection of teleological theories (or “grand narratives”) and the concept of a coherent, fixed human subject.

Judith  Butler’s writings on the unstable and “constructed” nature of both sex and gender identities played a crucial role in transmitting postmodern concepts into social theory and the social sciences. Yet  Butler herself rejects the term postmodernist,  claiming only to deploy deconstructive techniques to better discern the “discursive construction” of identity. Postmodern conceptions of the “hybrid,” “plural,” and “inconstant” nature of “identity” have had their greatest influence in the areas of cultural, gender, and postcolonial studies, though they have also influenced anthropology (e.g., James Clifford) and international relations theory (e.g., James Der Derrian).

Many people working in these areas reject behavioral, structural, and hermeneutic interpretations of the relationship between individuals, groups, and social structure, favoring instead analyses of the “decentered,” “local,” and “fragmented” nature of social phenomena.  Postmodern social theory rejects traditional social science’s goal of discerning causal relationships among social phenomena. It also rejects social science aspirations to discern superior or “parsimonious” interpretations of human behavior. In the postmodern conception, no “readerly” interpretation of a “text” can be more “truthful” than another. In fact some postmodernists refer to the concept of “truth” as “terroristic,” for the “truth” can only defend itself by repressive “exclusion.”

Postmodernism represents both a sensibility in regard to  social science research and  a  normative  critique  of modernity. According to postmodernism, the Enlightenment’s search for rational understanding that could ameliorate the human condition engendered ideological or false “grand narratives” of history, which are based on “essentialist,” “universal,” and “fixed” conceptions of human nature. Drawing  upon  Jean-Francois Lyotard’s  analysis in  The Postmodern  Condition (1984),  postmodernists reject the Enlightenment’s search for “totalizing” theories that offer “universal” narratives of human motivation and experience. Building on the work of Michel Foucault, postmodern theory claims that these “grand narratives” underpinned the Enlightenment’s  efforts to  “normalize” human  beings through  the  bureaucratic  and  repressive institutions  of “governance” (e.g., both state and nonstate organizations, such as the  asylum and  the  hospital) that  “categorize” human beings.

Postmodernism  and Deconstruction

According to postmodernists, social theories that claim to “represent” reality fail to comprehend that humans have no unmediated access to “reality.” Human conceptions of reality are, unavoidably, a product of subjective interpretation. Modern media and technology deny people the ability to discern the original author or to distinguish the original from the imitation.  In  1936 Walter Benjamin argued that in an age of “mechanical reproduction” it is nearly impossible to distinguish the original from a copy. Following this lead, postmodern  theorists such as Jean Baudrillard have contended that reality itself is a simulacrum (a copy of a copy). In a world of corporate image production  and  virtual realities, one cannot  determine what is authentic or inauthentic, real or fake. When computers allow people to “live” in cyberspace, the very concepts  of  reality, time,  and  space are  contestable and destabilized. Thus attempts to interpret the “essence” or true nature of social phenomena deny the reality that the world is a constantly shifting image.

Postmodern social theory draws heavily upon Jacques Derrida’s and deconstruction’s critique of structuralism. Claude Levi-Strauss’s structural anthropology and Louis Althusser’s  structural  Marxism (which investigated the structural role that class played within capitalist economics and ideology) dominated French intellectual life in the 1960s. Both of these theorists drew upon the early twentieth-century structural linguistics of Ferdinand Saussure. Saussure held that the meaning of a particular speech or language (la parole) is structured by the underlying structure of grammar (la langue, the structured relationship between signifier and signified that yields the meaning of a sign). But Derrida in Marges de la philosophie (1972) held that the relationship between signifier and signified is inherently  unstable.  For  Derrida,  “meaning”  includes both identity (what is) and différance (what is not). Thus postmodernists argue that any attempt to “fix” meaning will yield repressive attempts to eliminate the ineluctable “other” of human reality.

To avoid eliminating the play of différance, postmodern-influenced social science rejects the “binary oppositions” that  allegedly ground  Western philosophy: subject-object, man-woman,  reality-appearance, reasonemotion, and speech-writing. In this view, the very effort of representation and causal analysis excludes and devalues the “inferior” part of the binary term that is traditionally denigrated as being irrational or emotional. This rejection of binary oppositions as repressive and “norming” has had a profound influence on contemporary feminist and critical race theory, which warn against “essentializing” identities of gender and race. These studies of identity focus upon the “socially constructed,” hybrid, and ever-shifting nature of individual and group identity.

Given  the  absence of  a  stable referential relation between subject and  object, postmodernists argue that social theory should focus upon the way subjects are “constructed” by discourse itself. The postmodern conception of how the subject is a product of language and thought draws heavily upon philosophical traditions deriving from Friedrich Nietzsche. In addition, Martin Heidegger’s critique  of Western philosophy’s  ineluctable search for a fixed conception of “Being,” and of its attempt to dominate nature in the name of the “human,” informs postmodern  analysis. Postmodern  social science frequently draws upon  Foucault’s conception of power-knowledge discourses to examine how subjects are “produced” by discourse. While Foucault’s earlier “archaeological” work on how  epistemes (or  systems of  thought)   “norm”  and “exclude” has influenced postmodern  analysis, it  is his later genealogical analysis of power as “productive” and “enabling” (rather than  as primarily coercive) that  has most influenced postmodernism’s critique of “agency.” As Butler holds, the conception of a coherent, rational, human individual who exercises conscious agency ignores the reality that  human  identities are continually being reconfigured through  performative “self-inscriptions”  of dominant norms and discourses.

Laclau and Mouffe and “New Social Movements”

Ernesto  Laclau and  Chantal  Mouffe’s  Hegemony and Socialist  Strategy (1985)  represents a highly influential poststructuralist critique of the use of “grand narrative” in the social sciences. Rejecting a “determinist” Marxism that drew from the workers’ structural position in production of the teleological necessity of a “revolutionary consciousness,” Laclau and Mouffe asserted the “discursive”—and open—nature of social consciousness. In the determinist Marxist view, both  social democracy and  authoritarian communism  believed that  capitalism’s  interdependent division of labor would inevitably yield (whether through gradual self-organization or via a revolutionary external agent) a self-emancipating working-class movement for democratic control of the interdependent capitalist mode of production. In contrast to the Marxist tradition, Laclau and  Mouffe held that  one cannot—and  should not— mechanistically determine a subject’s “objective, true consciousness” from the subject’s alleged “structural” position in society. Rather, consciousness itself is discursively produced and represents a contested arena for politics.

In this view, much of the emancipatory impulse for democracy has come from the “new” social movements of racial, gender, and sexual identity. The consciousness of these identity-based groups cannot be deduced from their “objective” social role in society. Thus social theorists had to abandon privileging the “old” movement of the working class and construct a new, plural, and democratic theory that would unite (without homogenizing) the liberatory discourses of the new social movements. Laclau and  Mouffe’s work has had a great influence on  both social movement theory and postcolonial studies.

Postmodernism  and its Critics: the Search for Norms

The postmodern turn in social science has generated considerable controversy, some of it finding its way into the mass media. Most visible has been the neoconservative critique that postmodernist analysis dominates the humanities and social sciences, imparting to students a dangerous, nihilist critique of American democracy. Ironically, this critique conflates postmodernism with Marxism, despite postmodernism’s hostility to macrostructural and teleological forms of social analysis, including Marxism. Some left-leaning social theorists concur with the postmodern analysis that the marketing of images and lifestyles partly supplants the production and sale of physical goods in late capitalism. But these analysts of late capitalism (such as the geographer David Harvey and the cultural theorist Frederic Jameson), in contrast to  postmodernists, offer macrostructural and analytic explanations for the emergence of these phenomena. They locate the production of images-as-commodities within the global corporate conglomerates of the “infotainment,” media, and publishing industries.

The postmodern rejection of the realist conception that  economic  and  social institutions  constrain  the choices of individuals has occurred at a time of rapidly increasing global violence and  economic and  material inequality, and some critics have pointed out the ironic element in the timing of this development. Postmodernists often explain their critique of fixed, “linear” conceptions of time and space by metaphorical references to chaos theory’s rejection of periodicity and to the finding of quantum mechanics that  mass, force, and acceleration cannot be independently determined. This postmodernist rejection of even an  “unrepresentative” realist conception  of an external reality independent of theoretical interpretation helped engender the “Sokal affair.” Alan Sokal, a physicist (and materialist Marxist) at New York University, submitted a paper to the postmodern journal Social Text in 1996. The article cleverly deployed postmodern concepts while making alleged scientific references that any physics undergraduate could readily deem to be ludicrous. After the essay was published, Sokal revealed that  it  was a hoax aimed at revealing postmodernism’s ignorance of both science and the nature of material reality. The story made the front page of the New York Times.

Some leftist theorists note that the postmodern turn arose at the very moment that conservative political dominance decreased the prestige of leftist theory and practice. A crude “sociology of knowledge” of the postmodern turn might contend that, absent mass social movements contending for state power, left-wing academics retreat into the realm of pure theory. The rejoinder to this might be that postmodernism’s  insistence on the relevance of the particular, local, and hybrid has had a salutary effect on limiting the imperial claims of “grand narratives.” Either way, analytic attempts of macrostructural and historically oriented social theorists to discern the interaction between social agency and social structure are likely to remain a major theme within social science. And the postmodern concern with the fate of marginalized groups would seem to push the discussion ethically beyond postmodernism’s emphasis on the local and particular. The quasi-universal concepts of citizenship and global human rights may not have an irrefutable, a priori basis in a fixed human nature, but if human beings cannot develop shared understandings and values that bridge their differences, it is unlikely that the emancipatory, democratic project embraced by many postmodern theorists will ever be realized.

Bibliograhy:

  1. Best, Steven, and Douglass Kellner. Postmodern Theory: Critical Interrogations. New York: Guilford.
  2. Brown, Wendy. States of Injury: Power and Freedom in Late Modernity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  3. Butler, J 1990. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
  4. Clifford, J 1988. The Predicament of Culture: TwentiethCentury Ethnography, Literature, and Art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  5. Der Derian, James, and Michael Shapiro. 1989. International/Intertextual Relations: Postmodern Readings of World Politics. Lexington,  MA: Lexington.
  6. Derrida, J 1976. Of Grammatology. Trans. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
  7. Foucault, M 1980. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings, 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon.
  8. Laclau, Ernseto, and Chantal M 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.
  9. Lyotard, Jean-F 1984. The Postmodern Condition. Trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  10. Rosenau, Pauline M 1992. Post-Modernism and the Social Sciences: Insights, Inroads, and Intrusions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

See also:

Free research papers are not written to satisfy your specific instructions. You can use our professional writing services to buy a custom research paper on any topic and get your high quality paper at affordable price.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER


Always on-time

Plagiarism-Free

100% Confidentiality
Special offer! Get discount 10% for the first order. Promo code: cd1a428655