>>97445359>You again just have this habit of>For someone who bangs on constantly aboutFucking dimwitted retard, this is the first time I replied to you, I'm not whichever other anon you were arguing with
you should have been able to tell that based on how I replied to a post that the other anon you think I am already replied to
> lots of anthropologists believe that depictions of hunting had religious or educational significancethose anthropologists, like evolutionary psychology fags, have pulled their mindreading interpretations out of thin air based on nothing, they have no idea why early humans painted those cave paintings and are just guessing purely based on modern day animism tribe tropes. To me, it seems like the cave paintings are simple depictions of things those early humans literally just saw like herds of bison being hunted or whatever, and just doodled them in their spare time as they took shelter in the caves just because they could. Recording down what you have experienced and manifesting your vague internal thoughts into some tangible form for its own sake seems to be an innately human behavior for whatever reason - assuming it had to have some grand higher esoteric purpose is just being a romanticizing fag that can't see early humans as just ordinary people for some reason.
>yet you still regard it as art for some reason?yes, because art is literally just human thoughts and feelings manifested into a created form .
>Random assumptions about me with no basismy assumptions are on the basis of the way you described postmodernism because it's the exact same as many other carbon copy-paste fags have described it before, it's usually the same kind of people who describe it like that
>Post modernism was first defined in the late 19th centurythe term was first coined in the 19th century yes but it was still an obscure term and didn't refer to an actual art movement until after WW2
>Nigger it's inherently connected to the art form because it follows the same principles of rejection of everything that came before it, everything is subjective, everything is interpretative, everything is a social construct, social constructs are inherently evil, there are two groups which the oppressed and the oppressors.No.
You don't even realize the sleight of hand your brain is doing in this very sentence as you are describing it
This
>everything is subjective, everything is interpretative, everything is a social constructis actually separate and distinct to, and doesn't necessarily imply this
>social constructs are inherently evil, there are two groups which the oppressed and the oppressorsthis second part is additional and tacked on and doesn't automatically follow from the first part about everything being subjective
in fact, the first part directly contradicts it - if everything is subjective and meaningless, how could a thing like a social construct have a moral value like being 'evil?' How can you think everything is unordered and not inherently meaningful but also think society is rigidly ordered into specific classes with a hardline hierarchy like oppressors and oppressed at the same time? It doesn't make sense and this is why sociology fags trying to co-opt the term postmodernism doesn't make sense and is a misnomer
The sociological beliefs you are describing (and the modern day progressive orthodoxy they became) are a very specific set of ideological beliefs that describe the world in a highly ordered and specific way with specific claims - this is not at all like postmodernism, doesn't naturally follow from it and owes its origins and trajectory far more to Marxism (which claims to look at the world in a 'scientific' and predictive way) far more than anything else
the term postmodernism is just tacked onto the sociological marxism because it was an art trend at the time and they (the sociologists) thought they could construe the term for their own ends in much the same way as you and all the reactionaries are doing. In a way, you are playing the sociologists game and agreeing to their premise by handing them the term like this.
>Post modernist art is a propaganda tool for post modernist philosophy and politics.There is no such thing as 'postmodernist philosophy and politics' as I have laid out. It is merely a word game.
>It doesn't matter what the original intention of something is, only what it becomes and the effects of itironically, a very postmodernist statement
>The perfect consumer is someone who is not born with any latent biases, identity, ingroups, or otherwiseexcept that modern-day progressives and their sociological marxist forebears think the opposite of this, where everyone has inherent biases, are monumentally defined by their Identity(tm) and eternally belong to specific ingroups such as the oppressed People Of Color or Proletariat classes etc. the claims and goals of the social engineers are in fact opposite to what postmodernism says about reality.
