Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

How Do We Find Solutions To Social Problems?

pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/18/2013 9:19:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I believe we can find the solution to any problem using discussion.
If enough people have the knowledge and time to talk about any problem, it can be resolved completely or at least enough to make the matter bearable for all parties involved.

I'm sorry for answering my own question, but I thought it was a good start.
Noumena
Posts: 6,047
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2013 9:36:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
We can no longer believe, Lyotard contends, in the hegemony of the metanarrative, but must reinstate the rights of small and local first-order narratives; political legitimacy in postmodernity resides always within these various genres of discourse and never outside or "above" them. Lyotard's picture of political legitimation is one of a "perpetual sophistic debate"[7] between speakers telling often radically different stories, a free market of opinions and deliberations. All utterances in such a debate are seen not as arguments but as "moves" and "countermoves" within a context and within a particular genre of discourse; they represent not deductions from principles but tactical moves within a language game.[8] Normative statements are always situated within a framework of generally applicable rules: "[Tlhese rules are specific to each particular kind of knowledge, and the 'moves' judged to be 'good' in one cannot be of the same type as those judged 'good' in another, unless it happens that way by chance."[9] There is no single discourse of legitimation, no common measure between these various genres of utterance; rather, in postmodernity there will be a plurality of such discourses, none possessing a privileged or "meta" status.

-
7. Lyotard, Just Gaming, 66.
8. Citing Wittgenstein's term, Lyotard writes that "each of the various categories of utterance can be defined in terms of rules specifying their properties and the uses to which they can be put - in exactly the same way as the game of chess is defined by a set of rules determining the properties of each of the pieces, in other words, the proper way to move them." (Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 10).
9. Ibid, 26

http://www.reasonpapers.com...
Habermas, Lyotard, and Political Discourse- Paul Fairfield

====================================================
Might be useful in generating a specific framework for discussion (i.e., the nature of communication, discussion, argumentation, etc. in relation to political normativity). Perhaps someone will bite?
: At 5/13/2014 7:05:20 PM, Crescendo wrote:
: The difference is that the gay movement is currently pushing their will on Churches, as shown in the link to gay marriage in Denmark. Meanwhile, the Inquisition ended several centuries ago.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/22/2013 4:24:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/18/2013 9:19:08 PM, pozessed wrote:
I believe we can find the solution to any problem using discussion.
If enough people have the knowledge and time to talk about any problem, it can be resolved completely or at least enough to make the matter bearable for all parties involved.

I'm sorry for answering my own question, but I thought it was a good start.

Solve death.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?