Critical Reflection:
What I consider the central argumentof the paper is the idea that “Postmodernism as a philosophical movement is largely a reaction against the philosophical assumptions and values of the modern period of Western (specifically European) history — its straightforward denial of general philosophical viewpoints that were taken for granted during the 18th-century Enlightenment.” (Postmodernism, p. 1)
The idea that I found to be particularly challenging from the paper is the Postmodernism’s straightforward denial of general viewpoint such as this: “The descriptive and explanatory statements of scientists and historians can, in principle, be objectively true or false. The Postmodern denial of this viewpoint — which follows from the rejection of an objective natural reality — is sometimes expressed by saying that there is no such thing as Truth” (Postmodernism, p.1). – This idea of denial has fascinated me since this topic was discussed last February 11. Having read it again for this critical reflection has even more cemented my mind of the critical minds of these philosophers who negate what have been considered as truth and order of the world. These philosophers taught us one thing – that is to question what people tell us. For instance, mingling and working with the superiors and co-teachers would require us to be more critical of their actions and notions. We also need to question what they do especially if their actions seem already unfair or unjust. As human beings with common sense, we know exactly when the situation would demand justification over unfairness. Instances like the lack of room when others have been given enough rooms; facilities such as the computers which are supposed to be and exclusively for one particular class only, but later was decided to be shared to other tracks when the other tracks have already been given with theirs that are presently housed in actually four (4) rooms in the school building. Instances like these would require a strong negation that of course could be dealt with calmly. Not being heard of your grievances is simply offensive. To deprive one of his right and privileges may be their ‘Truth,’ so it has to be refuted. People have the right to express themselves. Minority can argue for debate and make their arguments heard.
The points I didn’t agree with is the “Postmodernist’s idea that reason and logic are merely conceptual constructs and are therefore valid only within the established intellectual traditions in which they are used” as opposed to reason and logic are universally valid (i.e. their laws are the same for, or apply equally to, any thinker and any domain of knowledge. (Postmodernism, p.2) – The world requires universal law that would determine understanding among nations in order to sustain peace – in the same way that a particular school would need certain law/order/right where every teacher and students would be protected and treated fairly. The law which the Postmodernists consider as conceptual constructs that are effective only within established intellectual traditions, could excite oppression, hence the elite (the superiors in school) or shall I say the ones with ‘superior power in the higher ups’ could enjoy control over their subordinates. Injustice, chaos and commotion would prevail if this would surface. There should be order and law for everyone to follow and for these superiors to consider, so that ‘power play’ could be lessened if not totally extinguished.
The implications of the argument to my area of expertise or context are: 1) However one negates the law or the philosophical viewpoints which should prevail, the majority could not deny the fact that order must exist in the world – in the same way that order, justice, and law must also succeed in addressing the needs of the students and teachers in the school when it comes to deprivation or power play; 2)While we carry on our jobs as teachers, we could not get away with conflicts; letting the ones concern know your ‘Truth’ and not only their ‘truth’ could pacify commotion, deal rejection, calm both parties involved; and 3) Knowing your ‘Truth’ could protect your character from misinterpretations – being maligned defames . Let them (the superior) discover your ‘Truth.’
What is desirable here is the opportunity to: 1) look at concepts or ideas in different perspective and discover the reasons why people think very differently from others; 2) read people’s mind, their motives and intentions in relation to how they act or treat people, things, and events.; 3) find ways to resolve your own problem by deviating from the norms, that is stepping onto the role of these people who think like Postmodernists; 4) engage yourself in questioning those around you; 5) seek the ‘Truth’ and its value in your present life; 6)be open with the complexities of life and find solutions to it; 7) enhance yourself by being open to the possibilities and impossibilities of this life; and 8)savor the learning each new day brings.
By: Lilia S. Crisostomo | Senior High School Teacher atBataan National High School 03-28-2017 | BNHS – Balanga City, Bataan
