Advertisement

A Conceptual Framework for Postmodernism

  • Roida Rzayeva OktayEmail author
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Philosophy book series (BRIEFSPHILOSOPH)

Abstract

Some general concepts and ideas characterise postmodernist discourse . This is what you might call an analytical tool or apparatus criticus. Though, as a whole, it is impossible to assert the absolute accuracy of the borders between the concepts mentioned below, it is however necessary to underline the standard mission of the concepts used for the characteristics of a postmodernist paradigm , in particular, the terms “postmodernism”, “postmodern”, “postmodernity”, “postmodernisation”, and “postcontemporaneity”. If postmodernity is focused on the social and political reflections of this philosophy in a society, postmodernism is a cultural and intellectual phenomenon. Hence, we can speak about a condition, that is postmodern, and about postmodernism as the intellectual phenomenon. The postmodernist philosophy in this measurement creates a theoretical basis, or, in other words, a basis of postmodernism. Hence, postmodernism is a philosophical and ideological projection of postmodernity. Summarising the positions, it is possible to notice that postmodernism expresses a philosophical measurement that the postmodern and postmodernity are social, and that postmodernisation is a social and economic measurement of a concept that, in our opinion, testifies to the interdisciplinary character of the phenomenon “postmodernism” and its complex character.

Keywords

Concept Narratology Derivatives Postmodernism Postmodernity Postmodernisation Postcontemporaneity 

References

  1. Bolay, S. H. (2003). In C. C. Aktan (Ed.), “Postmodernizm” modernite’den postmodernite’ye değişim. Konya: Çizgi Kitabevi.Google Scholar
  2. Foucault, M. (2002). Vlast i znaniye. In Intellektuali i vlast: Izbranniye politiceskiye statyi, vistupleniya i intervyu. M.: Praksis.Google Scholar
  3. Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  4. Grechko, L. К. (2000). Intellektualniy import, ili O periferiynom postmodernizme. Obshestvenniye Nauki i Sovremennost, 1, 166–179.Google Scholar
  5. Kravchenko, S. A. (2007). Sotsiologiya: Paradigmi cherez prizmu sotsiologiceskogo voobrajeniya. Moskva: Izdatelstvo “Ekzamen”.Google Scholar
  6. Lyotard, J.-F. (1986). Le postmoderne expliqué aux enfants. Paris: Galilée.Google Scholar
  7. Mejdistsiplinarnost v naukakh i filosofii (2010). M.: IFRAN.Google Scholar
  8. Mojeyko, M. A., & Mayboroda D. V. (2001). Binarizm. In Postmodernizm Ensiklopediya (pp. 78–81). Minsk: Interpresservis: Knijniy dom.Google Scholar
  9. Rubtsov, A. V. (2011). Architektonika postmoderna: Vremya. Voprosi filosofii, 10. http://vphil.ru/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=401&Itemid=52 (accessed November 10, 2011).
  10. Sarıbay, A. Y. (2001). Postmodernite, sivil toplum ve İslam. İstanbul: Alfa Yayınları.Google Scholar
  11. Turner, B. S. (1996). Oryantalizm postmodernizm ve Din. In Y. Aktay (Ed. & Trans.), Tezkire (pp. 9–10), Bahar.Google Scholar
  12. Turner, B. S. (1999). Oryantalizm Postmodernizm ve Din. In Postmodernizm ve İslâm, Küreselleşme ve oryantalizm (pp. 36–57). Ankara: Vadi Yayınları.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Azerbaijan National Academy of SciencesBakuAzerbaijan

Personalised recommendations