Postmodernism: A Very Short Introduction
これは以前読んだ本だけど・・・
手短に・・・それも結論の章だけ・・・
page 110
One of the central them of all that has gone before might be summarized as "realism lost" and along with it reliable sense of past history.・・・・
As we have seen, much postmodernist analysis is an attack on authority and reliability
page111
the political and historical even always reaches us in a fictionalized form in a narrative, massaged by the more or less hidden hand of political purpose
前にも書いたけど、ポストモダニズムってのは、いわゆるそこからすべてが判定されるような特権的な実在というものについて非常に懐疑的で、物事や世界に関する語り口はどうやっても何らかの偏向がかかっているんだ、ということだねーーー俗っぽくいってしまうと・・・
page112
For most postmodernist we live in a society of image, primarily concerned with the production and consumption of mere "simulacra". Information, by now, is just something we buy.・・・・・
The Nietzschean assumption that all such phenomena, from statements from the White House To everyday soap operas, are more or less secretly in the service of the mainstream of the power, economic and other , of somebody or other, rather than made in the service of the truth.
page 114
We are simply enclosed in a media -dominated world of signs, villainously generated by capitalism to synthesize our desires, which only really refer to one another within an entrapping chain of ideas. They are simulacra, which replace real things and their actual relationships(only truly known to those on the left, who see through such illusions) in a process which Baudrillard calls 'hyper-realization'.
実在がそうやって喪われたとすると、実在における事実や、それに対応する命題、あるいは、情報というのも怪しくなってきて、結局は権力などに影響を受けたイメージしか、ねえんじゃないないか、と。
page 116
The best thing that one can say here, and I am saying it, is that postmodernists are good critical deconstructors and terrible constructors.
ポストモダンの人は、ある権威のある語り口を解体していくのは得意だったんだけど、建設的な何かをいうのは苦手だったんじゃないか、脱構築はいいが、再構築が苦手なんじゃないか。
page 117
It is worth asking, then how far a postmodernist 'hermeneutics of suspicion' is justified. There is in any case a crippling contradiction at the heart of analysis--if anyone says that everything is 'really' just constituted by a deceiving image, and no by reality, how does he or she know? They presuppose the very distinctions they attack. ・・・・
それに、すべてが幻想だ、すべてが偽物だ、というには、偽ものや幻想と、本物や実在との区別を前提しているのだから、矛盾があるじゃないか、と。
A postmodernist sceptic, noting the extraordinary range of conflict in versions of reality available to us within a remarkably tolerant and pluralist society, and willing to be a bit of relativist, might well be inclined to opt for something like Richard Rorty's postmodernist irony. Such ironist have doubts about the truth of any "final vocabulary' and realize that other have different ones; they don't see their vocabulary as 'closer to reality than other people's .
page119
The ironist has doubts about the vocabulary he or she uses; others' vocabularies also seem to work well.
page 120
Post modernist beliefs therefore tend to a multiculturalism pluralism and relativism.
要するに、いろんな語り口があり、どれもがうまくいく、かもしれんし、またどの語り口が最後の審判、最後の言葉というわけではないのはわかる。
しかし、
page 121
however, ・・・this condition should be resisted and not allowed to justify a kind of ironic indifferentism・・・・・The belief that lead to the public stoning to death of an 'adulterous ' women are not just to be shrugged off as a symptom of the way they do things over there as opposed to round here.・・・・Postmodernist thought has done a great deal to point out and to defend the difference of identity involved here. But still , as a matter of fact, often lead to bitter conflicts, which need to be resolved by something better than postmodernist principles.
どれでもいい、あれもこれも同じようにいい、単に違いがある、というだけで、例えば、浮気をした女性に石を投げてぶち殺すのも、あちらさんでは、こちらとはちがって、そういうことになっております、それだけの話でござんす、といった、無関心主義も困る、と。
page122
Tolerance is a principled willingness to put up with the expression and pursuit of beliefs that you know to be wrong, for the sake of of some larger ideal , like freedom of inquiry or the autonomy of others in the construction of their own narrative or identity---provided, I would say, that they don't harm others in the process. But no amount of tolerance or postmodern scepticism should be allowed to conflict with the ideals expressed for example, in the United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights(disputable as some them are) or the Geneva Convention.
ポストモダニズムの人たちは違いや多元主義を強調して、相対主義的になっいるが、やろうとしていること、やっていることは、差異を尊重して、異なるものに対する寛容を唱道しているわけで、無関心主義に陥らず、また、実際の紛争に対処していくには、、そういった差異の主張のなかでも、寛容とか、人権といった伝統的な”理想”や”原則”が作用している、そこのところ忘れちゃいけない、というわけだ。
ちょっと引用した英文とはマッチしていないけど（ーーーシニファンとの戯れ・・・なんちゃって）、まあ、そんな感じ。
ポストモダニズムについていろんな総括のしかたがあるとは思いますけど、一つの総括のしかたでしょう。イデア＝普遍・理想への揺り戻しがあるところが面白いところだと思います。
なお、ほんとう、ほんもの、実在について、伝統的ではないとらえ方として、
Examined life
また、真理と実在について
真理の哲学
Searle and Foucault on Truthなどで簡単に触れたことがある。
さらに、例えば、公私の区別を解消していく運動から、公私の区別を復活させる思想の傾向については、
公と私
