Postmodern Condition(s), Postmodern Language Games and An Assesment on Architecture
Abstract views: 170
/ 
PDF downloads: 67
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12800336Keywords:
The Postmodern Condition, Language Games, Habermas, Lyotard, WittgensteinAbstract
When discussing Postmodernism, despite one of the foundational references being the 1979 work The Postmodern Condition by the French philosopher Jean-François Lyotard, the concept of postmodern delineated in this study does not entirely correspond with its diverse intellectual reflections across different domains. In the context of this deviation, while elaborating on the conceptual framework defined by Lyotard as the postmodern condition, Wittgenstein's theory of language games will be emphasized, initiating a discussion on the postmodern condition based on the claim that Lyotard misinterpreted Wittgenstein. A comparative reassessment of key concepts such as social bond, legitimacy, and consensus, highlighted in the report through cross-readings of Habermas, Lyotard, and Wittgenstein, could reveal the plurality of postmodern conditions under the heading of postmodernism. However, evaluating the impact of this misinterpretation on the legitimacy of this seminal work will be one of the prominent concluding judgments in the article you are about to read. The epilogue, within this broad intellectual perspective, is dedicated to assessing the relationship between the postmodern condition and architecture.
References
Bac, Le Huy, and Dao Thi Thu Hang. 2016. “From Language to Postmodern Language Game Theory”. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7(6), 319–324. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n6p319
Blake, Nigel. 2000. “Paralogy, validity claims, and the politics of knowledge: Habermas, Lyotard, and higher education”. In Lyotard: Just Education. Edited by Pradeep Ajit Dhillon and Paul Standish, 54–72. London and New York: Routledge.
Burbules, Nicholas C. 2000. “Lyotard on Wittgenstein: The differend, language games, and education”. In Lyotard: Just Education. Edited by Pradeep Ajit Dhillon and Paul Standish, 36–53. London and New York: Routledge.
Chtcheglov, Ivan. 2006 [1953]. “Formulary for a New Urbanism”. In Situationist International Anthology. Edited and translated by Ken Knabb, 3. Berkeley, California: Bureau of Public Secrets.
Doğrusöz, Ufuk. 2022. Postmodern Durum. [Seminer Dersleri]. MSGSÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
Donougho, Martin. 1987. “The Language of Architecture.” Journal of Aesthetic Education 21, no. 3: 53–67. https://doi.org/10.2307/3332870.
Eisenman, Peter, and Elisa Iturbe. 2020. Lateness. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/9780691203911.
Gleiter, Jörg H. 2021. “New Monumentality and Digital Documentality”. In Taishi Watanabe (hg.), Unity Architecture, ADP Company Tokyo.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1998. “Modern and Postmodern Architecture”. In Architecture Theory since 1968, edited by K. Michael Hays, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London: MIT Press.
Hutchinson, Phil, and Rupert Read. 2017. "Grammar." In Understanding Wittgenstein, Understanding Modernism, edited by Anat Matar, 224–232. Understanding Philosophy, Understanding Modernism. New York: Bloomsbury. http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781501302466.0022.
Lecourt, Dominique. 2001. The Mediocracy: French Philosophy since 1968. Translated by Gregory Elliot. New York: Verso.
Loeckx, André, and Hilde Heynen. 2020. “Meaning and Effect: Revisiting Semiotics in Architecture”. In The Figure of Knowledge. Conditioning Architectural Theory, 1960s-1990s, edited by Loosen, Sebastiaan, Rajesh Heynickx, and Hilde Heynen, 31 – 62. Leuven University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv16x2c28.4.
Lyotard, Jean-François. 1984 [1979]. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Translated by Bennington, Geoff, and Brian Massumi. Foreword by Fredric Jameson. Manchester University Press.
Lyotard, J.F. 1991. The Inhuman: Reflections on Time. Critical Theory; Philosophy. Stanford University Press.
Lyotard, Jean-François. 1994. “A Postmodern Fable on Postmodernity”. In Critical Architecture and Contemporary Culture, edited by Lillyman, William J., Marilyn F. Moriarty, and David J. Neuman, 187–195. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mota, Thiago. 2020. “Lyotard’s Agonistic Pragmatics: On The Problem of Legitimacy in Postmodernity”. Cognitio-Estudos: Revista Eletronica de Filosofia 17, no. 2: 260–276. https://doi.org/10.23925/1809-8428.2020v17i2p260-276
Nesbitt, Kate. 1996. Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture: An Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965—1995. Princeton Architectural Press.
Oktay, Cemil. 2022. “Meşruiyet ve Türleri”. M. A. Yekta Saraç (Ed). Sosyal Bilimler Ansiklopedisi, Cilt: 3, 75–78. Tübitak Yayınları.
Redding, Paul. 1986. “Habermas, Lyotard, Wittgenstein: Philosophy at the Limits of Modernity”. Thesis Eleven 14 (1): 9-25.
Rorty, Richard. 1984. “Habermas and Lyotard on Post-Modernity”. Praxis International, 4(1), pp. 32-44.
Rowe, Colin and Fred Koetter. 1978. Collage city. MIT Press, Cambridge.
Schalkwyk, David. 1997. “Why the Social Bond Cannot be a Passing Fashion: Reading Wittgenstein Against Lyotard”. Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory, 89, 116–131. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41802071.
Terzoglou, Nikolaos-Ion. 2018. “Architecture as Meaningful Language: Space, Place and Narrativity”. Linguistics and Literature Studies, 6(3), 120-132. DOI: 10.13189/lls.2018.060303.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1979. On Certainty. Edited by G. E. M. Anscombe and G. H. Von Wright. Translated by Denis Paul and G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 2020 [1953]. Felsefi Soruşturmalar (Çev. Haluk Barışcan). İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.
Woodward, Ashley. 2021. “Non-Projects for the Uninhabitable: Lyotard’s Architecture Philosophy”. Architecture Philosophy, 5(2), 33-52.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 POSSEIBLE
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
