The meaning of political science is often restricted to the state, government, and everyday politics. However, it goes beyond that. We as humans share various relationships. What do we do when conflicts arise in these relationships? How do we resolve them? The Socratic dialectical method or Habermas’ idea of deliberation provides a solution. It says conflicts are better resolved through dialogue rather than domination. Hence, it tells us how to talk in a dialectical manner. It is the process of reasoning together. For instance, when your father asks you to aim for a government job, but you want to become a content creator, you do not totally oppose each other. Instead, you engage rationally: Why is a government job important? Maybe because it provides security and financial stability. But being a content creator might give you creative freedom. So you decide to take a government job but also start your creator journey simultaneously — maybe by vlogging your day as a government employee...
When we didn't get 1st place in class, we were judged as not very intelligent. And if the rank was in double digits, our intelligence was questioned fundamentally. This is what modernization did — it categorized knowledge in a binary and hierarchical manner. A child not getting the 1st rank does not necessarily mean that he is not intelligent. Maybe his intelligence lies in something other than studies.
Postmodernism leaves room for multiple realities rather than a single universal reality, which Lyotard calls a meta-narrative or grand theory. It also challenges the idea of language. In the words of Derrida, if we deconstruct language, we find power dynamics. For instance, if someone says the word “black,” it automatically generates a negative connotation in our mind. It carries the historical baggage of how colonialists used it in a value-laden way to establish fair skin as superior and justify their colonialism. A similar argument applies to caste in India. Foucault uses the example of homosexuality; he says it was termed as abnormal by the doctors to distinguish the homosexuals and show them as inferior. The same homosexuality is now seen as somewhat normal. Same word but different meaning due to different power dynamics. Hence, language is also political, meaning it is used to exert power.
Hence, postmodernism rejects the idea of one — one reality, one idea, one narrative, etc. It leaves scope open for other possibilities, something similar to the idea of anekantavad in Jain philosophy. Unlike the idea of ekam satyam vipra bahudha vadanti, which assumes one truth with many expressions, postmodernism emphasizes only multiple realities with no single underlying truth.”
But now the question arises — if we reject everything or question everything, such as knowledge and discipline, will that not create disorder in society? Postmodernism here broadly accepts order but asks us to keep questioning it so that it does not become a tool of exploitation by the powerful. For instance, the varna system might have created order in the society when it originated, but today it is used to discriminate; hence, it must be rejected in totality.
Moreover, the universe is so big and we are a tiny little creature, it is just our ego that we start claiming that what we know is the only truth. In essence, postmodernism is not a denial of order but a warning against rigidity. It seeks to democratize knowledge by recognizing multiple realities and voices.
Comments
Post a Comment