modernity vs postmodernity, May 05, 2005
The “Post” syndrome (and the Fukuyamist intention of departing from history) can only be understood , paradoxically, within the rereading of the historical continuity, as way of overcoming the projectual inconsistence that exists.
In this context debates emerge about the utopian component and the question of sustainability of the modern project, and about society as a platform for communication .
It must be said that the post-modern debate (Vattimo, Lyotard, etc) was conformed by some gaps opened by modernity itself (as the conscience of a difficulty in the articulation between the aesthetic and the politic, the resistances existing on the relationship between form-use, the difficulty in really controlling aesthetically the relationship between production-consuption, etc.).At the limit, we could conceive that post-modernity could even be a short expression in the historical manifestation of modernity (“large” and “inconclusive”) and that its archaeology point to the re-reading of modernity. In this perspective our exposition feels no need to understand the post-Modern as it is frequently seen, that is as a contra-project of Modernity