Whatever they have they have unfortunately let their feeling run away with them.
Postmodernism is a critique frame of references and can't by definition be nonsense since they don't claim anything positive about the world.
Postmodernism is a critique frame of references and can't by definition be nonsense since they don't claim anything positive about the world.
ThomPete, you might find it instructive to consider that the major problem of postmodernism is its' adherents seeming inability to make simple declarative statements. Of course, simple declarative statements are often freighted with unspoken assumptions, and unpacking and analyzing these is a postmodern exercise in itself, particularly that of Jacques Derrida and the deconstructionists.
But where many postmodernsists go wrong is in the attempt to make fully qualified and narrowly specified declarative statements, which end up being almost impossible to read. In their zeal to avoid implying anything or having their intentions misunderstood, postmodernists frequently alienate their audiences with discourse which resembles cultural autism. This creates the impression that post-modernists are actually in love with the comforting certainties of modernism, but have seen the negative results of too much certitude: they would still like to establish definitive truths, but have decided to do so very very carefully.
I am not against post modernism, which I believe has many interesting things to say and provides useful tools with which to understand the world and our place in it. However, a critical framework that is so woolly and inconsistent as to be useless for practical communication of ideas does no service to the truths it was designed to express.
That Derrida showed that it's not possible to make declarative statement's is not the fault of Derrida but of language.
It is exactly the point that you CAN'T make any declaretive statements i.e. express truth that is the point of Derrida and deconstructivism.