![\"\"](\"http:\/\/portal.or-om.org\/portals\/or-om.org\/Dokumente\/htm\/rec-Dateien\/image002.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
GRUPPE<\/span> What does it mean: The End of Postmodernism?<\/strong><\/p>\n Gruppe Or-Om presented the Installation \u201cThe End of Postmodernism\u201d at the We would like to explicate some of the essential ideas of the project, which means also a<\/p>\n \u25baReconstruction beyond Postmodernism\u25c4<\/strong><\/p>\n Basics of Postmodernism<\/strong><\/p>\n Modern theory differs between the concepts of Reason (Vernunft) The Concept of Reason, an important heritage of the centuries of Reason so became associated with totalitarian suppression.\u00a0 Universality, totality, \u201cEmbedded in this mind-set is hostility to the idea that discriminating judgments are appropriate in assessing art and literature, to the idea that How can we handle a modest concept of reason beyond absolutistic usurpations? The different attempts of postmodernism, to establish a modest concept of reason Our next objections against postmodernism are condensed in the following citation: „The postmodern vision of a tolerant, pluralist<\/a> society in which every \u25baReconstruction beyond postmodernism\u25c4<\/strong><\/p>\n We have overcome the dungeons of postmodernism! We have Positions of traditional and postmodern arts and philosophy are only limitated Try to understand the deduction from the infinite line (1) (Absolute Traditional oeuvres of philosophy, sciences within line (3.1) and of arts line (3.2) are imperfect<\/strong>, incomplete, <\/strong>and can be evolved to a new step of perfection<\/strong>. If art, philosophy and sciences remain in the historical and contemporary limitations, they will not evolve but remain in a vicious circle being confronted with the problem of arbitrarity, atony and fatigue in new overlappings and hybrids. Our Deductive Generator\u00a9 <\/sup><\/strong>constitutes the aesthetical and logical basics for a new foundation of arts and sciences.<\/p>\n The Deductive Generator\u00a9 All formal aesthetics and all scientific concepts have to be deduced from and within the Infinite and Absolute Essence, recognizing the steps and hierarchies That means: One Universal Mankind (http:\/\/or-om.org\/oromacropolis.htm<\/a>), One Is this deductivefoundation of all epistemic, ethical, political, social and aesthetical pluralities within the Absolute and Infinite Essence a new despotic and hegemonic instrument of suppression of all other theories, a new inadequate governance of plurality? How can we maintain that this Deduction is not an Our answer: These deductions have to be examined by everyone itself. It must not be a doctrine imposed on someone by physical or psychical force and Finally some questions: Would you say, the Pythagorean theorem is The finite entities within line (3) have 2 possibilities:<\/p>\n a) continuous creation, permutation, variation and recombining of finite elements within circling tracks of vicious circles;<\/p>\n b) Integration of the finite entities and elements of line (3) into the Overall-(Or-Om-) Structure of line (1) and its inner deductions with new harmonies There is no dialectical necessity, that mankind will take the direction b) but <\/p>\n Edition: Karl S. Pflegerl, Siegfried: Gastarbeiter S.Pflegerl, Siegfried: Die Vollendete S. Pflegerl: Die Aufkl\u00e4rung der Aufkl\u00e4rer. S. Pflegerl: Ist Antisemitismus heilbar? S. Pflegerl: K.C.F. Krause Digital Research Project: See also: <\/p>\n http:\/\/rhizome.org\/object.rhiz?3132<\/a> http:\/\/www.mip.at\/de\/werke\/513.html<\/a> International Istanbul Graphic Design Week, Istanbul 3-7 May 2004;<\/p>\n K\u00fcnstlerhaus Wien, UPDATE: Hornbach Art Galleries\u00a9<\/sup> Monochrom, Team Teichenberg, Quartier 21: Extended Art Projects. An Extended Reconstruction Community Athens: Or-Om <\/p>\n
\n \u2013 OR-OM\u00a9<\/span><\/p>\n
\n\u25baReconstruction beyond Postmodernism\u25c4<\/strong>
\ndedicated to ReC
\nhttp:\/\/www.reconstruction.gr<\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/strong>O Force-compelled, Fate-driven earth-born race,
\nO petty adventurers in an infinite world
\nAnd prisoners of a dwarf humanity,
\nHow long will you tread the circling tracks of mind
\nAround your little self and petty things?<\/em><\/p>\n
\n„<\/em>How can ‚we‘ effect any change in people’s poor living conditions,
\nin inequality and injustice, if ‚we‘ don’t accept the validity
\nof underlying universals such as the ‚real world‘ and ‚justice‘ in
\nthe first place?“<\/em><\/p>\n
\nMuseumsquartier in Vienna in 2006 (http:\/\/or-om.org\/endpostmodern.htm<\/a>
\n). Harris Kondosphyris and Katherina Nasioka from ReC saw the project and especially the question of the \u201cTotalitarism of Pluralism\u201d found their interest.<\/p>\n
\nand Rationalities. Is there any common agreement about the
\nstructures and functions of one Super-Reason as an instance for
\nhandling and organizing the plurality of rationalities established
\nwithin the highly segmented and differentiated structures of one
\nsocial system, within the relations of different social
\nsystems (systems of the first, second, third and fourth world;
\ncenter and peripheries) and within the
\ncomplete world-system?<\/p>\n
\nEnlightment (Aufkl\u00e4rung) associated with the ideas of deliberation from immatureness and oppression,\u00a0 inequality and injustice,
\nbecame more and more devaluated by historical experiences and
\ncatastrophes of world wars and their abuse of ideas and concepts of
\nreason. The development of highly segmented
\nand stratificated societies and decentralisation rejected more and more \u201cimposed
\nunities of
\n
\nmeta-narrative<\/a> and hegemony<\/a>; the breaking of traditional frames of genre, structure
\nand stylistic unity; and the overthrowing of categories that are the
\nresult of logocentrism<\/a> and other forms of artificially imposed order\u201d(wikipedia).<\/p>\n
\ngenerality, fundamentalism, essentialism and metaphysics have to be rejected.\u00a0 Postmodernists have dismissed these ambitions as „metanarratives<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\nhierarchies of value exist, hostility to the idea that an objective
\ntruth exists. Postmodernism is the overarching label that is
\nattached to this perspective\u201d (Charles Murray).<\/p>\n
\nPostmodernism gave different answers f. e. Anti-totalitarian concept of antagonism (Widerstreit) LYOTARD; Transversal (pure) Reason WELSCH consisting only of formal categories ; Responsive Rationality (WALDENFELS)
\na.s.o.<\/p>\n
\nCommon criteria<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nfor handling pluralities, dialectic oppositions and contradictions
\nbetween socially sedimented rationalities, opinions, political, social, aesthetic and economic ideologies try to say: „The minimal instruments of an
\nanti-totalitarian reason to handle plurality have to accept the diversities, incompatibilities and\u00a0 incommensurabilities of modern high segmented societies and must not lead to essentialistic and substantial (semantic) concepts of a
\nSuper-Reason, which decrees formal and substantial categories and
\nstructures for the usage of ALL variations of rationalities and their pluralities within all social systems of the word-system.<\/p>\n
\nOur Critics<\/strong>
\nPostmodern theories don\u2019t possess selfreferential consistency. What does this mean? If every general and universal statement about anything is forbidden as totalitarian, hegemonic and\u00a0 essentialistic violation and suppression, if plurality has to be accepted as the highest possible rational instance for handling
\nthe question of objectivity, then postmodernism has to apply these
\nprinciples also to its own statements and theories<\/strong>. The different
\npostmodern theories would have to say:
\n\u201cWe are for ourselves not legitimated to make these general and
\nuniversalistic statements about all other theories developed till
\nnow. Our general and universalistic meta-statements about all other
\ntheories of reason and rationality cannot have any general and
\nuniversalistic validity. Our theories have to accept, that they are
\nalso only relatively narrow minded positions among all the other
\ntheories of reason. We have no right to handle the other theories in
\na totalitarian manner by using our concepts and reasonings. Our own theories have no right to govern the
\nother pluralities and to figure as meta-level in the hierarchy of
\nmeanings. Our own theories are only different elements within the
\nindiscernible, un-hierarchical, incommensurable and incompatible
\nplurality in connection with all other theories. According to
\npostmodern theories our theories must be accepted as upon the same level with all other theories. If we deny universality and essentiality also our theories have no universal and essential character.\u201d
\nPostmodern theories don\u2019t practise this self-referential consistency! Our
\nconsequence: Postmodern theories thus are realising all the deficiencies and shortcomings they are criticising at other concepts of reason.
\nPostmodern theories establish a forbidden conceptual meta-level, the theories are authoritarian and totalitarian, figure as \u201cobjective\u201d super-level of hierarchies and become a new hegemonic instrument of suppression and
\ndistortion of other theories of reason. They cannot deliver any
\ncriteria for their self-legitimation as meta-narrative and as a
\nprivileged position. If they would be self-referentially
\nconsistent they would be forced to deconstruct their own rational
\ngesture of universality and essentiality, their reign over
\nplurality.<\/p>\n
\npolitical ideology<\/a> is perceived to be as valid, or as redundant, as the other, may encourage individuals to lead lives of a rather disastrous apathetic quietism. This reasoning leads Habermas to compare postmodernism with conservatism and the preservation of the status<\/a> quo“ (wikipedia). This\u00a0 protection of plurality under the conditions of dissent <\/em>leads to the fatal result that we would be forced to accept all kinds of extremism, fundamentalism, fascism and indifferentism within the
\npluralistic social systems without any criteria for the evaluation
\nof epistemic, ethical, political, aesthetical conflicts, developments, evolutions and kinds of governance. The absence of any possibility of self-legitimation<\/strong> by their own Basics and the tin ear for epistemic, ethical, political, social and
\naesthetical criteria is the most important lack of postmodern
\ntheories. Under serious conditions these theories would be forced to
\neliminate themselves as tyrannic universal instruments of
\nhandling plurality.<\/p>\n
\nunmasked its anti-hegemonic gesture as hegemonic governance! But \u2013
\nbreathing fresh air \u2013 are we able to find structures of a
\nSuper-Reason never recognized till now, which enables us to solve
\nthe problems of handling the highly complex conflicts of
\nepistemic, ethical, political, social and aesthetical pluralities within the
\nworld system. We say: Yes! Here we can only try to explain the
\nstructure of this Reason within a metaphor. We use the Figure of the
\nLine (1), (2), (3) in a lot of our different works as a symbol for
\nubiquitous universal structures and relationships within the
\nEssential Absolute Infinity. The theoretical backgrounds and basics have to be studied at our website or under
\n
\nhttp:\/\/www.internetloge.de\/krause\/krausismo.htm<\/a> .<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/portal.or-om.org\/portals\/or-om.org\/Dokumente\/htm\/rec-Dateien\/image004.gif\")
<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nlines within line (3), without perceiving all relations between the
\ninfinite lines (1) and (2) and the limitations within line (3).
\nMostly these positions worship the Goddess of „Finite Plurality“.
\nThe infinite line (1) is a metaphor for the Absolute and Infinite
\nEssence, the basis of Divine Reason. Always in history
\nphilosophers said, that we – as human beings – have a direct access to
\nthis Reason.<\/p>\n\n
\nEssence) to the finite squares A, B, C …(philosophy)
\nwithin line (3.1) and the finite squares 1, 2, 3, 4 …(arts) within
\nline (3.2). Thus you will become aware of the
\n\u25baReconstruction beyond Postmodernism\u25c4
\nand all traditional schools of arts and philosophy. You will
\nrealise, that it will not be enough to handle the incommensurable
\nand incompatible overlappings, crossovers and entanglements in the plurality of schools in arts and philosophy in the postmodern manner, a kind of „Totalitarism of Plurality“.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n<\/sup><\/strong>
\n
\nhttp:\/\/or-om.org\/endpostmodern.htm<\/a><\/p>\n
\nof infinite and finite forms respectively concepts. This evolution
\nimplies new concepts for all kinds of art, philosophy and science.
\nThe present\u00a0 <\/em><\/strong>epistemic, ethical, political, social and aesthetical pluralities have not to be destructed or negated but they are integrated into a new Structure of Infinite Reason.<\/em><\/strong>
\nAnd there its limitations, distortions and incomplete relations
\nbecome obvious in a new manner. Nothing has to be eliminated, but
\nscarcely all has to be reconstructed within the new infinite framework and gets new weights, relations and balances. The deduction of all pluralities beginning with the One, Absolute and Infinite Essence delivers the possibility for our<\/p>\n
\n\u25ba Reconstruction beyond Postmodernism\u25c4<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nreligious system, new basics of epistemology, mathematics, logicsand semantics of all languages, new basics for all sciences andtheir overlappings. New relationships between Nature (matter) and Spirit, between man und woman, new social formations, a new social world order of globalization, new aesthetics and ethics (\u00a0 http:\/\/or-om.org\/Grundrechtskatalog.htm<\/a> and
\n
\nhttp:\/\/or-om.org\/Weltsystem.htm<\/a> ).<\/p>\n
\nauthoritarian and totalitarian logocentric meta-narrative a new artificially imposed order.<\/p>\n
\nviolence, menace, thread or fraud. It can only be distributed by
\npeaceful and good means<\/strong><\/em> of persuasion and convincing, not
\nby rebellion, uprising, insurgency and revolt.<\/p>\n
\na despotic and hegemonic instrument of suppression of all other theories of the triangle? Would you say, the abovementioned deduction of the line (1) , line
\n(2) and line (3) is a despotic and hegemonic instrument of
\nsuppression of all other theories of the line, a new inadequate
\ngovernance of the infinite plurality of finite lines within line (3)?<\/p>\n
\nand syntheses.<\/p>\n
\nwe have to point out its possibility.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/portal.or-om.org\/portals\/or-om.org\/Dokumente\/htm\/rec-Dateien\/image006.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nSelected Publications<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nChristian Friedrich Krause: Vorlesungen \u00fcber das System der Philosophie.
\nReprint Edition 1828. Breitenfurt 1981.<\/p>\n
\nzwischen Integration und Absto\u00dfung. Wien-M\u00fcnchen 1977.<\/p>\n
\nKunst. Zur Evolution von Kunst und Kunsttheorie. Wien-K\u00f6ln 1990.<\/p>\n
\nUniversalistische Ideologie- und Rassismuskritik. Frankfurt am Main,
\nBerlin, Wien, New York 2001.<\/p>\n
\nZur Bearbeitung einer fatalen Tradition. Frankfurt am Main, Berlin,
\nWien, New York 2001.<\/p>\n
\nKrauses Urbild der Menschheit. Richtma\u00df einer universalistischen
\nGlobalisierung. Kommentierter Originaltext und Weltsystemanalyse.
\nFrankfurt am Main, Berlin, Wien, New York 2003.<\/p>\n
\n
\nhttp:\/\/or-om.org\/kdrp.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n
\n
\nhttp:\/\/www.philosophers-today.de\/philosophers\/spf.html<\/a>
\n
\nhttp:\/\/www.internetloge.de\/krause\/krausismo.htm<\/a>
\n.<\/p>\n
\nProjects of
\nGruppe Or-Om\u00a9
\n<\/sup>
\n http:\/\/or-om.org<\/a> <\/strong>
\nRhizome:<\/p>\n
\n– Universal Net-Cubism;
\nMuseum in progress:<\/p>\n
\n,
\n
\nhttp:\/\/www.mip.at\/de\/kuenstler\/649.html<\/a>;
\nManifesto in „Der Standard“ 8. 3. 2004 and 11.3.2004;
\ndispositiv (Richard Jochum):<\/p>\n
\nhttp:\/\/www.dis-positiv.org\/publikationen\/or-om.html<\/a>
\ncritical features;
\nMonochrom, Quartier 21:
\n
\nhttp:\/\/www.monochrom.at\/quovadislogo<\/a>,
\n„Quo vadis logo?“;<\/p>\n
\n1-4\/2005;<\/p>\n
\nQuartier 21: Installation: Die Ge_HORNBACH_te
\nKunst. Wien 5-8\/2005
\nMonochrom, Quartier 21: Installation: The End of
\nPostmodernism. Wien 3-8\/2006.
\nKunsthaus Graz\/Kunstlabor: Installation: The End
\nof Postmodernism. Graz 10-12\/2006.
\nTeam Teichenberg,\u00a0 Quartier 21: Installation: The Google Goose.
\nWien 10-12\/2006.<\/p>\n
\nPresentation. Wien 11\/2006.<\/p>\n
\nAcropolis
\n
\nhttp:\/\/www.reconstruction.gr\/en\/actions_dtls.php\/8<\/a>
\n.
\nAthens since 11\/2006.<\/p>\n