Super!Geek, PCR, 2/15, Habermas

In my pre-class response last week, I expressed confusion over Habermas's definition of modernity, largely on the basis that it sounded so similar to previous definitions given for post-modernism. According to Habermas, “Modernity revolts against the normalizing functions of tradition; modernity lives on the experience of rebelling against all that is normative.” Yet Habermas appears to hold a rather staunch opposition to post-modernism, or what he would call anti-modernity. I still am vexed as to how his conception of modernity can not hold itself compatible to post-modernism. Both aim to break through the conformity of traditionalism, by ushering in new thought. Yet maybe that is the point-- post-modernity is not really post-modernity, but instead just the current form of modernism. Or potentially, post-modernism is now the true ‘modernism’ and the modernism of the last epoch is instead a new bracket of traditionalism… as if this explanation makes me any less confused.

Habermas also appears to be staunchly against the 'cult of the new' yet it is that very same 'cult' that drives his definition of modernity. Those who are active agents against tradition are those who pride the 'new' over the 'old'. In modernism, new is intrinsically better, or else it would not actually be modern, it would be traditional. Even in the case of 'retroism', it is the recreation of the old that is actually favored, not the original. The ‘cult’ also acts as the driving force in determining what is in fact modern, if we are viewing modernism in the sense of what is current. New thought is what drives modernism therefore the ‘cult of the new’ are actually Habermas’s biggest proponents. This seems to leave a flaw in his argument pertaining to which body of thought he is actually advocating for. However, this may be why some use Habermas to support post-modernity all the same as modernism.