As he states in ” (Hegel 1807, 59), because subject and object are both instances of a “this” and a “now,” neither of which are immediately sensed.
A consequence of achieved modernism is what postmodernists might refer to as de-realization.
De-realization affects both the subject and the objects of experience, such that their sense of identity, constancy, and substance is upset or dissolved.
Habermas argues that postmodernism contradicts itself through self-reference, and notes that postmodernists presuppose concepts they otherwise seek to undermine, e.g., freedom, subjectivity, or creativity.
He sees in this a rhetorical application of strategies employed by the artistic avant-garde of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, an avant-garde that is possible only because modernity separates artistic values from science and politics in the first place.
Rather, its differences lie within modernity itself, and postmodernism is a continuation of modern thinking in another mode.
Finally, I have included a summary of Habermas's critique of postmodernism, representing the main lines of discussion on both sides of the Atlantic.
The French, for example, work with concepts developed during the structuralist revolution in Paris in the 1950s and early 1960s, including structuralist readings of Marx and Freud.
For this reason they are often called “poststructuralists.” They also cite the events of May 1968 as a watershed moment for modern thought and its institutions, especially the universities.
I therefore give Lyotard pride of place in the sections that follow.
An economy of selection dictated the choice of other figures for this entry.