Blog Marcos L. Mucheroni Filosofia, Noosfera e cibercultura

In 1979 Jean-François Lyotard launched the classic book, “The Postmodern Condition,” where he already proposed the political crisis, calling it a sophist in the sense that reformulates the problem of democracy as follows: speech politics the fashion of the sophists founded on Democratic opinion, and politics of universalist dimension of Kant, consecrated in the model of Hegelian state and in the social contract.
The point of contention with Habermas is that Lyotard regards as unsatisfactory and fragile the articulation between what is direct and de facto, the articulation that makes it on the one hand too abstract and, on the other, too factual, nor the consensus of the contract that is Fragile, and what could be considered the practicality of “facts” with absent utopia.
I say thus by Lyotard: “Consensus has become an outdated value, and I suspect. Justice, but it is not. It is therefore necessary to arrive at an idea and practice of justice that is not linked to that of consensus. “(Lyotard 1979: 106)
But Lyotard’s critique does not stop there, he found it in a game of language called a double analogy, between the “practical-political” and another “cognitive” of science that would be “de facto” (factual reality).
Thus the first part is based on a critique of the systemic criterion of communication proposed by Luhmann, but the theories of relativity and quantum, the “open systems”, the theories of catastrophes and chaos, among others, do not fail to make references.

The second part of the Lyotardian solution comes from legitimizing a path of law, aiming to criticize the methodological foundations of consensus theory, from Bachelard, Kuhn, Feyerabend and Serres, which are attempts to revitalize the “scientific” way of working the facts. As a consequence two complementary types of pragmatism.
Although he disagrees with pragmatics, what he calls “legitimation by paralogia” that is the participation of “social communities”, there is the misconception between combining science and politics, there is a positive aspect of making criticism in which the power of the The West can not regard itself as superior to the play of narrative language, which we find in primitive cultures, since a metanarrative borrowed from Plato to philosophy (Lyotard 1979: 51).
The universe of post-truth discourse is therefore a paralogy, invented by the cynical reason of present times, there is nothing else that Lyotard calls in another book Le différend, the differences, that are different in a logic of conflict, with discourses made in Different.

Lyotard, J.F. Le Condition postmoderne. Paris: Minuit, 1979.