@article{
author = "Krstić, Predrag",
year = "2018",
abstract = "Moglo bi se reći da je, uopšte, postmodernizam predstavljao posebnu inspiraciju
reafirmaciji prosvetiteljstva, ali i da se prosvetiteljstvo revidiralo u odgovoru na taj izazov.
Branioci prosvetiteljstva su u tom zahvatu koristili različite strategije ali im je, ako se izuzme
povremeno paušalno odbacivanje i nagrda, svima bilo zajedničko osporavanje da je teorija
postmodernizma ono za šta se izdaje. Pri njihovoj rekonstrukciji pozicije postmodernizma,
jednom se uočava da je u pitanju baštinjenje najstarijih tradicija protivprosvetiteljskog i uz to
neodgovornog mišljenja. Drugi put se ističe nezasnovano zaklanjanje teorije postmoderne iza
krivotvorenog naloga prosvetiteljstva ili još manje zasnovano samohvalisavo i iluzorno raskidanje
s modernom. Treći put se postmodernizam upisuje u tradiciju „sa sobom zavađene
moderne“ upravo naporom da se iskoči iz nje, u tradiciju prosvetiteljstva i njegove bespoštedne
kritike kao sastavnog dela istog pregnuća. Zaključuje se da nijedna od apologija prosvetiteljstva,
na vlastitu štetu, ne uspeva da dosledno inkorporira oštricu postmodernističke primedbe
i da se, pod prinudom odbrane i profilisanja vlastitog pravovernog stanovišta, njenom
psihosocijalnom neutralizacijom ogrešuje o sam kritički potencijal prosvetiteljstva., It could be said that, in general, Postmodernism represented a special inspiration
for reaffirmation of the Enlightenment, and that the Enlightenment revised in response
to this challenge. Defenders of the Enlightenment in the procedure used different
strategies but, except for the occasional lump rejection and distorts, they all shared
conviction that the theory of Postmodernism misrepresented itself. In their reconstruction
of the position of Postmodernism, one shows that it comes to inherit the oldest
traditions of the Counterenlightenment and the irresponsible relativist thinking. Another
time it is emphasized the unfounded sheltering of the theory of Postmodernism
behind the counterfeit principle of the Enlightenment or, even less based, boastfully
as well as illusory breaking with Modernity. The third approach entered Postmodernism
in the tradition of „with itself quarreling Modernism” by the very effort to go
beyond it; in the tradition of the Enlightenment and its relentless criticism as an integral
part of the same endeavor. It is concluded that none of the apology of the Enlightenment,
to its own detriment, succeded to consistently incorporate cutting edge of
postmodern objections and, under duress to defend and profiled its own orthodox point
of view, by its psychosocial neutralization violates the critical potential of the
Enlightenment.",
journal = "Theoria",
title = "Moda, kamufliranje i kontinuitet: raskrinkavanje postmodernizma kroz apologije prosvetiteljstva, Fashion, Camouflage and Continuity: The Unmasking of Postmodernism Through Apology of the Enlightenment",
number = "1",
volume = "61",
pages = "179-194",
doi = "http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0351-2274/2018/0351-22741801179K.pdf"
}
