3.) As an analytical philosopher, I have always been told that postmoderns have been defeated by Sokal’s hoax and that these absurd and pernicious ideas have been banished to the margins of literary criticism and sociology departments, never to be taken seriously. I fear that the analysts were wrong to celebrate too soon, and that the current takeover of academia (and society at large) has turned out to be a great victory for postmodernists. Have the postmoderns won? Is Gramsci’s long march through institutions over?
4.) People like Jordan Peterson, Jonathan Haidt, etc., championed free speech, reasoned debate, and classical liberalism as antidotes to pernicious far-left wokeism. That said, how do you persuade someone in a debate or reciprocal discussion when they have already been convinced that dialogue, truth, logic, proof, validity, argument, polite civil discourse, etc. , are only expressions of power and systems of oppression. ?
5.) What does the current moment of awakening/intersection mean for free speech and Western liberalism in general in the future to come?
6.) Recently, the “post-liberal” Catholic thinker, Patrick Deneen, at Notre-Dame, as well as other “integralist” types (Vermeule, Pappen, Amari) have argued that the foundations of classical liberalism themselves have logically led to woke away- leftist intolerance. Do you agree? What is the classic liberal response to such a view?