Science’s paralogy is the antimodel to the totalizing performativity system

Evidence

To the extent that science is differential, its pragmatics provides the antimodel of a stable system. A statement is deemed worth retaining the moment it marks a difference from what is already known, and after an argument and proof in support of it has been found. Science is a model of an “open system,” in which a statement becomes relevant if it “generates ideas,” that is, if it generates other statements and other game rules. Science possesses no general metalanguage in which all other languages can be transcribed and evaluated. This is what prevents its identification with the system and, all things considered, with terror. — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 444

Categorization

  • DEFINE: The core of Lyotard’s positive thesis: science as open system producing new moves, and its refusal of a general metalanguage is what shields it from the system.
  • XREF: Directly the metanarrative-incredulity that Jameson answers — Lyotard’s refusal of a metalanguage is precisely the abandonment of the grand narrative Jameson mourns/analyzes. — connects to: Research funding subordinates truth to the goal of performativity — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 342; Technical performativity now shapes what counts as scientific truth. — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 344; Paralogy as a move differs from innovation as system improvement — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 429 (+3 more)

Broader Connections