ABSTRACT
Ratifying the end of something entails knowing what such a something is. Then, in order to uphold the end of postmodernism, we should have a kind of definition or picture of it. And here we meet a first difficulty, for post-modernism has to do precisely with the sunset/difficulty/death of the possibility of defining, circumscribing, naming things, world, and experience. In this sense, it is precisely ‘the strategy of naming’ (Peters, 2008), which in postmodernism gets lost. Then, given such a difficulty, there can be no guarantee that we still dwell, without our knowledge, in postmodernism. And, I would argue, this is our case, for postmodernism is not over: in the current transition it just assumes another face.
