PAUL ERNEST POSTMODERNITY AND SOCIAL RESEARCH IN MATHEMATICS EDUCATION Postmodernism is a brash new style, which, in the mouths of some authors, claims to supersede what came before. In my view much of its claimed originality is overhyped, and as a cultural —as opposed to philosophical— discourse it celebrates the hybrid, pastiche, and ironic. These exhibit double —or more— codings as multiple meanings collide. Thus hypocrisy, insincerity and double standards are all potential dangers for postmodernism. If I adopt, for the moment, the standpoint of a cynic, postmodernity can be read as an excuse for inauthenticity and ethical expediency. However, simultaneously, the philosophical discourse of postmodernity, much of which I support, celebrates authenticity, being-here-now (Heidegger’s Dasein). These are attitudes that acknowledge our multiple existence in the linked but disparate worlds of our experience: the bodily, mundane, discursive, political, professional, institutional and cultural realms. Thus the irony is that the postmodern celebrates the transgressive —crossing the traditional boundaries of knowledge, values, economics— as well as those of good taste, decency, and morality. And this leaves me feeling split —both a supporter and a critic of the various stances attributed to post-modernism. This is all heady stuff. But it takes me away from the more down to earth and dare I say it —serious— aims of this chapter. Habermas (1990) distinguishes the philosophical and cultural discourses of postmodernity —and modernity. Most of the above musings are to be found in the cultural discourse. In the present context it is the philosophical discourse I shall draw upon. For the purposes of this chapter I will pick and choose those elements of postmodernity relevant to my project, namely developing the conceptualisation of socio-political and socio-cultural research in mathematics education. In doing so I will not take the space to offer a definitive account of postmodernism —not that I could necessarily supply this. Rather I will devote my space to three themes which, although varying in support from the pantheon of postmodernist and poststructuralist authors cited here, are undoubtedly important in mathematics education. The three elements or themes I have chosen to focus on are the rejection of metanarratives, a focus on conversation and language, and the knowledge / power / economics nexus. P. Valero and R. Zevenbergen (Eds.), Researching the socio-political dimensions of mathematics education: Issues of power in theory and methodology, 65—84. © 2004 Kluwer Academic Publishers.