Hi Erin:
> Platt,
> Okay I was a little miffed at your last post because I thought you just cut
> and pasted it from every other post about postmodernism. But on rereading
> this I see that what is bothering you is that "no one language dominates."
> I guess you could interpret that as one not being better then another. I
> didn't. I don't think MOQ rejects other metanarratives or presented as THE
> metanarrative. That is how I interpreted the sentence and that is how I
> meant it. I can understand your interpretation now but let me ask you with
> my interpretation, give comments.
We agree there is no one metanarrative. Also, we agree the MOQ
doesn't present itself as the one and only metaphysics. The door to DQ
is always open. There may be a better metaphysics out there although I
have yet to find it.
But let me ask you: Do you see any difference in the assertions of truth
set forth by the metanarratives of astronomy and astrology?
Postmodernism says no. To quote one of its most famous adherents,
Richard Rorty, "No area of culture, and no period of history, gets reality
right more than any other." In other words, equal truth all around.
Will you surprise me and say you disagree with Rorty?
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:20 BST