Gar Lipow wrote:
> Everybody seems to miss my last point. So once more, no irony. What is
> the objection to Meta-narrative?
I must have missed the posts that objected to meta-narrative..
Until I decided that "pomo" was so vague as to not be even usable in private thought, I had always classified objections to Meta-Narrative as "postmodern." In any case the first time I ever heard anyone reject a point because it was a "narrative" (the occasion was in an Eng. Dept. discussion forum at ISU) the only response I could give was to drop my jaw. I would assume that while meta-narrative and thinking are not quite synonymous they are so closely intertwined that to reject one is to reject the other.
Carrol