Chuck Miller wrote:
> Carroll:
>
> Since your definition of clear and private thought might be
> circular, perhaps it is not the unclarity of the pomos you have a problem
> with but your assumptions about what constitutes, in some way, rational and
> private thinking.
Apparently *I* wasn't too clear. I was not saying anything at all about the "pomos." I was arguing that it was a useless category and that statements about them were pretty empty for that reason. I was criticizing Paul on this list, Lou Proyect on pen-l for using the category.
I have criticized (mostly on ethical grounds) one writer said to be a post modernist (Judith Butler), for herself using an empty category (lacking specified persons who could defend themselves), but otherwise I have not engaged in any argument either way about "The Postmodernists" (since Doug Henwood and Malgosia Ascanias taught me better a year or so ago).
Carrol