> It seems to me that Paul is playing games by almost deliberately
> implying an obvious falsity: that upholders of meta-narrativeS
> necessarily uphold some one meta-narrative, which would be
Au Contrare, Carrol. I pointed out a number of different kinds of meta-narratives. As a Jamesian pragmatist I'm automatically a radical pluralist as well.
> The closest I can think of to such an all-encompassing single
> meta-narrative would be that implied in Paul's organizational
> label, "Reason and Democracy," which is either an utter
> triviality or a claim to a meta-narrative that out metas even
> that of Jerry Falwell.
Ah, the light begins to dawn!
That's EXACTLY what I'm up to: a leftwing out-meta-ing of the religious right.
And why the hell not?
-- Paul Rosenberg Reason and Democracy rad at gte.net
"Let's put the information BACK into the information age!"