>
> This is a fair warning - I project it back to you as a scholarly
> question about your classifying several of my statements as
> 'objectivism". Are you not also in danger of putting a paradigm faith in
> your construct of living in language when you challenge others who
> argue the fragility of language as a form of communication.
I think you and Gary are similar in your perspectives and that you both
are searching for an Other. Strange that no one here will play a devil's
advocate to postmodernism! (Don't look at me! I won't either.)
But, seriously, the next step after postmodern enlightenment is surely
finding a way to create a meaningful discourse without agonistics. Hard
for me, too. How do we weave together new ideas in a dialectical
discourse? How do you put forward the other side without challenge and
treating someone as an Other? Without polarizing truth and objectifying
it? I think Gary's trying, but often failing at that, and it bugs you, as
it would me. But like Gary, I often fall flat on my face when I try to
escape the self-defeating ways of modernity.
Ooops! Gary! Am I doing it again?
..Lois Shawver
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%