Although I commend DLJ for his wit, I think that there *IS* a
slight disagreement between WST & Po-Mo that he neglected in his
reply. It is at the epistemic level. Po-Mo is inclined to
attack both WST and the Neo-Marxism that gave it birth as each
being "TOTALIZING DISCOURSE" or "META-NARRATIVES" (I'm not sure
which evil is greater) that deny the unique individuality of
views. For its part, WST suspects Po-Mo of being so subjective
in its Mannheimian relativism that it would castigate the entire
project of social science as impossibly postivistic. Take your
choice. I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
Cheers,
Peter Grimes