Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 07:27:28 -0600
Subject: RE: legitimation








Lois wrote:
One might ask, "How can
paralogy legitimate?"  Just as science never presents a
conclusion that is beyond falsifiction, so paralogy does
not require access to apodictic truth in order to
legitimate.  The legitimation is a judgment that the move
is proper within the language game.  And within the
language game of paralogy, which is our postmodern
conversation, what is legitimate is a move that takes the
conversation forward, that presents us with a fertile
perspective, or destabililizes the status quo
taken-for-granted explanation and allows he generation of
new ideas. 

Don smith replies:
Lois, your explanation is very clear but if the rule of parology is that a
move in the game must take the conversation forward and present a fertile
perspective or destabilize the status quo and allow the generation of new
ideas, then why isn't that rule, which is universal to the game of parology,
a metanarrative or at least a part of the old metanarratives? 
Don