Is there no basis for differentiating a personal from a historical narrative?

2

0

Is there no basis for differentiating a personal from a historical narrative? My narrative is a mess, so I'd like to get to grips with the question, ideally as it links to literature. Who in philosophy or literary criticism is explicitly arguing against the claim that all we have are lots of narratives of individual people, perhaps due to post-modern ends to "meta" narratives?

So Rorty thinks "of the entire culture, from physics to poetry, as a single, continuous, seamless activity in which the divisions are merely institutional and pedagogical". I'm asking for clearly worded refutations of the atomized, to the person, version of that. That our entire culture can only be understood as the actions of individual lives, and not at any more grand level than that.

So instead of being able to map the beginnings of literary modernism and how community may or may not have sustained that beyond its initial impetus to coexist with post-modernism, really only that some contemporary writer is writing with some techniques to the critical success that they now enjoy.

user35983

Posted 2019-01-06T22:45:28.060

Reputation:

I think your question is about what the individual experience of beauty means, but perhaps I am wrong. – Frank Hubeny – 2019-01-06T23:05:42.397

that's a fair enough intuition, but i'm not going to edit it in :) @FrankHubeny – None – 2019-01-06T23:10:02.357

+1 If it is about the individual experience of beauty there may be a philosophic answer to this. If I don't get to it, it would be from Dominic O'Meara's Plotinus. See the chapter on beauty. – Frank Hubeny – 2019-01-06T23:18:31.607

"I'd really like to read something" is not an SE answerable question. "Is anyone in the philosophical or literary literature arguing against the claim that all we have are lots of narratives of individual people, due to post-modern ends to "meta" narratives". You mean like analytic philosophers in almost their entirety? See Can Analytic Philosophy and Literary Criticism be Friends? by Escobedo and Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? by Latour

– Conifold – 2019-01-07T05:57:41.980

@Conifold are you sure? i mean, i believe it now you said. i'll edit the question. whether or not nearly everyone would agree =/= they are all arguing against it – None – 2019-01-07T06:30:22.473

Rorty is a notable exception (also Feyerabend), although for him cultural "narratives" are communal rather than individual. He also has essays on literary criticism, if you are interested. Even on the continental side, hermeneutics (Gadamer) and the Frankfurt school (Habermas) oppose post-modernist ultrarelativism. Latour is a repentant post-modernist, btw. – Conifold – 2019-01-07T07:03:03.623

so that's the phrase then "pomo ultrarelativism"? what does that incorporate? i'm less interested in meta-ethics etc., as these seem to have less practical bite for me: only 'personal narrative' opposed to 'history' @Conifold – None – 2019-01-07T07:10:17.047

No, this is my characterization of "thinking of the entire culture, from physics to poetry, as a single, continuous, seamless activity in which the divisions are merely institutional and pedagogical" (Rorty), and similar pronouncements. – Conifold – 2019-01-07T07:13:02.997

hmm too subtle for the question. no-one tackles this exact question head on? @Conifold if the answer is "i don't know" i'm guessing that means "no"? given that i am quite clear about what i mean (and do believe it is clearly expressed). let me mull that phrase over – None – 2019-01-07T07:14:15.547

Sorry, as usual, we have different ideas of what is clearly expressed. I do not understand what your (answerable) question is, I am just giving you free associations in hope that something fits. – Conifold – 2019-01-07T07:24:04.997

or maybe i'm not clear on what i mean to ask? what bit don't you understand? @Conifold – None – 2019-01-07T07:48:33.390

The first two paragraphs are better now. But if I grasp the question, the title now does not match it (also, "is there still a basis" is a bad opening for any question). It should be something like "Arguments against postmodernist dissociation of culture into individual narratives". Next, is "literary modernism" supposed to be "literary postmodernism"? And "this contemporary writer is writing with these techniques to the critical success they now enjoy". Who is "this" writer? What are "these" techniques? You want criticism of postmodernism by postmodernist techniques??? – Conifold – 2019-01-07T08:32:39.993

What keeps us from insisting that temperature be considered only as the actions of individual molecules, and not at any level more grand than that? -- Observed patterns that make more sense in the aggregate than in detail... Our lives are not about random facts, they are about narratives, and about the organization of those narratives for our own use. Meta-narratives may be illusions, in an absolute sense, but they give us things like science, which none of us wants to discard. – None – 2019-01-07T22:22:47.080

The object world and its inertia is the true controller. For the most part it makes the history unless we somehow take control of it. The subject is on the fringe, what is left of it. To be atomized is even more reduced and ineffective. Some form of personalism may be a response if we stay under our present system. But to overcome the inertia of the object world now would be a formidable, almost impossible task. Unless it collapses on its own. – Gordon – 2019-01-08T09:51:49.327

No answers