I think we might just have to agree to disagree. For me, it's not about foundations, as such. It's about whether there's a coherent set of ideas that constitute a substantive philosophical/theoretical position that can be labeled "postmodernism".
-
Hey Helen. You might want to check out chapter 9 of Scruton's recent "Fools, Frauds & Firebrands". It's *exactly* your topic. He sees things a bit like you - PM is primarily political - though a more restricted take on what constitutes PM. He calls it the "nonsense machine".
Not all of it is relevant, but that particular chapter is right on topic. He basically argues if you want to understand what's going on in postmodernism don't look for meaning - it's actually a political intervention designed to place adherents on the side of "justice"/"good".
