<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Pomocon Persuasion?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2013/02/08/a-pomocon-persuasion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2013/02/08/a-pomocon-persuasion/</link>
	<description>A First Things Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 07:44:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: CJ Wolfe</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2013/02/08/a-pomocon-persuasion/comment-page-1/#comment-33408</link>
		<dc:creator>CJ Wolfe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Feb 2013 20:12:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=10553#comment-33408</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[To kick-start the manifesto John, here&#039;s a question that I&#039;ve been wondering about the POMOCON persuasion ever since I started reading and posting on this blog:

Is there a rhyme or reason behind the various bloggers&#039; use of ALL CAPITAL LETTERS? 

Most of the other blogs I read don&#039;t use caps the way that the pomocon posters do. As far as I can tell, the capital letters are used mainly for 1) keywords, 2) emphasis, 3)humor. I think it&#039;s a nice invenzione, even if Pomocon wasn&#039;t the first blog that used caps this way. Not all the posters on here use them, but Lawler usually does and sometimes Carl does I think; as a commenter I sometimes do too in order to fit in. But I was wondering if there were additional unspoken rules to their usage on POMOCON]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To kick-start the manifesto John, here&#8217;s a question that I&#8217;ve been wondering about the POMOCON persuasion ever since I started reading and posting on this blog:</p>
<p>Is there a rhyme or reason behind the various bloggers&#8217; use of ALL CAPITAL LETTERS? </p>
<p>Most of the other blogs I read don&#8217;t use caps the way that the pomocon posters do. As far as I can tell, the capital letters are used mainly for 1) keywords, 2) emphasis, 3)humor. I think it&#8217;s a nice invenzione, even if Pomocon wasn&#8217;t the first blog that used caps this way. Not all the posters on here use them, but Lawler usually does and sometimes Carl does I think; as a commenter I sometimes do too in order to fit in. But I was wondering if there were additional unspoken rules to their usage on POMOCON</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Corey</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2013/02/08/a-pomocon-persuasion/comment-page-1/#comment-33399</link>
		<dc:creator>Corey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 21:00:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=10553#comment-33399</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I do wish you would have somebody comment a little more deeply on the phenomenological character of the philosophical side of PoMoConism. It seems kind of crucial to me, inasmuch as our epoch has been so affected by individualism and liberal democracy, to explain how a political science can be evident not only to the philosopher, but to the citizen as well. Different hermeneutical methods, or different reductions, will of course result in more powerful tools of explanation, but dignity and the &quot;higher goods&quot; should have some way of being made manifest to everyone without making idols of any particular concept. So why not lean a little harder on the &quot;post-modern&quot; side of PoMoConism, and give a more rigorous account of the way the things we can&#039;t not know about ourselves, maybe despite our history of ideas and the sedimentation of Cartesian metaphysics, make our dignity manifest? And then, from this beginning on what we can&#039;t not know- where philosophy is silent- you could show the need, at the bottom of things, for a revealed Christian theology.

But maybe this is Ralphism, in other words?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do wish you would have somebody comment a little more deeply on the phenomenological character of the philosophical side of PoMoConism. It seems kind of crucial to me, inasmuch as our epoch has been so affected by individualism and liberal democracy, to explain how a political science can be evident not only to the philosopher, but to the citizen as well. Different hermeneutical methods, or different reductions, will of course result in more powerful tools of explanation, but dignity and the &#8220;higher goods&#8221; should have some way of being made manifest to everyone without making idols of any particular concept. So why not lean a little harder on the &#8220;post-modern&#8221; side of PoMoConism, and give a more rigorous account of the way the things we can&#8217;t not know about ourselves, maybe despite our history of ideas and the sedimentation of Cartesian metaphysics, make our dignity manifest? And then, from this beginning on what we can&#8217;t not know- where philosophy is silent- you could show the need, at the bottom of things, for a revealed Christian theology.</p>
<p>But maybe this is Ralphism, in other words?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl Eric Scott</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2013/02/08/a-pomocon-persuasion/comment-page-1/#comment-33392</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl Eric Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 15:30:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=10553#comment-33392</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[my response to this is in the original thread...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>my response to this is in the original thread&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Pomocon Persuasion? &#124; CATHOLIC FEAST</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2013/02/08/a-pomocon-persuasion/comment-page-1/#comment-33388</link>
		<dc:creator>A Pomocon Persuasion? &#124; CATHOLIC FEAST</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2013 11:20:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=10553#comment-33388</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] I took these words from a response to a fine post by Carl Scott, and decided to make them into a not so fine post of mine here&#8211; A long time ago Peter Lawler mentioned doing the most unconservative thing, i.e., writing some kind of postmodern conservative manifesto. It would at Source: Postmodern Conservative&#160;&#160; [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I took these words from a response to a fine post by Carl Scott, and decided to make them into a not so fine post of mine here&#8211; A long time ago Peter Lawler mentioned doing the most unconservative thing, i.e., writing some kind of postmodern conservative manifesto. It would at Source: Postmodern Conservative&nbsp;&nbsp; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
