Narrative and scientific knowledge are incommensurable language games with no common criterion

Evidence

It is therefore impossible to judge the existence or validity of narrative knowledge on the basis of scientific knowledge and vice versa: the relevant criteria are different. All we can do is gaze in wonderment at the diversity of discursive species, just as we do at the diversity of plant or animal species. Lamenting the “loss of meaning” in postmodernity boils down to mourning the fact that knowledge is no longer principally narrative. Such a reaction does not necessarily follow. — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 232

Categorization

• DEFINE: Gives Lyotard’s core claim that narrative and scientific knowledge cannot judge one another — the incommensurability of language games that grounds the ‘incredulity toward metanarratives’ idea.
• XREF: Directly what Jameson answers/contests: Jameson rejects the ‘loss of meaning’ as mere mourning and treats postmodern fragmentation as structural to late capitalism rather than a neutral diversity of discursive species. — connects to: Scientific knowledge operates as a pragmatic game governed by contract — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 325; Social language games are heteromorphous with no common metaprescriptions — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 449; Postmodern society is a pragmatics of heterogeneous language games, not a Newtonian system. — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on…, 90 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Scientific and narrative thought are evaluated by different criteria #corroborates (0.92)
• The cumulative character of scientific knowledge is never questioned in the dominant paradigm #expands (0.75) — Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition, 123