I think that 'normative' model should be initially changed to modelS. I do not think that post-modernist approaches necessarily preclude the normative but extends this to include varieties and subtleties.

Dear Paul,

I think that after some time normative models will be considered as anomalies and not usable in theory and practically. I do such conclusion watching the present values of Y and Z generations (born in the end of last century).

Yours truly,\

Arvydas

Dear Arvydas,

I think that Paul's response is very attractive: we would be more comfortable to talk about "models", rather than a "model". On the one hand, this emphasis on comfort is the foundation of the distaste for a model, and a preference for models, in the post-modern era. Jean-Francois Lyotard's answer to this question, and his critique of Jurgen Habermas' position, are striking in this regard. It is to sustain this comfort, and to avoid any "judge" from any where, that arguments for a normative model are considered anomalies in the post-modern era.

On the other hand, we can still have a model, even though our cultural prides and our extreme desires for freedom make such a model seem anomalous, and impossible. However, objective cross-cultural assessment of the structures and components of available normative models and 'subtleties' would definitely reveal which models are better, more humane, more sustainable, and therefore deserve our attention and consideration.