Key Arguments

• Ricoeur asks whether, 'in literature, a model of intelligibility?' suggesting that literary narrative provides a way to make sense of complex lived entanglements.
• He notes that each 'Active history, in confronting the diverse fates belonging to different protagonists, provide models of interaction in which the entanglement is clarified by the com petition of narrative programs,' indicating that narratives display how different agents’ projects intersect and conflict.
• By speaking of 'models of interaction' and 'competition of narrative programs', he implies that literary narratives schematize the practical field of interwoven actions and projects, thereby making it intelligible.

Source Quotes

in literature, a model of intelligibility? And does not each Active history, in confronting the diverse fates belonging to different protagonists, provide models of interaction in which the entanglement is clarified by the com petition of narrative programs?

in literature, a model of intelligibility? And does not each Active history, in confronting the diverse fates belonging to different protagonists, provide models of interaction in which the entanglement is clarified by the com petition of narrative programs? The final objection rests on a misunderstanding which is not always easy to dispel.

Key Concepts

• in literature, a model of intelligibility?
• each Active history, in confronting the diverse fates belonging to different protagonists, provide models of interaction in which the entanglement is clarified by the com petition of narrative programs
• models of interaction in which the entanglement is clarified

Context

Continuation of section 2, where Ricoeur is still responding to objections about applying narrative structures to life and emphasizes the role of literary narratives as models for understanding complex practical entanglements.