How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 Philosophy 101
 Rorty and his Consequences
 1 2 3 4 5 6
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Rorty and his Consequences

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


0 posted 09-04-2001 02:37 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

This is a review of a book I mentioned earlier, "Rorty and his Critics":
http://www.thenewrepublic.com/082001/blackburn082001_print.html

Needless to say, I disagree this Blackburn's assessment.

Here's an excerpt:

"If you visit a mighty good school, you might find some big words written over the gate: words such as Truth, Reason, Knowledge, Understanding, or even Wisdom. If the school is old enough and in another country, you might even find a mention of God, though this word may now be an embarrassment, or regarded as purely decorative, or if the word was once there, perhaps it has been erased and something secular substituted. But nobody would want to erase Truth, Reason, and the rest, would they?


Richard Rorty would."

[This message has been edited by Brad (edited 09-04-2001).]

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


1 posted 09-04-2001 06:50 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Okay...I'm back from the show.   (It was great by the way, I think everyone should dance with a red feather boa at least once in their lives...)

And I've read the aforementioned review and bookmarked it for when my ears stop ringing...but was curious, Brad. Is the excerpt you quoted ALL that you disagreed with? hmmm....sign me, still curious...  

(serenity exits...sans leather... )
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


2 posted 09-04-2001 09:27 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Good God, no. I give introductory quotes when I do this just to entice people to read the whole thing.

I agree with the part I quoted by the way.


Glad you had a good time at the show.

Brad
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


3 posted 09-04-2001 12:10 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

sans leather -- good grief why???

Read the review (about half of it) but haven't read Rorty -- so I'm hesitant to engage the rubarb without that knowledge -- but assuming Brandom has rendered an 'objective' synopsis I will say langauge is not a Darwinian defense mechanism --

Language originated as a way for women to 'gossip' about what went on in the clan while the men were away hunting -- so that if someone was sleeping with someone they shouldn't the mother-in-law could report it to her son.  (according to the best anthropologists I've read)

I will agree though that language is a way to exclude 'the new kid on the block' and has been used that way for millenia -- the shiboleth comes to mind -- technical jargon inside specific industries is designed largely to weed out the unwashed -- I also read an excellent essay on the topic of abortion wherein the writer claims the debate cannot go forward because of the language chosen to discuss it -- wish I could find it again -- thought I had it bookmarked...

anyway -- intersting topic Brad but I'm curious about what direction you wanted to shepard the conversation?

did you want to focus on words such as 'truth' being held in regard as a deity?

[This message has been edited by Local Rebel (edited 09-04-2001).]

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


4 posted 09-06-2001 06:06 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Well, I disagree with the view on Rorty but I still thought it covered the 'hot spots' of the last ten years or so pretty well (from the opposite point of view).

He does talk about Fish and Sokal and I thought it might tie in nicely with the thread on tolerance.  

I could show quotes from the book that show how wrong his reading of Rorty is but unless somebody else reads the book, I don't see any value in it.

In a way, I guess I was just trying to give a little more context to the tolerance thread.

Brad
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


5 posted 09-06-2001 05:00 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

yeah I just wish I was better read in this area -- I've been rightly accused of ignoring post-modernism -- but not totally -- I guess I just find it pretty irrelevant in a world that's still imbued in fundamentalism.
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


6 posted 09-08-2001 11:39 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Yeah, Rorty's continuing analogy to give up TRUTH and REASON (as opposed to the tools we use to arrive at these things) is usually theological. Questions about TRUTH as correspondance to reality should go the way of the certainty of one's salvation and epistemology should go the way of demonology, but those still are very real and important things to a lot of people.

I've read some religious articles that say many postmodern thinkers are potential allies. I'm pretty sure I see their point but there's gotta be something funny about those who want to discuss absolutes and those who stress the contingency of our thought as buddies.

I guess the question really revolves around how persuasive, "God told me to do it," is these days when it comes to what people actually do and how persuasive "It's the objective truth" is in the same way.

A Pragmatist argues for neither. A Pragmatist asks, "Does it work?"

Brad
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> Philosophy 101 >> Rorty and his Consequences Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors