Greetings,

I won't ask about the choice of extremes, and what those choices are dependent 
on?  


Marsha






On Jan 31, 2010, at 8:14 PM, david buchanan wrote:

> 
> 
> dmb said to Steve:
> ...relativism and foundationalism aren't the only two options and I'm opposed 
> to them both.
> 
> 
> Steve replied:
> I agree, and so does Rorty. The key difference may be that you see "other 
> options" as middle ground, while I see the alternative as dropping the notion 
> of grounding all together.
> 
> dmb says:
> 
> Exactly, I'm saying that foundationalism and relativism are the extreme 
> positions and the other options would be somewhere in the middle. See, 
> dropping the notion of grounding altogether is the purely anti-foundational 
> move that results in relativism. In this case, that's not an alternative to 
> relativism but rather the cause of it. Because he thinks no reconstruction 
> project is desirable or even possible, Rorty ends up holding the extreme 
> position. As Hildebrand puts it, "Rorty's neo-pragmatism harbors such a deep 
> skepticism about traditional epistemologies and metaphysics that it can 
> accept only a wholesale rejection of their projects" (103). As Rorty saw it, 
> Dewey was either intentionally slipping back into essentialism or he was 
> doing so unconsciously. Hildebrand calls this "Rorty's Fork", which I take to 
> be a version of that all-or-nothingism I keep seeing again and again. Rorty 
> even suggest that we bracket out all of Dewey's constructive work (bad Dewey) 
> but applaud the anti-foundationalism, anti-Cartesianism and the other similar 
> demolition projects. Rorty thinks Dewey was just so confused or whatever that 
> when he offered his reconstructions, Dewey somehow aligned himself "with 
> doctrines he repudiated, becoming, in effect, his own nemesis" (105). 
> Hildebrand is making a case here that this unflattering Janus portrait of 
> Dewey is not untrue, bracketing out the reconstructive side "eviscerates" 
> pragmatism. I agree. For all the same reasons, Rorty's neopragmatism would 
> have cut out of the MOQ as well. 
> By now it should be clear that central notions like primary and secondary 
> experience and projects seeking the generic traits of existence cannot be 
> expunged from Dewey's philosophy, nor do they need to be. Rorty's claim that 
> such notions only indicate Dewey's fealty to the obsolete tenets of 
> traditional metaphysics does not stand scrutiny. It is unfortunate that Rorty 
> cannot shake his conviction that ANY philosophical project that aims to 
> describe the most general features of reality must be seeking the divine. 
> Dewey understood the vice of overgeneralizations, and so he admitted 
> generalities into metaphysic only insofar as they could be functionally 
> justified. In other words, he knew that a metaphysical inquiry would only be 
> worthwhile if it begins from a living starting point and is set up with 
> categories that can adjust to the tests and revisions of future experience. 
> An empirical metaphysics begins not with a THEORY that life is interactive 
> but with the interactions - the EXISTENCES - themselves. (120) 
> 
> By contrast, because Rorty's "approach is based on the demonstration that all 
> vocabularies are metaphysically equal - i.e., no vocabularies can claim to 
> 'get at' what we now know is a phantom, the 'really real' - it offers an 
> opportunity for the downtrodden humanities to take back power from thier 
> scientistic oppressors. It's a sexy fantasy, but not one on which Rorty's 
> neopragmatism can deliver" (124). Hildebrand even thinks that, at times, 
> Rorty's "linguistic pragmatism borders on whimsical nonsense". (124) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>                                         
> _________________________________________________________________
> Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390706/direct/01/
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/


 
___
 

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to