dmb said to dmb:
Yes, I most certainly have read Rorty.
Steve:
In that case, you seem tone deaf to him. You've read Rorty the way Ham has read
Pirsig.
dmb says:
That's exactly what I'm talking about. Your defense of Rorty here is vague and
insulting. If you're going to make a case for Rorty, you have to give me a
reason, not just an attitude. And if I'm tone deaf, then why are you the one
who says that Rorty quotes don't sound like Rorty? And isn't it Matt and you
that can see no important difference between Rorty and the classical
pragmatists even though entire books have been written on those differences?
How is that not tone deaf? You're using anti-positivism to dismiss
anti-positivism. How tone deaf is that?
No sir. I'm quite certain that you and Matt are both failing to register some
very profound difference. Basically, that's what this whole debate is about.
You see nothing to get excited about but the professionals think its a very big
difference, so much so that some will even go so far as to say that Rorty
doesn't even count as a pragmatist. Again, if Hildebrand thinks Rorty's
position constitutes an "evisceration" of pragmatism and this only causes you
to shrug it off, then there is definitely something you're not seeing.
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850553/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/md/archives.html
