From: Matt the Enraged Endorphin (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Sat Oct 12 2002 - 05:12:12 BST
DMB:
Hmmm. Making distinctions is good, but I'm not so sure about holding reality
and justice in seperate visions. I can't see how one can avoid problems like
inconsistency and self-contradiction.
Matt:
It's not that inconsistency and self-contradiction are unimportant, but I
think Rorty wants to make this distinction for the sake of efficiency, to
get important policy passed so that we may lessen the humiliation and
misery of others and not get thoroughly bogged down by philosophical issues
that have been raging for 2,000+ years.
If you are interested, I would refer you to "Trotsky and the Wild Orchids."
Its here that Rorty attempts to explain, in a bit of autobiography, how
he's gotten to his, as he admits, weird position. (Its in Philosophy and
Social Hope.)
DMB:
At the same time, the enlightenment thinkers, many of whom
were political philosophers, gave us the ideals of rights, freedom and
democracy. I mean, it seems to me that if we insist on keeping them
seperate, we'll only get stupid politics and powerless ideas. I don't know.
I guess I'll have to take your word for it, but I suspect you've mis-read
Rorty. If not, I don't think much of his philosophical views.
Matt:
Oh, Rorty loves the Enlightment political thinkers. In a lecture entitled
"Is Post-Modernism Relevant to Politics?", Rorty argues that there were two
Enlightenment projects, one political and one philosophical. Rorty wishes
to preserve the Enlightenment political project which aims at using
democracy to ensure people's private rights while protecting these same
people from pain and humiliation from others. On the other hand, Rorty
wishes to ditch the Enlightment philosophical project which attempted to
set knowledge on sure footing. As Rorty says, "one was to create heaven on
earth: a world without caste, class, or cruelty. The other was to find a
new, comprehensive worldview which would replace God with Nature and
Reason." So, while I don't think I'm really misreading Rorty (if I am, I
think its negligible at this point), I do think his position is a bit more
sophisticated then I am able to produce at this time.
DMB:
Oh, and by the way, did you happen to see Rorty's answer to 3WD in this
forum? He was asked about the similarities and connection to Pirsig and/or
the MOQ. Rorty said
there wasn't much of a connection.
Matt:
Certainly did. As I answered then, and again later, I don't take Rorty's
word for it. Rorty would be the first to say that he can't do and see
everything. People are doing interesting work in their own private areas
all the time. One man's inspiration is another man's nap. I am, in fact,
taking a lesson from Rorty's own professed project by ignoring any
objections Rorty might have, and continuing on with this little project of
coligating Rorty and Pirsig.
Matt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:37:56 GMT