Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Diskussion/Discussion. Richard Rorty and the American Philosophical Scene

Diskussion/Discussion. Richard Rorty and the American Philosophical Scene Abstract Richard Rorty’s assessment of the American philosophical scene is unduly cynical. Part of the reason for this seems to lie in his recognition (in Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature) of the incoherence of “grounding” a linguistic or conceptual scheme on a “given”, but proceeding, nevertheless, to think of representation and truth as requiring conformity to a “given”. He, therefore, fails to appreciate the unity and seriousness of American philosophers who, abandoning the “given”, are working with some success·on plausible accounts of representation and truth. Surprisingly, neither in his article nor his book does he attend to the remarkable increase in sophistication and serious research on the part of historians of philosophy and historians of science. Both in serious work on representation and truth and in historical research there is more rapprochement between American and Continental philosophers than Rorty seems prepared to credit. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Analyse & Kritik de Gruyter

Diskussion/Discussion. Richard Rorty and the American Philosophical Scene

Turnbull, Robert G.
Analyse & Kritik , Volume 4 (2) – Nov 1, 1982
Download PDF
16 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/diskussion-discussion-richard-rorty-and-the-american-philosophical-9aNZ00asIh

References (7)

Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
Copyright © 1982 by the
ISSN
0171-5860
eISSN
2365-9858
DOI
10.1515/auk-1982-0206
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract Richard Rorty’s assessment of the American philosophical scene is unduly cynical. Part of the reason for this seems to lie in his recognition (in Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature) of the incoherence of “grounding” a linguistic or conceptual scheme on a “given”, but proceeding, nevertheless, to think of representation and truth as requiring conformity to a “given”. He, therefore, fails to appreciate the unity and seriousness of American philosophers who, abandoning the “given”, are working with some success·on plausible accounts of representation and truth. Surprisingly, neither in his article nor his book does he attend to the remarkable increase in sophistication and serious research on the part of historians of philosophy and historians of science. Both in serious work on representation and truth and in historical research there is more rapprochement between American and Continental philosophers than Rorty seems prepared to credit.

Journal

Analyse & Kritik – de Gruyter

Published: Nov 1, 1982

There are no references for this article.