Rorty, an old teacher of mine, views himself as a left liberal. His Achieving Our
Country is advertised as a way of rethinking reformist (we might say) politics. He
writes for Dissent. He is an anti-Marxist, but that is not enough to make you not on
the left. Dewey was an advocate of worker con
Justin,
Please see my reply to Tom Walker where I both criticize hermeneutics and
empiricism.
btw, to my knowledge, Richard Rorty has nothing do with left. He is a new
pragmatic following the footsteps of Dewey...
thanks,
Mine
>Mine,
>I am actually a "philosophy person"--used to be a phi
> If there would be a philosophy or literature person here, s(he) would
> *really* be pissed, not only by the unprofessional use of language but
> also by ignorance. I am not a big fun of hermeneutics and deconstruction
> either, but I never make the mistake of considering those theorists
> writ
Mine,
I am actually a "philosophy person"--used to be a philosophy professor before I was a
lawyer. Although I do not necessary share the vehemence of the rejection of (the very
different, as you remark) approaches of deconstruction or hermeneutics, I am fairly
suspicious of their value when
>I'm not sure what that has to do with literary criticism (which is
>basically supposed to help us understand the fiction we read). It is true
>that the meaning of a theory varies with context, but that says we have
>to
>be very clear by what _we_ mean by the theory. The sociology or
>psycholo
>
>>References to hermeneutics and deconstruction don't convince me. I've
never
>>been into that kind of lit crit sh*t. I prefer logic, empirical
research,
>>and the philosophy of science (methodology).
If there would be a philosophy or literature person here, s(he) would
*really* be pissed, n
