>Ah, the world-weary Rortyean handwave, compounded with the shrug, the
philosophical equivalent of Reagan's "There he goes again!" And quite as
argumentatively empty. Reason, that is very bad, as we all know, there is no
such things, just criss-crossing and incommensurable patterns of belief,
inference, and valuation, deeply historically located. we are stuck inouts,
but that's OK as long as we take the properly ironic attitude towards it.
Negative poot. Don't read Rorty, have a tragic view of life and never claimed there was no such process as reason. You realists are so predictable. While I do think there are incommensurable patterns of belief, Im more concerned about the halting problem of the argument; incompleteability, finality and the lack thereof in so much of the moral life makes for tragedy, a term that gives ironists fits.
>I was a student of Rorty's, I know all the moves.
There is no such set as all the moves. Moves is metaphorical as are points.....
Apologies in advance for an argument from authority. "If we understand by metaphysics the belief in principles that are non-analytic, yet derive their validity from reason alone, modern science is anti-metaphysical. It has refused to recognize the authority of the philosopher who claims to know the truth from intuition, from insight into a world of ideas or into the nature of reason or the principles of being, or from whatever super-empirical source. There is no separate entrance to truth for philosophers. The path of the philosopher is indicated by that of the scientist: all the philosopher can do is to analyze the results, to construe their meanings and stake out their validity. Theory of knowledge is analysis of science." [Hans Reichenbach]
Discordianly,
Ian