• Log In

The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android Spotify Google Podcasts audible patreon
  • Home
  • Podcast
    • PEL Network Episodes
    • Publicly Available PEL Episodes
    • Paywalled and Ad-Free Episodes
    • PEL Episodes by Topic
    • Nightcap
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Pretty Much Pop
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • (sub)Text
    • Phi Fic Podcast
    • Combat & Classics
    • Constellary Tales
  • Blog
  • About
    • PEL FAQ
    • Meet PEL
    • About Pretty Much Pop
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • Meet Phi Fic
    • Listener Feedback
    • Links
  • Join
    • Become a Citizen
    • Join Our Mailing List
    • Log In
  • Donate
  • Store
    • Episodes
    • Swag
    • Everything Else
    • Cart
    • Checkout
    • My Account
  • Contact
  • Mailing List

Episode 155: Richard Rorty Against Epistemology

January 2, 2017 by Mark Linsenmayer 14 Comments

http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.libsyn.com/partiallyexaminedlife/PEL_ep_155_12-15-16.mp3

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:52:49 — 103.4MB)

On Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (1979), Part II: "Mirroring" (Ch. 3–4).

Is a "theory of knowledge" possible? Rorty says that while of course psychology has interesting things to say, any specifically philosophical effort is doomed. Why? Because there is no fixed point outside of the "knowledge language game" that provides an ultimate grounding.

Rorty draws on Sellars (ep. 154) to say that there is no sensory "given" or primary intuition of reason that can serve this function, and also on Quine (ep. 66) who argued that there are no "analytic truths," that even the truths of logic are merely central to our web of belief, not immovable foundations.

Rorty is arguing for a coherence view of truth, where propositions can only be justified by how well they fit with the other propositions, not by their correspondence to the world outside of human discourse. He thinks that since Locke and Kant, we have come to think of this philosophical project of figuring out the roles of intuition (what we sense) vs. concepts (what our minds do to make sense of this sense data) as an inescapable problem, but no: As with the related issue of inner mind vs. outer world (as discussed in ep. 153), this has been a matter of our idiosyncratic history, and a proper reading of the ancient Greeks will not find this paradigm of epistemic theorizing at all.

Mark, Wes, and Dylan reflect on whether Rorty's pragmatic objections hold any water and whether he's just a dirty, stinking relativist! Buy the book or try this online version.

End song: "The Ghosts Are Alright" from The Bye-Bye Blackbirds (Houses and Homes, 2008), as discussed on Nakedly Examined Music #32.

Please support PEL!

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Filed Under: Podcast Episodes Tagged With: Analytic Philosophy, epistemology, philosophy podcast, Richard Rorty, Wilfrid Sellars

Comments

  1. Imad Zaheer says

    January 2, 2017 at 4:42 pm

    It will be interesting to see if you can talk about Susan Haack in a future podcast and her response to Rorty on these issues. Even better, get her on the show!

    Reply
    • Seth Paskin says

      January 2, 2017 at 5:01 pm

      Funny you mention this Imad. We’re emailing each other about it right now.

      Reply
      • dmf says

        January 4, 2017 at 7:57 pm

        she’s an interesting thinker, this might be of use:
        https://www.academia.edu/23523493/EVIDENCE_MATTERS_Transcript_of_Robert_Talisses_podcast_interview_with_Susan_Haack_2016_

        Reply
    • Bob says

      January 3, 2017 at 2:36 am

      Seconded. Susan Haack is great. If you do an episode with her you should get her to explain what ‘foundherentism’ is.

      Great episode today guys. Never disappoints.

      Reply
    • Clark says

      January 3, 2017 at 3:32 pm

      Haack is great and would make a fantastic interview. Alternatively Hildebrand has that nice book against Rorty and Putnam Beyond Realism & Anti-Realism. It’s a great book situating Rorty into some of the disputes early in 20th century American philosophy.

      Reply
  2. Clark says

    January 3, 2017 at 3:27 pm

    It’d be useful if instead of vaguely pointing to pragmatism you get a bit more specific as these are places where there are big differences between Peirce, James and Dewey. I think it’s even debatable whether Rorty is a pragmatist. Usually the label neo-pragmatist got applied to Rorty, Putnam and their followers to distinguish them from the classic pragmatists. There really are some important differences. Putnam is pretty forthright about these differences – primarily on epistemology between say Peirce’s sense of truth and his warranted assertability. Rorty, as is ever the case, is sometimes a big more ambiguous although towards the end of his life he formally broke from pragmatism.

    As I followed the discussion I kept wanting to shout how Peirce anticipates and avoids all the issues you brought up. He manages to keep the social aspect that I think Rorty gets right about community consensus and ‘knowledge’ but avoids a lot of the mistakes or sloppiness that I think Rorty gets into.

    Reply
    • Clark says

      January 3, 2017 at 3:45 pm

      Let me add a bit since rereading that my comments come off as harsh when I didn’t intend them to have that tone. I loved the episode and hope you do more of these. It’s just that pragmatism is a bit more broad than I think the comments labeling Rorty suggest. It could confuse people a bit. In particular the gap between James and Peirce is pretty profound. I think Rorty is much more in James’ camp even though he tends to appeal to Dewey a fair bit.

      Reply
      • Bob says

        January 3, 2017 at 4:29 pm

        It was good you said that however. Rorty, at least according to a number of well-known pragmatists (Cheryl Misak for example and Susan Haack who has pragmatist leanings) is controversial in that he basically has no patience for Peirce, the founder of pragmatism. So his pragmatism at the very least requires significant qualification, hence people drop the label in favor of “neo-pragmatism.” The usual way of describing the situation is that there are two fairly distinct traditions or lines of thought within the pragmatist movement. One line is the more “objectivist” side which goes from Peirce to C.I. Lewis, to Putnam and others. The other wing is the more “subjectivist” side which starts more with James, goes through Dewey and ends in Rorty. The two sides have duked it out for over a hundred years.

        By the way, if Misak is correct (see this podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjNypOXwsCM), then much of the twentieth century’s greatest philosophers such as Quine and Goodman literally ripped off the work of their pragmatist teacher C.I. Lewis, so I would like to see an episode on Lewis if possible, since PEL has already done Quine (Two Dogmas specifically).

        Reply
    • dmf says

      January 4, 2017 at 7:56 pm

      pretty sure Peirce rejected James’ pragmatism for pragmaticism, no?
      there really is only a familial resemblance for such thinkers and no hard and fast rule as to what would include one thinker and not another, if it wasn’t for Rorty pragmatism wouldn’t even be on the public radar maybe that should count for something…
      http://www.philpercs.com/2016/11/an-interview-with-randall-auxier-about-the-founding-of-the-new-american-institute-for-philosophical-.html

      Reply
  3. Wayne Schroeder says

    January 29, 2017 at 3:47 pm

    Richard Rorty is intellectually hilarious:

    “Truth is what your contemporaries let you get away with.”
    “The world does not speak. Only we do.”
    “Philosophers get attention only when they appear to be doing something sinister.”

    However his irony, or contempt for anyone disobeying his rules of philosophy is the unfortunate basis of his humor. You can always tell you are in the presence of a pragmatist when your own more complex ideas start seeming absurd (of course they may be, so it’s great fun).

    He is the post-Tractatus Wittgenstein saying we should not talk of that which we know nothing about–that which is justificatory epistemology and outside of language–the black box of qualia. As such he truly is the rank behaviorist as noted in the episode, and good cause for consternation.

    But Rorty is always good for a laugh: “The difference between people and ideas is… only superficial.”

    Reply
  4. Kevin Cassidy says

    March 14, 2019 at 8:16 pm

    Does anyone have a link to the Animal Consciousness guy mentioned? Would love to check out his book but I can’t seem to find him. Thanks!

    Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Episode 155: Richard Rorty Against Epistemology (Part Two) | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    January 9, 2017 at 7:01 am

    […] to part 1 first, or get the unbroken, ad-free Citizen edition. Please support […]

    Reply
  2. Episode 157: Richard Rorty on Politics for the Left (Part One) | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    March 12, 2017 at 11:01 pm

    […] This episode serves to bridge our recent political discussion with the previous episode on Rorty's epistemology. […]

    Reply
  3. Episode 163: Guest Stewart Umphrey on Natural Kinds (Part One) | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    May 1, 2017 at 7:00 am

    […] up in the course of the contingent (i.e., could have gone differently) history of science (contra Rorty). This is not to say that we might not be wrong about what we think the natural kinds are, but if […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

PEL Live Show 2023

Brothers K Live Show

Citizenship has its Benefits

Become a PEL Citizen
Become a PEL Citizen, and get access to all paywalled episodes, early and ad-free, including exclusive Part 2's for episodes starting September 2020; our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more causally; a community of fellow learners, and more.

Rate and Review

Nightcap

Listen to Nightcap
On Nightcap, listen to the guys respond to listener email and chat more casually about their lives, the making of the show, current events and politics, and anything else that happens to come up.

Subscribe to Email Updates

Select list(s):

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Support PEL

Buy stuff through Amazon and send a few shekels our way at no extra cost to you.

Tweets by PartiallyExLife

Recent Comments

  • John Heath on PEL Eulogies Nightcap Late March 2023
  • Randy Strader on Ep. 309: Wittgenstein On Certainty (Part Two)
  • Wes Alwan on PEL Nightcap February 2023
  • Kunal on Why Don’t We Like Idealism?
  • Ronald Cogen on Ep. 311: Understanding the Dao De Jing (Part One)

About The Partially Examined Life

The Partially Examined Life is a philosophy podcast by some guys who were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it. Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. You don’t have to know any philosophy, or even to have read the text we’re talking about to (mostly) follow and (hopefully) enjoy the discussion

Become a PEL Citizen!

As a PEL Citizen, you’ll have access to a private social community of philosophers, thinkers, and other partial examiners where you can join or initiate discussion groups dedicated to particular readings, participate in lively forums, arrange online meet-ups for impromptu seminars, and more. PEL Citizens also have free access to podcast transcripts, guided readings, episode guides, PEL music, and other citizen-exclusive material. Click here to join.

Blog Post Categories

  • (sub)Text
  • Aftershow
  • Announcements
  • Audiobook
  • Book Excerpts
  • Citizen Content
  • Citizen Document
  • Citizen News
  • Close Reading
  • Combat and Classics
  • Constellary Tales
  • Exclude from Newsletter
  • Featured Ad-Free
  • Featured Article
  • General Announcements
  • Interview
  • Letter to the Editor
  • Misc. Philosophical Musings
  • Nakedly Examined Music Podcast
  • Nakedly Self-Examined Music
  • NEM Bonus
  • Not School Recording
  • Not School Report
  • Other (i.e. Lesser) Podcasts
  • PEL Music
  • PEL Nightcap
  • PEL's Notes
  • Personal Philosophies
  • Phi Fic Podcast
  • Philosophy vs. Improv
  • Podcast Episode (Citizen)
  • Podcast Episodes
  • Pretty Much Pop
  • Reviewage
  • Song Self-Exam
  • Supporter Exclusive
  • Things to Watch
  • Vintage Episode (Citizen)
  • Web Detritus

Follow:

Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Apple Podcasts

Copyright © 2009 - 2023 · The Partially Examined Life, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Copyright Policy

Copyright © 2023 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in