Grilled Cheese

ExploreLog inSign up
Terms of UsePrivacy PolicyCommunity StandardsHelpGet the app

Grilled Cheese is a product of Village Compute

Version devBuilt at: 2026-10-18 01:16:41 EDT

PhotosVideosAllPeople
LatestRanked
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 26, 2026, 2:01 PM

Certainly authors are not the best authorities on how to use their own books.
Rorty & His Critics p.150
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Interpretation

Reading authors against their own expectations, against the grain of their intentions, is often a profitable exercise, no matter how annoyed the authors get at finding themselves so read. Certainly authors are not the best authorities on how to use their own books. More generally, philosophy professors may not be the best authorities on which philosophy books can do most for the progress of human civilization. Once we write our books, we should, I think, sit back and say, "Habent sua fata lzbelli; anybody who cares enough to read them can do what they want to with my books, and good luck to them." I admit that it is often exasperating to read other people's summaries of what one has said; I have frequently experienced this exasperation myself. But I do not think there is much point in insisting that the only legitimate Rezeptionsgeschichte is one in which authorial intention is respected.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 25, 2026, 2:01 PM

Reading authors against their own expectations, against the grain of their intentions, is often a profitable exercise, no matter how annoyed the authors get at finding themselves so read.
Rorty & His Critics p.150
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Interpretation

Reading authors against their own expectations, against the grain of their intentions, is often a profitable exercise, no matter how annoyed the authors get at finding themselves so read. Certainly authors are not the best authorities on how to use their own books. More generally, philosophy professors may not be the best authorities on which philosophy books can do most for the progress of human civilization. Once we write our books, we should, I think, sit back and say, "Habent sua fata lzbelli; anybody who cares enough to read them can do what they want to with my books, and good luck to them." I admit that it is often exasperating to read other people's summaries of what one has said; I have frequently experienced this exasperation myself. But I do not think there is much point in insisting that the only legitimate Rezeptionsgeschichte is one in which authorial intention is respected.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 24, 2026, 2:03 PM

Nobody is in any position to generalize about "all possible" philosophy or poetry or science, because brilliant innovators will always think up new things for any of these three to be.
Rorty & His Critics p.148
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Philosophy

What they should say - what would improve and expand their community if they did say - is, "There is a lot about philosophy that I don't know." This is also what should be said by Continental philosophers who are repelled by the technicality - the lack of romance, drama, and verve - when they pick up a book by Searle, Rawls, Davidson, Dennett, or Putnam. But neither sort of philosopher is willing to say this, because both insist that they know what philosophy is. They are both wrong. Nobody knows what philosophy is, any more than anybody knows what poetry is or what science is. All three of these are cultural traditions with many contemporary growing points - so many that no single person can keep track of them all. Nobody is in any position to generalize about "all possible" philosophy or poetry or science, because brilliant innovators will always think up new things for any of these three to be.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 23, 2026, 2:03 PM

Philosophy, poetry, and science are cultural traditions with many contemporary growing points–so many that no single person can keep track of them all.
Rorty & His Critics p.148
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Philosophy

What they should say - what would improve and expand their community if they did say - is, "There is a lot about philosophy that I don't know." This is also what should be said by Continental philosophers who are repelled by the technicality - the lack of romance, drama, and verve - when they pick up a book by Searle, Rawls, Davidson, Dennett, or Putnam. But neither sort of philosopher is willing to say this, because both insist that they know what philosophy is. They are both wrong. Nobody knows what philosophy is, any more than anybody knows what poetry is or what science is. All three of these are cultural traditions with many contemporary growing points - so many that no single person can keep track of them all. Nobody is in any position to generalize about "all possible" philosophy or poetry or science, because brilliant innovators will always think up new things for any of these three to be.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 22, 2026, 2:03 PM

Nobody knows what philosophy is, any more than anybody knows what poetry is or what science is.
Rorty & His Critics p.148
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Philosophy

What they should say - what would improve and expand their community if they did say - is, "There is a lot about philosophy that I don't know." This is also what should be said by Continental philosophers who are repelled by the technicality - the lack of romance, drama, and verve - when they pick up a book by Searle, Rawls, Davidson, Dennett, or Putnam. But neither sort of philosopher is willing to say this, because both insist that they know what philosophy is. They are both wrong. Nobody knows what philosophy is, any more than anybody knows what poetry is or what science is. All three of these are cultural traditions with many contemporary growing points - so many that no single person can keep track of them all. Nobody is in any position to generalize about "all possible" philosophy or poetry or science, because brilliant innovators will always think up new things for any of these three to be.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 20, 2026, 2:01 PM

We can only resolve some issues by trying to create a culture in which the science-poetry distinction is not explicated in terms of the distinction between reality & fantasy, but in terms of the distinction between different sorts of human needs.
Rorty & His Critics p.151
#Rorty
#Experimentalism

I would suggest that these issues can only be resolved, as Dewey would say, experimentally. That is, we can only resolve them by trying to create a culture in which the science-poetry distinction is not explicated in terms of the distinction between reality and fantasy, between "the world" and "us," but rather–as I suggested above–in terms of the distinction between different sorts of human needs. This would be a great big cultural change–as big as the one that was brought about by the secularization of morality and of social institutions–but is worth a try. Perhaps my conviction that this experiment would succeed is due to being an American who has read too much Emerson, Whitman, James, and Dewey–just as Bouveresse admits that his conviction that such an experiment is bound to fail may be the result of certain particular aspects of the French situation and of his personal history. But, however this may be, there is no substitute for trying the experiment and observing the result.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 19, 2026, 2:02 PM

One of the few things Thomas Nagel and I agree about is that argument is over-rated in philosophy and that the central issues on which he and I disagree–whether experience goes beyond language–are pretty well unarguable.
Rorty & His Critics p.151
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Experimentalism

How are Bouveresse and I to resolve these issues? By applying the powerful methods of analytic philosophy? What methods? Our disagreements about these matters can as easily be phrased in the jargon of analytic philosophy of science and philosophy of language as in any other. Restatement in a given jargon does not insure the availability of a method for resolving disagreement. (One of the few things Thomas Nagel and I agree about, for example, is that argument is over-rated in philosophy and, in particular, that the central issues on which he and I disagree - whether experience goes beyond language, and whether reality may not extend beyond the reach of any possible human language - are pretty well unarguable.)
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 18, 2026, 2:02 PM

The voice of the past must always be heeded. But intellectual & moral progress would be impossible unless people can sometimes, in exceptional cases, be persuaded to turn a deaf ear to that voice.
PasAA p.175
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Philosophy

David Lewis once said that philosophy is a matter of collating our intuitions and then finding a way to keep as many of them as possible. I think that it is a matter of treating both intuitions and accusations of paradox as the voice of the past, and as possible impediments to the creation of a better future. Of course the voice of the past must always be heeded, since rhetorical effectiveness depends upon a decent respect for the opinions of mankind. But intellectual and moral progress would be impossible unless people can sometimes, in exceptional cases, be persuaded to turn a deaf ear to that voice.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 17, 2026, 2:02 PM

I think that philosophy is a matter of treating both intuitions and accusations of paradox as the voice of the past, and as possible impediments to the creation of a better future.
PasAA p.175
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Paradox

David Lewis once said that philosophy is a matter of collating our intuitions and then finding a way to keep as many of them as possible. I think that it is a matter of treating both intuitions and accusations of paradox as the voice of the past, and as possible impediments to the creation of a better future. Of course the voice of the past must always be heeded, since rhetorical effectiveness depends upon a decent respect for the opinions of mankind. But intellectual and moral progress would be impossible unless people can sometimes, in exceptional cases, be persuaded to turn a deaf ear to that voice.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 16, 2026, 2:03 PM

I see Brandom’s persistence in using the terms “getting right,” “really is” and “making true” as tools which will fall into authoritarian hands and be used for reactionary purposes.
PasAA p.173
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Brandom

The choice is between dropping the notions of “answering” and “representing” (though not those of “of” and “about”) and keeping them. My argument for dropping them is that they preserve an image of the relation between people and non-people which, in these lectures, I have been calling “authoritarian” and denouncing. I see both Brandom’s identification of calling an assertion “true” with endorsing it and Davidson’s refusal to define “true” as tools for persuading us to abandon this authoritarian image. But I see Brandom’s persistence in using the terms “getting right,” “really is” and “making true” as tools which will fall into authoritarian hands and be used for reactionary purposes.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 15, 2026, 2:03 PM

My argument for dropping the notions of “answering” and “representing” is that they preserve an image of the relation between people and non-people which, in these lectures, I have been calling “authoritarian” and denouncing.
PasAA p.173
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Answering

The choice is between dropping the notions of “answering” and “representing” (though not those of “of” and “about”) and keeping them. My argument for dropping them is that they preserve an image of the relation between people and non-people which, in these lectures, I have been calling “authoritarian” and denouncing. I see both Brandom’s identification of calling an assertion “true” with endorsing it and Davidson’s refusal to define “true” as tools for persuading us to abandon this authoritarian image. But I see Brandom’s persistence in using the terms “getting right,” “really is” and “making true” as tools which will fall into authoritarian hands and be used for reactionary purposes.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 14, 2026, 2:02 PM

One should just stop answering altogether, thus avoiding the choice between answering to people and answering to nonpeople.
PasAA p.173
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Answering

One way of putting the issue is to revert to the words I put in Davidson’s mouth earlier, and to say that one should just stop answering altogether, thus avoiding the choice between answering to people and answering to nonpeople. As long as the latter choice is posed, one will count as a defender of objectivity merely by virtue of denying, as Brandom does, that truth can be identified with what people believe under certain conditions. But when Brandom then goes on to say that he identifies truth with answering to nonpeople, realists like Searle will ask him how he knows that he is giving the right answers.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 13, 2026, 2:01 PM

I see the pragmatist tradition not just as clearing up little messes left behind by the great dead philosophers, but as taking part in a world-historical change in the self-image of European and American civilization.
PasAA p.170
#Pragmatism
#Rorty

When I first read Brandom’s book, it seemed to me that Brandom was abandoning hard-won ground by making the notions of “representation,” “fact,” and “making true” respectable. This was because I had gotten accustomed to Davidson’s repudiation of all these notions. I no longer am sure about this, and now I am inclined to say that Brandom and Davidson pretty much agree on all the issues, and are simply employing different rhetorical strategies to make pretty much the same points. But rhetoric matters, especially if, as I do, one sees the pragmatist tradition not just as clearing up little messes left behind by the great dead philosophers, but as taking part in a world-historical change in the self-image of European and American civilization.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 12, 2026, 2:01 PM

When I heard the news about the Twin Towers my first thought was “Oh, God. Bush will use this the way Hitler used the Reichstag fire.”
Last Words from Richard Rorty
progressive.org/magazine/las...
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Terrorism

I’m not aware of having moved to the left, and am curious as to why I might seem to have done so. When I heard the news about the Twin Towers my first thought was “Oh, God. Bush will use this the way Hitler used the Reichstag fire.” I have never thought of the Republicans at any time since Reagan’s election as more than greedy, unscrupulous scoundrels. In regard to the “war on terror” I have described the same trajectory as a lot of other leftists: in favor of the war against the Taliban in Afghanistan and against invading Iraq. On “cultural” matters, there was a time when I had old-fogeyish doubts about gay and lesbian marriage that I no longer have. But that doesn’t seem much of shift. In regard to domestic policy, I am still in favor of soaking the rich and redistributing the money to the workers (though not of nationalizing the means of production).
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 11, 2026, 2:01 PM

Sooner or later some terrorist group will repeat 9/11 on a much grander scale. I doubt that democratic institutions will be resilient enough to stand the strain.
Last Words from Richard Rorty
progressive.org/magazine/las...
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Terrorism

The Bush administration has now been repudiated by US public opinion, and the Iraq debacle will make future European governments hesitant about following America’s lead. But I still think that the end of democracy is a likely consequence of nuclear terrorism, and I do not know how to guard against this danger. Sooner or later some terrorist group will repeat 9/11 on a much grander scale. I doubt that democratic institutions will be resilient enough to stand the strain.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 10, 2026, 2:01 PM

In the eyes of both Brandom and McDowell, l am a sort of aging enfant terrible, making the appropriation of Sellars and Davidson unnecessarily difficult by recasting the views of each in unnecessarily counterintuitive ways.
PasAA p.168
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Brandom

Brandom is, in this respect, to Davidson as McDowell is to Sellars. Each thinks that a distinguished precursor was unfortunately tempted to throw the baby out with the bath. Brandom wants to recuperate “representation” and McDowell wants to recuperate “perceptual experience.” It is natural, therefore, that both Brandom and McDowell have doubts about my own version of pragmatism—a version which delights in throwing out as much of the philosophical tradition as possible, and urges that philosophers perform their social function only when they change intuitions, as opposed to reconciling them. In the eyes of both Brandom and McDowell, l am a sort of aging enfant terrible, making the appropriation of Sellars and Davidson unnecessarily difficult by recasting the views of each in unnecessarily counterintuitive ways.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 9, 2026, 2:01 PM

My own version of pragmatism delights in throwing out as much of the philosophical tradition as possible, and urges that philosophers perform their social function only when they change intuitions, as opposed to reconciling them.
PasAA p.168
#Pragmatism
#Rorty

Brandom is, in this respect, to Davidson as McDowell is to Sellars. Each thinks that a distinguished precursor was unfortunately tempted to throw the baby out with the bath. Brandom wants to recuperate “representation” and McDowell wants to recuperate “perceptual experience.” It is natural, therefore, that both Brandom and McDowell have doubts about my own version of pragmatism—a version which delights in throwing out as much of the philosophical tradition as possible, and urges that philosophers perform their social function only when they change intuitions, as opposed to reconciling them. In the eyes of both Brandom and McDowell, l am a sort of aging enfant terrible, making the appropriation of Sellars and Davidson unnecessarily difficult by recasting the views of each in unnecessarily counterintuitive ways.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 8, 2026, 2:02 PM

To say that philosophy’s task is to make human practices explicit rather than to legitimize them by reference to something beyond them is to say that there is no authority beyond utility for these purposes to which we can appeal.
PasAA p.165
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Brandom

Brandom puts this point by saying that philosophy’s job is to make our practices, linguistic and other, explicit, rather than to judge these practices in the light of norms which lie outside them. He takes Wittgenstein’s infinite-regress argument against the possibility of appealing to such outside norms as fundamental to his metaphilosophical position. “Pragmatic theories of norms are distinguished from platonist theories, in treating as fundamental norms implicit in practices rather than norms explicit in principles.” There is no way for human beings to get beyond their own practices except by dreaming up better practices, and no way to judge these new practices better except by reference to their various advantages for various human purposes. To say that philosophy’s task is to make human practices explicit rather than to legitimize them by reference to something beyond them is to say that there is no authority beyond utility for these purposes to which we can appeal.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 7, 2026, 2:02 PM

There is no way for human beings to get beyond their own practices except by dreaming up better practices, and no way to judge these new practices better except by reference to their various advantages for various human purposes.
PasAA p.165
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Brandom

Brandom puts this point by saying that philosophy’s job is to make our practices, linguistic and other, explicit, rather than to judge these practices in the light of norms which lie outside them. He takes Wittgenstein’s infinite-regress argument against the possibility of appealing to such outside norms as fundamental to his metaphilosophical position. “Pragmatic theories of norms are distinguished from platonist theories, in treating as fundamental norms implicit in practices rather than norms explicit in principles.” There is no way for human beings to get beyond their own practices except by dreaming up better practices, and no way to judge these new practices better except by reference to their various advantages for various human purposes. To say that philosophy’s task is to make human practices explicit rather than to legitimize them by reference to something beyond them is to say that there is no authority beyond utility for these purposes to which we can appeal.
@rortyquotes.bsky.socialSep 6, 2026, 2:01 PM

Philosophy’s job is to make our practices, linguistic and other, explicit, rather than to judge these practices in the light of norms which lie outside them.
PasAA p.165
#Pragmatism
#Rorty
#Brandom

Brandom puts this point by saying that philosophy’s job is to make our practices, linguistic and other, explicit, rather than to judge these practices in the light of norms which lie outside them. He takes Wittgenstein’s infinite-regress argument against the possibility of appealing to such outside norms as fundamental to his metaphilosophical position. “Pragmatic theories of norms are distinguished from platonist theories, in treating as fundamental norms implicit in practices rather than norms explicit in principles.” There is no way for human beings to get beyond their own practices except by dreaming up better practices, and no way to judge these new practices better except by reference to their various advantages for various human purposes. To say that philosophy’s task is to make human practices explicit rather than to legitimize them by reference to something beyond them is to say that there is no authority beyond utility for these purposes to which we can appeal.
Load more