FROM ELSEWHERE: ON RORTY AND THE POST ANALYTIC MOVEMENT Rorty is not important i

FROM ELSEWHERE: ON RORTY AND THE POST ANALYTIC MOVEMENT

Rorty is not important in the traditional contexts. If we consider the metaphysical and epistemological efforts in philosophy, then certainly the epistemological program has been fruitful, even if the metaphysical program has been a failure (in the sense of philosopher’s attempts to render philosophy into a science.)

Rorty, and the post-analytic program have been important in specifically abandoning the metaphysical program, first, and even the epistemic program, in order to return philosophy to meaningful use as a tool by which we can determine right actions both public an private.

The criticisms above do not account for the relative abandonment of philosophy outside of the discipline, specifically because the analytical program, which attempts to integrate physical sciences, while maintaining the dream of solving the metaphysical program, and therefore rendering philosophy into a science, and as a science, return it to legitimacy as an influential social program, which in turn will convey status upon its advocates – status that was lost when science and empiricism became dominant tools, abandoning philosophy altogether.

The post-analytical movement is an attempt to correct this problem in philosophy and to return it to its relevance in society. Experimental psychology, biology and economics are providing us the answers that philosophical introspection cannot.

While Rorty and others have not sufficiently divorced post analytic from analytic as thoroughly as analytic has been divorced from continental, and, continental and enlightenment from religion, they have at least acknowledged and attempted to work at solving the problem of making philosophical reasoning once again useful, by applying it to practical matters, and treating scientific information first and foremost, using philosophy to assist us in properly understanding that scientific information.

I believe it is possible to create a unified philosophical framework for discussion of meaningful ideas

I also realize that to make this argument forces those indoctrinated and habituated into philosophy that attempts to solve the metaphysical program to consider that their fascinations, problems, hobbies and careers are an outdated technology akin to cobol programming or water wheel construction. 🙂

But then, an economist would argue that this makes sense, because it is too great an effort to change one’s point of view without material incentives. 🙂

Cheers