[MD] DMB and Me

[Matt Kundert]

DMB said:
It doesn't even hinge on whether or not Rorty retains the 
assumptions of SOM, although a case could be made for 
that too. I'm only interested to show that SOM is the 
framework in which he denies the possibility of objectivity, 
in which he levels his critique of traditional empiricism. As 
Hildebrand put it above, Rorty "needs to give a nod to the 
reality of objective things so that it may then argue that 
access to them is not just impracticable, but IMPOSSIBLE."

Matt:
This doesn't make sense--it doesn't matter if "Rorty retains 
the assumptions of SOM" because you are "only interested 
to show that SOM is the framework in which he denies the 
possibility of objectivity"?

I take it that you misspoke.  I also take it that one could only 
gloss Rorty as needing to "nod to the reality of objective things" 
if one has previously feretted out evidence that Rorty is using 
an SOM framework and not, on the contrary, rejecting it (albeit 
the particularities of his rejection have changed over the years, 
changes not always minded by some critics--e.g., be 
suspicious of any reference to "The World Well Lost").

Now--I imagine that accusing Rorty of being a SOMist is as 
difficult as accusing James: both claim to be rejecting it.  
Such claims of their's, I would think, would modulate what 
a person says about their respective philosophies.  It's 
what you've said to me about James (albeit as a claim that 
I don't understand James unless I previously commit to the 
proposition, I guess, that James successfully and infallibly 
broke SOM's spine and couldn't possibly have backslid).  It's 
what I'm trying to say to you about Rorty (albeit as a claim 
that presentation of a claim matters for _what a claim is_ 
and that your claims have something wrong with them).

But then again, I'm not sure people should take what I say 
about Dave that seriously.  I haven't been able to really 
read and concentrate on Dave's writings in the requisite, 
demanded fashion in some time, because his writings look 
to me like somebody getting off on the wrong foot and 
falling down a long mountain.  The more written, the longer 
the fall, and the more too-terrifying for me to watch.  
Mine--clearly--look that way to him, too, because his 
writing about me displays the same kind of "you're so 
wrong-headed, I really couldn't get into the tissue of 
what you said."

And as I keep trying to impress upon everyone, c'est la vie.

Matt
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID27925::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:032010_2