[MD] Pirsig's theory of truth

[david buchanan]

Steve said to dmb:


... Can you please, please, please define relativism with respect to truth, so I can know what you mean when you say (pace Ant) that Pirsig can't rightly be called a relativist with respect to truth?


dmb says:

Pragmatic truth is empirical. I would have thought it would be completely obvious that empiricism is incompatible with relativism. They're not exactly opposite terms, but I can't think of a way to be both an empiricist and a relativist at the same time. So I'm quite baffled by your objections to that answer. I also pointed out that truth can be plural and provisional without giving up these empirical standards. 

As for Rorty's part, it's like the Wiki article said: "Thus his position, in the view of many commentators, adds up to relativism." As you so often do, Steve, you're asking for an answer that I already supplied. You're asking in response to the post in which I supplied it. Are you playing some kind of game? 

Again, the Wikipedia article on RELATIVISM has a section on RORTY: 

Wiki says, "Philosopher Richard Rorty has a somewhat paradoxical role in the debate over relativism: he is criticized for his relativistic views, but prefers to describe himself not as a relativist, but as a pragmatist.'"Relativism" is the traditional epithet applied to pragmatism by realists'[14]'"Relativism" is the view that every belief on a certain topic, or perhaps about any topic, is as good as every other. No one holds this view. Except for the occasional cooperative freshman, one cannot find anybody who says that two incompatible opinions on an important topic are equally good. The philosophers who get called 'relativists' are those who say that the grounds for choosing between such opinions are less algorithmic than had been thought.'[15]'In short, my strategy for escaping the self-referential difficulties into which "the Relativist" keeps getting himself is to move everything over from epistemology and metaphysics into cultural politics, from claims to knowledge and appeals to self-evidence to suggestions about what we should try.'[16]Rorty takes a deflationary attitude to truth, believing there is nothing of interest to be said about truth in general, including the contention that it is generally subjective. He also argues that the notion of warrant or justification can do most of the work traditionally assigned to the concept of truth, and that justification is relative; justification is justification to an audience, for Rorty. Thus his position, in the view of many commentators, adds up to relativism.In Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity he argues that the debate between so-called relativists and so-called objectivists is beside the point because they don't have enough premises in common for either side to prove anything to the other".


Let me repeat the salient point. "He also argues ...that justification is RELATIVE; justification is justification to an audience, for Rorty. Thus his position, in the view of MANY COMMENTATORS,  adds up to RELATIVISM."


That is my "unusual" idea of what relativism is, specifically in relation to Rorty's position. Is there something unclear about this? How is it that an encyclopedia article on Rorty's relativism goes unrecognized as the answer to your question about relativism? I mean, why do I have to do this twice?

Steve said:
I have no idea what they or you could mean by relativism because you have refused to define it.


dmb says:

Again, the Wiki article explains why Rorty is seen as a relativist. "Thus his position,.. adds up to relativism." You deleted the Wiki quote and now you're accusing me of refusing to define it? Kinda slap-stick sloppy, don't you think? AND you claim that you have no idea what it could mean, despite that fact that you JUST READ a description of Rorty's relativism in the Wiki quote I supplied? This conversation is looking like a bad comedy sketch, a comedy or errors. "his position, in the view of many commentators, adds up to relativism."


Steve said:
I am still very interested to read a concise definition of relativism from you where Rorty qualifies but James does not.





dmb says:

"Thus his position, in the view of many commentators, adds up to relativism." Hmmm. That question sounds vaguely familiar. Oh, I know. How about if I go to some basic, neutral, third party for an answer. That way, we can have a common definition to work with. You know, especially because my idea of relativism is so weird and unusual, eh? "Thus his position, in the view of many commentators, adds up to relativism." 


As luck would have it, the Wikipedia article on RELATIVISM has a section on RORTY: Wiki says, "Philosopher Richard Rorty has a somewhat paradoxical role in the debate over relativism: he is criticized for his relativistic views, but prefers to describe himself not as a relativist, but as a pragmatist.'"Relativism" is the traditional epithet applied to pragmatism by realists'[14]'"Relativism" is the view that every belief on a certain topic, or perhaps about any topic, is as good as every other. No one holds this view. Except for the occasional cooperative freshman, one cannot find anybody who says that two incompatible opinions on an important topic are equally good. The philosophers who get called 'relativists' are those who say that the grounds for choosing between such opinions are less algorithmic than had been thought.'[15]'In short, my strategy for escaping the self-referential difficulties into which "the Relativist" keeps getting himself is to move everything over from epistemology and metaphysics into cultural politics, from claims to knowledge and appeals to self-evidence to suggestions about what we should try.'[16]Rorty takes a deflationary attitude to truth, believing there is nothing of interest to be said about truth in general, including the contention that it is generally subjective. He also argues that the notion of warrant or justification can do most of the work traditionally assigned to the concept of truth, and that justification is relative; justification is justification to an audience, for Rorty. Thus his position, in the view of many commentators, adds up to relativism."






 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts with Hotmail.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4