[lit-ideas] Re: On linguistic and genetic uncertainty
- From: Torgeir Fjeld <torgeir_fjeld@xxxxxxxx>
- To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 13:01:10 +0100
Adding to JMC's comments, there's a question as to how one considers a
signifier such as "society." To quote the Iron Lady, "There is no such thing as
society", in the sense that the idea of a space in which all divisions may be
contained is founded on an impossibility. The klind of universality entailed by
enlightenment notions such as "progress" or "eternal peace" elides the way
society is torn through with antagonisms, and that any agreement remains
provisional and effected by decisions that are through and through political.
John McCreery <john.mccreery@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Isn't to speak of performative contradiction to ignore Rorty's pragmatism?
There is no contradiction between seeking the widest possible agreement
while also recognizing that universal agreement will never be found, a
proposition for which the whole history of philosophy provides overwhelming
empirical evidence.
John
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 2:14 AM, Walter C. Okshevsky <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
wrote:
> I find the view that, at the end of the day, when the spades are turned,
> all we
> can do is go with the maxim "You show me yours and I'll show you mine"
> displays
> a very sceptical (indeed almost cynical) view of the rationality of moral
> judgement, and of the possibilities for agreement amongst competing
> conceptions
> of the good/authentic life in multiculturally pluralist democracies.
Med vennlig hilsen / Yours sincerely,
Torgeir Fjeld
http://independent.academia.edu/TorgeirFjeld
Other related posts:
