Published in 1981 Richard Rorty's Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (PMN) has become something of a classic in contemporary Anglo-American philosophy. As someone who had, until that point, largely worked within the analytic tradition Rorty's criticism of many of the tenants of Anglo-American philosophy was seen by some commentators as near heretical. PMN is a wide-ranging and meticulously referenced commentary on mid-twentieth century analytic philosophy. Though Rorty discusses a range of inter-related issues with great alacrity, his criticism is primarily focused on epistemology. In particular, Rorty is critical of what is often referred to as representational - the contention that we do not have direct access to reality, but, only to indirect representations of that reality in our minds. According to Rorty this view has been detrimental by causing philosophers to seek out criteria for assessing and improving these representations. He contends that this search for transcendental objective knowledge is misguided. Instead Rorty argues for a deflationary, or what he calls an edifying or conversational approach wherein truth/knowledge is limited to specific social groups or language games - as he pithily remarks truth is what your friends will let you get away with. As a result of PMN, Rorty has been criticized by many within the Anglo-American tradition as a relativist. While it is clear that, at least in a broad ontological sense, he is a relativist much of this criticism seems overstated. While I disagree with some of his key presuppositions (e.g. physicalism), his position given this worldview seems quite consistent. Indeed, theistic commentators have often remarked that in a physicalist/atheistic worldview notions of objective truth or knowledge are illusory. Although PMN is a worthwhile read, potential readers are advised that it is nuanced and sophisticated discussion - part of an internecine debate amongst academic philosophers. If one is not well versed in the Modern Western tradition (Descartes, Locke, Kant, ETC.), let alone more recent commentators such as Wittgenstein, Quine, Sellers, Putnam, the discussion will likely be incomprehensible. Overall, a good book by a broad and interesting thinker. Recommended for students of modern analytic philosophy

lgrsnf/N:\libgen djvu ocr\561000\240c2e112ff2b9e3a3f43f35774e1aff-ocr.djvu

lgli/N:\libgen djvu ocr\561000\240c2e112ff2b9e3a3f43f35774e1aff-ocr.djvu

Rorty, Richard

Princeton University, Department of Art & Archaeology

Princeton paperbacks, 2nd print., with corrections; first Princeton paperback print, Princeton, New Jersey, 1980

2nd print., with corrections., Princeton, N.J, New Jersey, 1980

2nd printing, with corrections, Princeton N.J, 1980

United States, United States of America

Princeton, New Jersey, 1979

First Edition, PT, 1981

1st, 1980-01-21

+OCR

до 2011-01

lg1264143

{"edition":"1","isbns":["0691020167","0691072361","9780691020167","9780691072364"],"last_page":415,"publisher":"Princeton University Press"}

Includes bibliographical references and index.
6

Includes bibliographical references and index.

<p><i>Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature</i> hit the philosophical world like a bombshell. Richard Rorty, a Princeton professor who had contributed to the analytic tradition in philosophy, was now attempting to shrug off all the central problems with which it had long been preoccupied. After publication, the Press was barely able to keep up with demand, and the book has since gone on to become one of its all-time best-sellers in philosophy.</p>
<p>Rorty argued that, beginning in the seventeenth century, philosophers developed an unhealthy obsession with the notion of representation. They compared the mind to a mirror that reflects reality. In their view, knowledge is concerned with the accuracy of these reflections, and the strategy employed to obtain this knowledge—that of inspecting, repairing, and polishing the mirror—belongs to philosophy. Rorty's book was a powerful critique of this imagery and the tradition of thought that it spawned. He argued that the questions about truth posed by Descartes, Kant, Hegel, and modern epistemologists and philosophers of language simply couldn't be answered and were, in any case, irrelevant to serious social and cultural inquiry. This stance provoked a barrage of criticism, but whatever the strengths of Rorty's specific claims, the book had a therapeutic effect on philosophy. It reenergized pragmatism as an intellectual force, steered philosophy back to its roots in the humanities, and helped to make alternatives to analytic philosophy a serious choice for young graduate students. Twenty-five years later, the book remains a must-read for anyone seriously concerned about the nature of philosophical inquiry and what philosophers can andcannot do to help us understand and improve the world.</p>


<p>A radical and important critique of the notion that the mind is a mirror of nature in the area of philosophy of knowledge.
</p>

"Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature" hit the philosophical world like a bombshell. Richard Rorty, a Princeton professor who had contributed to the analytic tradition in philosophy, was now attempting to shrug off all the central problems with which it had long been preoccupied. After publication, the Press was barely able to keep up with demand, and the book has since gone on to become one of its all-time best-sellers in philosophy.
Rorty argued that, beginning in the seventeenth century, philosophers developed an unhealthy obsession with the notion of representation. They compared the mind to a mirror that reflects reality. In their view, knowledge is concerned with the accuracy of these reflections, and the strategy employed to obtain this knowledge--that of inspecting, repairing, and polishing the mirror--belongs to philosophy. Rorty's book was a powerful critique of this imagery and the tradition of thought that it spawned. He argued that the questions about truth posed by Descartes, Kant, Hegel, and modern epistemologists and philosophers of language simply couldn't be answered and were, in any case, irrelevant to serious social and cultural inquiry. This stance provoked a barrage of criticism, but whatever the strengths of Rorty's specific claims, the book had a therapeutic effect on philosophy. It reenergized pragmatism as an intellectual force, steered philosophy back to its roots in the humanities, and helped to make alternatives to analytic philosophy a serious choice for young graduate students. Twenty-five years later, the book remains a must-read for anyone seriously concerned about the nature of philosophical inquiry and what philosophers can and cannot do to help us understand and improve the world.

2014-10-05