I agree with Kevin here. Calling Rorty a "fat slob" would be like
dismissing Foucault as "that faggot philosopher who didn't believe in truth
and deserved to get AIDS," or disregarding Heidigger because of his "great
error", i.e. his misapprehension of National Socialism. It's what one calls
an argument ad hominem (against the man), perhaps the lowest form of
argumentation.
Dan Harrison
FSU Sociology
Tallahassee, FL 32036-2011
At 08:31 AM 4/4/96 -0800, you wrote:
>I know this is a Foucault discussion group, but I do think that this is a
>misrepresentation of Rorty's position. In fact, his democratic pluralism
>is an attempt to expand the signifier of `we' as widely as possible.
>Hence the importance of literature and journalism in his work which he
>sees as providing for the ability to see things from the perspective of
>the `other'.
>
>It also seems a little foolhardy to suggest that Rorty's position within
>the academic hierarchy has everything to do with his academic claims. We
>should not forget the privileged position Foucault acquired within the
>French academy.
>
>Kevin D. Haggerty - haggerty@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>University of British Columbia, Dept. of Anthropology/Sociology
>On Thu, 4 Apr 1996, Joe Cronin wrote:
>
>> I think Richard Rorty is a fat slob. His advocation of
>> pluralism is nothing but a whiny defense of teh "democratic"
>> structures that have kept his belly full for a number of
>> years. (as long as you ask). The "we" he has in mind are
>> teh bureaucratic elite - and fortunately, there is very
>> little of this "wee" in Foucault's work.
>>
>>
>
>
dismissing Foucault as "that faggot philosopher who didn't believe in truth
and deserved to get AIDS," or disregarding Heidigger because of his "great
error", i.e. his misapprehension of National Socialism. It's what one calls
an argument ad hominem (against the man), perhaps the lowest form of
argumentation.
Dan Harrison
FSU Sociology
Tallahassee, FL 32036-2011
At 08:31 AM 4/4/96 -0800, you wrote:
>I know this is a Foucault discussion group, but I do think that this is a
>misrepresentation of Rorty's position. In fact, his democratic pluralism
>is an attempt to expand the signifier of `we' as widely as possible.
>Hence the importance of literature and journalism in his work which he
>sees as providing for the ability to see things from the perspective of
>the `other'.
>
>It also seems a little foolhardy to suggest that Rorty's position within
>the academic hierarchy has everything to do with his academic claims. We
>should not forget the privileged position Foucault acquired within the
>French academy.
>
>Kevin D. Haggerty - haggerty@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>University of British Columbia, Dept. of Anthropology/Sociology
>On Thu, 4 Apr 1996, Joe Cronin wrote:
>
>> I think Richard Rorty is a fat slob. His advocation of
>> pluralism is nothing but a whiny defense of teh "democratic"
>> structures that have kept his belly full for a number of
>> years. (as long as you ask). The "we" he has in mind are
>> teh bureaucratic elite - and fortunately, there is very
>> little of this "wee" in Foucault's work.
>>
>>
>
>