on 4/10/01 7:04 PM, Nathan Goralnik at rhizome85@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> Why don't we treat liberal humanism like a toolbox? I think we'll find a lot
> of really useful tools inside.
Nobody says we shouldn't. The point is that those tools (like any tools) are
dangerous.
Rorty starts with liberalism (humanism) as the standard by which everything
should be judged. He artificially defines liberalism as stopping suffering.
He then conflates his idea of liberalism with liberal politics and uses
divisions between public and private spheres to avoid criticism.
---
Asher Haig ahaig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dartmouth 2004
"We're concerned about AIDS inside our White House ? make no mistake about
it." -- Bush
> Why don't we treat liberal humanism like a toolbox? I think we'll find a lot
> of really useful tools inside.
Nobody says we shouldn't. The point is that those tools (like any tools) are
dangerous.
Rorty starts with liberalism (humanism) as the standard by which everything
should be judged. He artificially defines liberalism as stopping suffering.
He then conflates his idea of liberalism with liberal politics and uses
divisions between public and private spheres to avoid criticism.
---
Asher Haig ahaig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dartmouth 2004
"We're concerned about AIDS inside our White House ? make no mistake about
it." -- Bush