Just came to my attention as I finally read Eric Alterman's latest column in 'The Nation'.
"Richard McKay Rorty (October 4, 1931 in New York City – June 8, 2007) was an American philosopher."
Thought it should be mentioned, and discussed here, if he was somewhat of a liberal icon.
However, although the name was familiar to me, detailed knowledge about him or his philosophy was not, so I did a little reading.
http://stanford.edu/~rrorty/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rortyhttp://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/#3Although I have respect for Dewey, as I studied him in various Institutional Economics classes, I do not like what I read here about Rorty's pragmatism.
"Pragmatists generally hold that a proposition is true if believing it helps us solve a given problem."
It may depend on how 'problem' and 'solve' are defined, but I am struck by the similarity of that pragmatism and the philosophy of the Bush administration which acts as though it can 'make' its own truth, regardless of any facts. They hold that a proposition is true, if believing it helps them consolidate or expand their political power or enrich the wealthy.
I would say, for example, that the truth of the revenue effects of tax cuts are true independent of any pragmatic uses. Believing that tax cuts will increase revenue may help sell the idea to ignorant, greedy and hopeful masses, but in the end, the truth is, they don't and they haven't.
Maybe it's a motivational thing, at some level, the belief that civilization is worth preserving will motivate people to roll up their sleeves and work to preserve it. But I have no idea what Rorty has said about these things, since I cannot remember reading any of his works. How about y'all?