罗蒂:《科学研究与后真理政治》

IF 0.6 4区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Christopher J. Voparil
{"title":"罗蒂:《科学研究与后真理政治》","authors":"Christopher J. Voparil","doi":"10.1215/0961754x-10046516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In a symposium built around a critical reassessment by Nicholas Gaskill of Richard Rorty’s pragmatism, this contribution examines the provocative question of whether Rorty’s rhetoric hinders Rortian aims. When reconsidering him in company with “the philosophical wing of science studies” (Bruno Latour, Isabelle Stengers, and Donna Haraway), Gaskill finds that Rorty’s persistent assumption of nature/culture and word/world dichotomies is politically dangerous and prevents his comprehending both distributed agency and the complexity of human entanglements with the nonhuman. Gaskill’s Rorty lacks a sustained and coherent positive project, but a fuller picture, outlined in this article, reveals not only greater alignment of Rorty with science studies and agential realism but also key Rortian contributions to those fields that are particularly of moment in our “post-truth” condition.","PeriodicalId":45679,"journal":{"name":"Common Knowledge","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rorty, Science Studies, and the Politics of Post-Truth\",\"authors\":\"Christopher J. Voparil\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/0961754x-10046516\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:In a symposium built around a critical reassessment by Nicholas Gaskill of Richard Rorty’s pragmatism, this contribution examines the provocative question of whether Rorty’s rhetoric hinders Rortian aims. When reconsidering him in company with “the philosophical wing of science studies” (Bruno Latour, Isabelle Stengers, and Donna Haraway), Gaskill finds that Rorty’s persistent assumption of nature/culture and word/world dichotomies is politically dangerous and prevents his comprehending both distributed agency and the complexity of human entanglements with the nonhuman. Gaskill’s Rorty lacks a sustained and coherent positive project, but a fuller picture, outlined in this article, reveals not only greater alignment of Rorty with science studies and agential realism but also key Rortian contributions to those fields that are particularly of moment in our “post-truth” condition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Common Knowledge\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Common Knowledge\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/0961754x-10046516\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Common Knowledge","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/0961754x-10046516","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要:在尼古拉斯·加斯基尔(Nicholas Gaskill)对理查德·罗蒂(Richard Rorty)的实用主义进行批判性重新评估的研讨会上,本文探讨了罗蒂的修辞是否阻碍了罗蒂的目标这一具有挑衅性的问题。当他与“科学研究的哲学翼”(布鲁诺·拉图尔、伊莎贝尔·斯坦厄斯和唐娜·哈拉威)一起重新审视罗蒂时,加斯基尔发现,罗蒂对自然/文化和世界/世界二分法的坚持假设在政治上是危险的,并阻碍了他对分布式代理和人类与非人类纠缠的复杂性的理解。Gaskill的罗蒂缺乏一个持续的和连贯的积极项目,但在本文中概述的一个更全面的画面,不仅揭示了罗蒂与科学研究和代理现实主义的更大的一致性,而且揭示了罗蒂对那些在我们的“后真相”条件下特别重要的领域的关键贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rorty, Science Studies, and the Politics of Post-Truth
Abstract:In a symposium built around a critical reassessment by Nicholas Gaskill of Richard Rorty’s pragmatism, this contribution examines the provocative question of whether Rorty’s rhetoric hinders Rortian aims. When reconsidering him in company with “the philosophical wing of science studies” (Bruno Latour, Isabelle Stengers, and Donna Haraway), Gaskill finds that Rorty’s persistent assumption of nature/culture and word/world dichotomies is politically dangerous and prevents his comprehending both distributed agency and the complexity of human entanglements with the nonhuman. Gaskill’s Rorty lacks a sustained and coherent positive project, but a fuller picture, outlined in this article, reveals not only greater alignment of Rorty with science studies and agential realism but also key Rortian contributions to those fields that are particularly of moment in our “post-truth” condition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Common Knowledge
Common Knowledge HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信