What do you think?
Rate this book
Debating the State of Philosophy: Habermas, Rorty, and Kolakowski
Do we still need philosophical discourse as part of communication within our culture? Is philosophical endeavor still valid? This book offers the views of some of the most popular, distinguished contemporary philosophers who have placed their mark on philosophy. Durgen Habermas, Richard Rorty, Leszek Kolakowski, and Ernest Gellner bring their ideas into confrontation in a unique debate devoted to the present state of philosophy.
Habermas begins with a comprehensive account of contextualism. According to him, contextualism is a new form of historicism. What are the merits of an approach that takes into account both a historical and a cultural context? Is the pragmatism promoted by Richard Rorty an acceptable criticism of our platonic heritage? If so, does this mean the end of rationality as a regulative ideal of the human universe? Rorty's answer is Yes. This world-renowned American thinker recommends putting a full stop at the end of a narrative which was useful in pursuit of our ancestors' purposes but is no longer useful for ours. Leszek Ko^D/lakowski attempts to undermine the alleged pragmatic merits of pragmatism from the position of an analytic philosopher who continues to value classical elements of philosophical tradition. Ernest Gellner also turns against Rorty's pragmatism, which he denounces as a product of the Enlightenment roots of American culture and its centuries of political and economic stability. The future of Western culture may depend on the answers to the questions asked by these authors.
Habermas begins with a comprehensive account of contextualism. According to him, contextualism is a new form of historicism. What are the merits of an approach that takes into account both a historical and a cultural context? Is the pragmatism promoted by Richard Rorty an acceptable criticism of our platonic heritage? If so, does this mean the end of rationality as a regulative ideal of the human universe? Rorty's answer is Yes. This world-renowned American thinker recommends putting a full stop at the end of a narrative which was useful in pursuit of our ancestors' purposes but is no longer useful for ours. Leszek Ko^D/lakowski attempts to undermine the alleged pragmatic merits of pragmatism from the position of an analytic philosopher who continues to value classical elements of philosophical tradition. Ernest Gellner also turns against Rorty's pragmatism, which he denounces as a product of the Enlightenment roots of American culture and its centuries of political and economic stability. The future of Western culture may depend on the answers to the questions asked by these authors.
- GenresPhilosophy
160 pages, Paperback
Published October 30, 1996
1 person is currently reading
35 people want to read
About the author
Jürgen Habermas
379 books702 followersJürgen Habermas is a German sociologist and philosopher in the tradition of critical theory and American pragmatism. He is perhaps best known for his work on the concept of the public sphere, the topic of his first book entitled The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. His work focuses on the foundations of social theory and epistemology, the analysis of advanced capitalistic societies and democracy, the rule of law in a critical social-evolutionary context, and contemporary politics—particularly German politics. Habermas's theoretical system is devoted to revealing the possibility of reason, emancipation, and rational-critical communication latent in modern institutions and in the human capacity to deliberate and pursue rational interests.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
June 17, 2022
Coping With Contingencies
On May 8-9, 1995, two of the most distinguished contemporary philosophers, the American Richard Rorty and the German Jurgen Habermas, met in Warsaw under the auspices of the Instutute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences to discuss broad philosophical issues. The Polish philosopher Leszed Kolakowski was also scheduled to participate but was unable to appear in person due to an accident. The discussion between Habermas and Rorty, together with supporting material by Kolakowski and other philosophers, is memorialized in this 1996 book, "Debating the State of Philosophy: Habermas, Rorty, and Kolakowski". The book will be of interest to students of these thinkers as well as to readers interested in discussion between philosophers from different philosophical backgrounds and approaches.
Habermas is a highly erudite philosopher and social thinker influenced by many sources, including German philosophy but also heavily by American pragmatism, including John Dewey. Rorty began his career as an analytic philosopher but dramatically shifted gears with his book "Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature." He became a leader his own style of neo-pragmatism, heavily influenced by Dewey. He criticized and tried to end traditional philosophical debate in terms of subject-object, representationalism, correspondence, and truth. The debate was designed to show commonalities and differences in the thought of Habermas and Rorty.
Editor Josef Niznik's Preface to the volume helps clarify the scope of the discussion. Rorty, Habermas, and Kolakowski had agreed in advance to address the following questions, as proposed by Rorty.
1. Has the Enlightenment done more harm than good?
2. Can a secular culture produce enough of a civic community to protect democratic society against collapse?
3. Is the notion of "rationality" of any use in articulating the nature of such a secular culture?
Editor Niznik offered the following comment on the phrase "coping with contingncies", the title of Habermas' oral presentation at the conference.
"The phrase 'coping with contingencies' implies an effort to preserve or regain an order within our world of ideas and to secure the coherence of a symbolic universum, the coherence of which is a primary need for every human being. As it happens, nothing can free philosophy from the task of reflecting on such efforts. Such tasks, moreover, can be seen as a confirmation of philosophy's identity and universality despite the many differences that appear in specific approaches."
The discussion is divided into three chapters: "Coping with Contingencies", "The Challenge of Relativism" and "Philosophy and the Dilemmas of the Contemporary World." Habermas begins with a lengthy, difficult presentation, "Coping with Contingencies: The Return of Historicism" which begins with the Greeks and proceeds through Dilthey and Heidegger. While rejecting Platonism and subject-object dualism, Habermas argues that reason and rationality have an important place in a redirected philosophy of communication and in the attempts of democracies and speakers to come to agreeent.
Rorty offers presentations in each chapter, titled "Emancipating our Culture", "Relativism-- Finding and Making" and "On Moral Obligation, Truth, and Common Sense" and, in chapter 3, "The Notion of Rationality". He takes issue with Habermas' efforts to find an underlying sense of communicative rationality even while he largely agrees with Habermas' social and political aims. The tendency is to find commonality in the positions of the two thinkers while minimizing disagreement. As always, Rorty writes and speaks beautifully and engagingly.
Habermas and Rorty continued their discussion up to Rorty's death in 2007, I read this book as part of an ongoing interest in Rorty and Habermas and, more broadly, as part of an effort to explore commonalities and discussion between different philosophical traditions. This book will interest readers with a passion for contemporary philosophy.
Robin Friedman
On May 8-9, 1995, two of the most distinguished contemporary philosophers, the American Richard Rorty and the German Jurgen Habermas, met in Warsaw under the auspices of the Instutute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences to discuss broad philosophical issues. The Polish philosopher Leszed Kolakowski was also scheduled to participate but was unable to appear in person due to an accident. The discussion between Habermas and Rorty, together with supporting material by Kolakowski and other philosophers, is memorialized in this 1996 book, "Debating the State of Philosophy: Habermas, Rorty, and Kolakowski". The book will be of interest to students of these thinkers as well as to readers interested in discussion between philosophers from different philosophical backgrounds and approaches.
Habermas is a highly erudite philosopher and social thinker influenced by many sources, including German philosophy but also heavily by American pragmatism, including John Dewey. Rorty began his career as an analytic philosopher but dramatically shifted gears with his book "Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature." He became a leader his own style of neo-pragmatism, heavily influenced by Dewey. He criticized and tried to end traditional philosophical debate in terms of subject-object, representationalism, correspondence, and truth. The debate was designed to show commonalities and differences in the thought of Habermas and Rorty.
Editor Josef Niznik's Preface to the volume helps clarify the scope of the discussion. Rorty, Habermas, and Kolakowski had agreed in advance to address the following questions, as proposed by Rorty.
1. Has the Enlightenment done more harm than good?
2. Can a secular culture produce enough of a civic community to protect democratic society against collapse?
3. Is the notion of "rationality" of any use in articulating the nature of such a secular culture?
Editor Niznik offered the following comment on the phrase "coping with contingncies", the title of Habermas' oral presentation at the conference.
"The phrase 'coping with contingencies' implies an effort to preserve or regain an order within our world of ideas and to secure the coherence of a symbolic universum, the coherence of which is a primary need for every human being. As it happens, nothing can free philosophy from the task of reflecting on such efforts. Such tasks, moreover, can be seen as a confirmation of philosophy's identity and universality despite the many differences that appear in specific approaches."
The discussion is divided into three chapters: "Coping with Contingencies", "The Challenge of Relativism" and "Philosophy and the Dilemmas of the Contemporary World." Habermas begins with a lengthy, difficult presentation, "Coping with Contingencies: The Return of Historicism" which begins with the Greeks and proceeds through Dilthey and Heidegger. While rejecting Platonism and subject-object dualism, Habermas argues that reason and rationality have an important place in a redirected philosophy of communication and in the attempts of democracies and speakers to come to agreeent.
Rorty offers presentations in each chapter, titled "Emancipating our Culture", "Relativism-- Finding and Making" and "On Moral Obligation, Truth, and Common Sense" and, in chapter 3, "The Notion of Rationality". He takes issue with Habermas' efforts to find an underlying sense of communicative rationality even while he largely agrees with Habermas' social and political aims. The tendency is to find commonality in the positions of the two thinkers while minimizing disagreement. As always, Rorty writes and speaks beautifully and engagingly.
Habermas and Rorty continued their discussion up to Rorty's death in 2007, I read this book as part of an ongoing interest in Rorty and Habermas and, more broadly, as part of an effort to explore commonalities and discussion between different philosophical traditions. This book will interest readers with a passion for contemporary philosophy.
Robin Friedman
May 16, 2022
Rorty's contributions are excellent, well worth reading.
Only 56,000 words this book is available online.
One very good, long essay in this book entitled “Relativism—Finding and Making” (6,800 words) gained its deserved attention when republished in Rorty's collection of essays Philosophy and Social Hope (Penguin, 1999).
But Rorty's reply to Habermas in this book, entitled "Emancipating Our Culture" (pp. 24-30), is one of his most striking essays and is never cited by scholars — and it's only 2,000 words.
Read it and wonder about the mind that wrote it.
Only 56,000 words this book is available online.
One very good, long essay in this book entitled “Relativism—Finding and Making” (6,800 words) gained its deserved attention when republished in Rorty's collection of essays Philosophy and Social Hope (Penguin, 1999).
But Rorty's reply to Habermas in this book, entitled "Emancipating Our Culture" (pp. 24-30), is one of his most striking essays and is never cited by scholars — and it's only 2,000 words.
Read it and wonder about the mind that wrote it.
December 5, 2010
I liked reading these three in dialogue. However, I kind of wish everyone got an equal turn. I felt like there was too much Rorty and not enough Kołakowski (who is great and ever underappreciated.) Also the Q&A stuff in the appendicies was a bit lame.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews