|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
よく一緒に購入されている商品
商品の説明
内容説明
In this book Rorty argues that thinkers such as Nietzsche, Freud, and Wittgenstein have enabled societies to see themselves as historical contingencies, rather than as expressions of underlying, ahistorical human nature or as realizations of suprahistorical goals. This ironic perspective on the human condition is valuable on a private level, although it cannot advance the social or political goals of liberalism. In fact Rorty believes that it is literature not philosophy that can do this, by promoting a genuine sense of human solidarity. A truly liberal culture, acutely aware of its own historical contingency, would fuse the private, individual freedom of the ironic, philosophical perspective with the public project of human solidarity as it is engendered through the insights and sensibilities of great writers. The book has a characteristically wide range of reference from philosophy through social theory to literary criticism. It confirms Rorty's status as a uniquely subtle theorist, whose writing will prove absorbing to academic and nonacademic readers alike.
Book Description
In this book, major American philosopher Richard Rorty argues that thinkers such as Nietzsche, Freud, and Wittgenstein have enabled societies to see themselves as historical contingencies, rather than as expressions of underlying, ahistorical human nature, or as realizations of suprahistorical goals. This ironic perspective on the human condition is valuable but it cannot advance Liberalism's social and political goals. In fact, Rorty believes that it is literature and not philosophy that can do this, by promoting a genuine sense of human solidarity. Specifically, it is novelists such as Orwell and Nabokov who succeed in awakening us to the cruelty of particular social practices and individual attitudes. Thus, a truly liberal culture would fuse the private, individual freedom of the ironic, philosophical perspective with the public project of human solidarity as it is engendered through the insights and sensibilities of great writers. Rorty uses a wide range of references--from philosophy to social theory to literary criticism--to elucidate his beliefs.
登録情報
|
この本のなか見！検索より
（詳細はこちら）
この商品を見た後に買っているのは？
類似した商品から提示されたタグ(詳細)関連タグ(この商品に近い関連キーワード)を追加する++最初のタグになります
|
カスタマーレビュー
最も参考になったカスタマーレビュー
2 人中、2人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
形式:ペーパーバック
本書の序文は、上述のタイトル文で始まる。プラトンというヘレニズムの代表者と欧米哲学の背後を支えるキリスト教の主張を、公共的にも私的にも融合しようとする＜欲張り（筆者）＞にして、現実的で政治的な枠組みで人間と哲学の関係を検討しようとする。しかし、この二律背反的なテーマを棄て去り、公と私が共約不可能と居直られたときに、どう対応すれば良いのか、というのが本書が試そうとする議論である。そして、この矛盾に満ちた課題を解読するために、リベラル・アイロニストという人種を設定する。リベラルとは「残酷さこそ私たちがなしうる最悪のこと」と考える人であり、アイロニストは「重要な信念や欲求は、時間と偶然性を超えた何ものかに関連して」いるという考えすら捨て去れる唯名論者を指す。
現実世界のアポリアを、徹底的な合理論で再検討しようとする著者の戦略的な議論は、まさに目から鱗が落ちる思いである。援用されるテキストも哲学者から文学者まで、哲学の終焉が、文学の始原と謂わんばかりに「言語論的転回（Linguistic turn: 言語それ自体への回帰）」を実行してみせ、実り豊かな議論のシンフォニーが響く。味読に値する1冊である。
現実世界のアポリアを、徹底的な合理論で再検討しようとする著者の戦略的な議論は、まさに目から鱗が落ちる思いである。援用されるテキストも哲学者から文学者まで、哲学の終焉が、文学の始原と謂わんばかりに「言語論的転回（Linguistic turn: 言語それ自体への回帰）」を実行してみせ、実り豊かな議論のシンフォニーが響く。味読に値する1冊である。
Amazon.com で最も参考になったカスタマーレビュー (beta)
Amazon.com:
22件のカスタマーレビュー
84 人中、79人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
There's nothing wrong with pragmatism....
2000/2/3
形式:ペーパーバック
American intellectuals who are politically liberal face a problem. They are the happy inheritors of a tradition built around Judeo-Christian values (such as concern for the poor) and Enlightenment social institutions (representative democracy, free market economy, etc.) but, having read their Darwin, Nietzsche, and Freud, they can no longer give credence to the metaphysical notions (God's Will and Universal Reason) which have historically grounded our admirable social practices. In this book Richard Rorty, like John Dewey before him, argues that the ONLY justification a political institution or social policy requires is that it WORKS. Look not to lofty origins, but to concrete results. Of course, American intellectuals who are politically liberal tend to value programs whose results promote human growth, personal liberty, and social solidarity. But their enthusiasm for such goods will be tinged with irony, since they realize that there's nothing universal about these preferences (had Socrates, Jesus, and Jefferson died in their cradles our list of desirable ends might look very different-- Rorty calls this contingency). This book concludes with the suggestion that in a liberal utopia the bourgeois distinction between the public and the private would be a strong one, thus freeing individuals to pursue their own private perfection, a project Rorty feels is sometimes threatened from extremists on the Left and on the Right. This is a wonderful book, but potential readers who are ignorant of 20th century intellectual history will probably find the opening chapters pretty rough going.
24 人中、23人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
A stimulating opportunity...
2006/8/23
形式:ペーパーバック
I've noticed a trend that various reviewers on philosophy books use this cyberspace as an opportunity to display their understanding and mastery over the work in question. This is, in ways, an interesting and useful phenomenon, but it can also be misleading. This is especially the case for thinkers like Richard Rorty, whose work is often read with the prejudice of traditional, less radical philosophical thought. I am in no way asserting that there is one true way of interpreting this text (a suggestion Rorty himself would abhor). I merely recommend that if you have an interest in contemporary analytic and continental philosophy, or even an interest in literary criticism, you should purchase this very stimulating book. It is stimulating because, like Kant and the other metaphysicians Rorty will challenge, he offers a vocabulary and set of terminology unique (at least in organization and inter-relation) to this work. To master Rorty's somewhat idiosyncratic use of words like "vocabulary" or "irony" or "metaphysics" one has to place oneself in a bit of a hermeneutic circle. Only then will one acquire and master this particularly useful, fecund philosophical language. Many of the reviews here seem written from outside that language, which is discouraging. This is an active read so don't be afraid to get more than your toes wet. This is an important book and is very useful for understanding the desire for autonomy as well as for solidarity. I hope Rorty's poignant writing will be as useful in your life as it has been in mine.
19 人中、18人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
big ideas, clear writing, with only a few gaps
2005/7/31
形式:ペーパーバック
Rorty's book is an articulate and very clearly written attempt to deal with one major modern philosophical question, namely:
"If nothing (or everything) is true (or real), what grounds are there for developing a system of values?"
Rorty starts by summarising the problems of modern philosophy (relativism rules, or "nothing is true"). He then moves into a discussion of how-- in the absence of God, or of concrete proof of the value and meaning of scientific research-- values might be articulated. Rorty's answer (which he takes to some extent from Sartre) is that it is literature (and the arts in general) which allow us to imagine the human context of ideas. Through this imagining we can create the title's "solidarity" with others against ideas (or governments) which are cruel.
Rorty's book is forceful, well-written and clear. Anybody without a philosophy background can get his ideas. There are a few gaps. Rorty, of the blank-slate ("nurture") school of human nature, ignores much evidence from neuroscience, anthropology and other disciplines which basically says that, no, there ARE inherent human universals. We aren't jsu tcreated by culture, and we cannto simpy adopt ANY set of social ideas and build a society around them. It would be interesting to see Rorty argue ethics with, say, Steven Pinker. Rorty also takes relativism one step too far. As Allan Bloom put it, he makes the mistake of turning epistemological relativism into MORAL relativism (in human language, that means he starts with "we don't know anything for sure" and uses that to argue "there is no way to have moral standards").
Those interested in this book would also enjoy the following--
Charles Taylor's THE SOURCES OF THE SELF. A history of how Westerners came to see themselves (in philosophical and political terms). Opens with a fascinating indirect rebuttal to Rorty. Taylor writes beautifully for an educated but non-specialist audience.
Steven Pinker's HOW THE MIND WORKS. The first half is the computational theory of mind; the second looks at gene-based human universals and makes a fascinating counterpoint to Rorty.
"If nothing (or everything) is true (or real), what grounds are there for developing a system of values?"
Rorty starts by summarising the problems of modern philosophy (relativism rules, or "nothing is true"). He then moves into a discussion of how-- in the absence of God, or of concrete proof of the value and meaning of scientific research-- values might be articulated. Rorty's answer (which he takes to some extent from Sartre) is that it is literature (and the arts in general) which allow us to imagine the human context of ideas. Through this imagining we can create the title's "solidarity" with others against ideas (or governments) which are cruel.
Rorty's book is forceful, well-written and clear. Anybody without a philosophy background can get his ideas. There are a few gaps. Rorty, of the blank-slate ("nurture") school of human nature, ignores much evidence from neuroscience, anthropology and other disciplines which basically says that, no, there ARE inherent human universals. We aren't jsu tcreated by culture, and we cannto simpy adopt ANY set of social ideas and build a society around them. It would be interesting to see Rorty argue ethics with, say, Steven Pinker. Rorty also takes relativism one step too far. As Allan Bloom put it, he makes the mistake of turning epistemological relativism into MORAL relativism (in human language, that means he starts with "we don't know anything for sure" and uses that to argue "there is no way to have moral standards").
Those interested in this book would also enjoy the following--
Charles Taylor's THE SOURCES OF THE SELF. A history of how Westerners came to see themselves (in philosophical and political terms). Opens with a fascinating indirect rebuttal to Rorty. Taylor writes beautifully for an educated but non-specialist audience.
Steven Pinker's HOW THE MIND WORKS. The first half is the computational theory of mind; the second looks at gene-based human universals and makes a fascinating counterpoint to Rorty.
これらのレビューは参考になりましたか？
ご意見はクチコミでお聞かせください。
リストマニア
|
|
関連商品を探す
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Education > Reference > Words & Language
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Philosophy
- 洋書 > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Linguistics
- 洋書 > Reference > Words & Language > Linguistics
- 洋書 > Science > History & Philosophy
- 洋書 > Special Features > By Authors > Arts & Photography
- 洋書 > Special Features > all foreign books
同じキーワードの商品を探す
フィードバック
- カタログ情報、または画像について報告
- 著者からのコメント
- 出版社からのコメント
|
