Mortal Vocabularies vs. Immortal Propositions

Abstract

Over thirty years ago, Richard Rorty’s Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature declared the demise of epistemology and the arrival of a new post-Philosophical era. Rorty envisaged the intellectual activity of this predominantly literary culture as an unconstrained large-scale conversation that would flourish in an “ecstasy of spiritual freedom.” Having abandoned all systematic pretensions, edifying philosophers would add their voice to the conversation of mankind, fully aware of the radical incommensurability of the mortal vocabularies they employ. In an attempt to evaluate this radical proposal, the first part of this essay argues that some of Rorty’s most memorable utopian statements are far-fetched, rhetorical and often exaggerated to the point that they damage his broad humanistic vision. Building on this, the second part discusses the “missed potential” of Rorty’s excessively broad notion of a conversation of mankind and of the uncompromisingly anti-essentialist and anti-foundationalist reorientation that he proposes.