Justice as a Larger Loyalty - Richard Rorty (1996)

A reupload of a talk by Richard Rorty as part of a 1996 series given at the University of Girona.
#Philosophy #Ethics #Rorty

[@quantumfineartsandfossils2152]

5:30+ "should we contract the circle for the sake of loyalty or expand it for the sake of justice"

[@subjectt.change6599]

Richard Rorty fans are surprisingly immune to Irony for people who call themselves Ironists.

[@Khuno2]

Surprising that Rawls considered his earlier work of a piece with his later work, as it's like reading two philosophers who disagree.

[@leehayes4019]

Was there any q&a?

[@sabyasachisenapati3619]

As a universalistic ethics, why can't we say, reason dictates or outlines the acts that ought not to be performed, some universal values for all members belonging to the species and some pluralist positive prescriptions which can be objective facts of reality, as first person emotive reports.

[@dasteven10]

The clarity and brilliance of Richard Rorty once again on display

[@dmblum1]

Loyalty is the wrong word. Tribalism is the right one.

[@subjectt.change6599]

Actually, Rorty was a publicly avowed “ethnocentrist.”

[@Khuno2]

@@subjectt.change6599 Joking aside, I certainly prefer Rorty's ethnocentrism to the reactionary ideology that usually merits the term.

[@Catofminerva]

@@subjectt.change6599 he was an anti-anti-ethnocentrist, a bit more nuanced then it lets on

[@ozzy5146]

That Rorty would read aloud a paper to a class (of undergrads?) that should be READ shows that he was not a good teacher. Papers are meant to be read individually, not recited aloud. Absurd.

[@yp77738yp77739]

Most first order academics view teaching undergrads as a necessary but valueless exercise. At least he was being authentic in his disdain towards them.

[@obrotherwhereartliam]

This was taken from Robert Brandom’s channel. I saw Brandom present once and he did a similar thing, must’ve taken the idea from him.

[@obrotherwhereartliam]

@@yp77738yp77739 I wonder what you think of the unwashed masses.

[@subjectt.change6599]

Do you think the self-proclaimed Ironist appreciates the irony of proposing a prescriptive philosophical ethics as the founder of the post-philosophy movement?

[@dasuero7489]

I’m too pea brained. Please summarize. Thank you

[@subjectt.change6599]

@@dasuero7489 You know that the device you are currently using allows you to search the meanings of words?

[@dasuero7489]

@@subjectt.change6599 I’m aware but I tend to confuse multiple definitions and words so I question whether or not the meaning I looked at for said word was appropriate or true, that it somehow matched or didn’t. Like I once confused sarcasm and irony together and still to this day I can’t tell or pick them apart. I know they’re connected in some way.

[@subjectt.change6599]

@@dasuero7489 Not everyone uses intentionally obscurantist language; some of us say what we mean.

[@dasuero7489]

@@subjectt.change6599 I understand. It’s just something my brain does. It’s hard to explain it really. I really am smoothbrained

[@subjectt.change6599]

He only believes this because he read a particular set of books…

[@theevilsandwitch8520]

What did he say that you disagree with? Why do you disagree with it?

[@subjectt.change6599]

@@theevilsandwitch8520 You misunderstand my intentions. I was quoting him at himself for the purpose of insult and derision. I had no other purpose besides.

[@subjectt.change6599]

@@theevilsandwitch8520 Or are you too damn sophisticated to recognize a joke?

[@subjectt.change6599]

@@theevilsandwitch8520 th-cam.com/video/GlrEbffVVjM/w-d-xo.html 6:51

[@theevilsandwitch8520]

@@subjectt.change6599 there is no satire so clear that it cannot be mistaken for that which it seeks to satire