The Problem of the Rationality of Knowledge in a Post-Metaphysical Perspective

This work examines the options for understanding the problem of the foundations of knowledge and the conditions for obtaining rational knowledge in modern philosophy. Projects by Jurgen Habermas and Richard Rorty are under consideration. On the one hand, the works of these philosophers bear some conceptual similarities. Thus, both thinkers offer their own views on the problem of the role and place of philosophy in culture. In their reflections, they draw on the ideas of leading representatives of both analytic and continental philosophical traditions. However, despite the outward similarity, these thinkers express a different attitude to the problem of the conditions of rational knowledge. If Habermas continues to consider the problem of rationality constitutive for his philosophical search and calls for adapting it to the specifics of modern philosophical thinking, Rorty considers this problem a relic of classical epistemology and calls for refusing to pose this problem. It is concluded that the position of Habermas is more consistent and heuristic. Reflecting on the problem of the foundations of cognition, Rorty implicitly represents these very foundations as a set of extremely abstract principles shared by a certain community of researchers; from these principles, more particular propositions are derived. Rorty overlooks the fact that the question of the foundations and conditions of cognition is not aimed at identifying the fundamental provisions on which different ways of describing the world are based, but rather at explicating the conditions that make these very descriptions meaningful. In addition, Rorty points out that various dictionaries interact with each other, which implies the “hope of agreement” characteristic of any conversation. The question arises: what is the nature of this hope? Is it the question of normative expectation, which is present not only in communicative interaction within a certain linguistic community, but also in the interaction between different ways of describing the world? In the context of these issues, Habermas's position appears to be more consistent.

Keywords

Authors

References