Richard Rorty: A nomad or an ironist?

The article is a response to Sergey Smirnov’s study of Richard Rorty’s philosophical self-definition and self-identification. Following this point of view, the article attempts to define Rorty’s position in the “Nomad - Ironist” range. Rorty, who began his philosophical activity as an adherent of analytic philosophy, later became an adherent of continental philosophy in the person of its various representatives. In addition, Rorty frequently changed his position on the same problems. “Tag” philosophy, based on external opinion or self-identification, serves an important function, simplifying the ways in which certain philosophical views are considered. But, first of all, it is necessary to identify the philosopher as a philosopher. We can argue as much as we like about who is closer to the truth, continental or analytic philosophers, but we primarily identify them as philosophers. Different philosophical positions offer different solutions, forms, and methods of discussing philosophical questions. The differences here are undoubtedly enormous. But the unity of philosophical knowledge is not set by the uniformity of solutions, which may be infinitely many, but by the unity of the questions belonging to the field of philosophy. The authors declare no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References