A brilliant, humane scholar. A public intellectual in the finest sense, and a profound influence on the way I think about politics, long-time Nation contributor Richard Rorty has died.

I had the pleasure of meeting Rorty a few years ago and wrote one of my earliest pieces about a debate he had with Jurgen Habermas here in Chicago. Rorty had an uncanny ability to stare into the post-modern abyss, in which nothing is grounded in the divine or universal, and yet somehow, some way, find a kind of practical empathy that could serve as a beacon in the face of nihilism, authoritarianism and cruelty.

He will be greatly, greatly missed.

Comments (17)

1. one

   Posted by Will C. at 06/09/2007 @ 5:15pm

2. more hole in the ground

   Posted by Will C. at 06/09/2007 @ 5:16pm

3. I AM NOTHING IF NOT A LEFT-LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE CRYPTOSOCIALIST...

   (Some such labeling will do, if you're into labels.) And yet, I am perfectly aware of the fact that the relativistic morality on which most such liberal positions rest (and for which Rorty was a prime and articulate apologist) is DEMONSTRABLY fallacious (at least to the extent that it can be shown to lead to irreconcileable contradictions). Go figure. (The alternative, however, is not a sterile conservatism which, while claiming to be founded on "moral absolutes" is, at bottom, mostly just covert cryptofascist nihilism in one form or another. I'll take an intellectually honest moral relativism over an intellectually DIShonest moral absolutism -- think William F. Buckley, Jr., and his politico-rhetorical spawn such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter -- any time.)

   Posted by w_m_bear at 06/09/2007 @ 5:49pm

4. Moral relativism

   that's like saying you want the ten commandments plastered to the walls of every class room and then skipping off to wage aggressive warfare, based on lies, "losing track" of the funds you gave out in no bid contracts while cutting the VA benefits for your returning wounded, leaving them in rat and roach infested rooms lying in their own urine before you out process them to go find a job with the guys whom you just gave a huge tax cut and like you look to illegal aliens or outsourcing as an excellent money management strategy…

   isn't it?

   Posted by Will C. at 06/09/2007 @ 6:04pm

5. Posted by WILL C. 06/09/2007 @ 6:04pm

   Still no demand for your economic understanding or market for your skills, eh?

   What a surprise. Your Hillary will fix everything for you, Willy boy.... unless Phred enters the fray.

   Posted by john maasch at 06/09/2007 @ 8:24pm

6. "the relativistic morality on which most such liberal positions rest... is DEMONSTRABLY fallacious"

   Posted by W_M_BEAR 06/09/2007 @ 5:49pm

   Please, demonstrate its fallaciousness.

   Posted by Mask at 06/09/2007 @ 9:41pm

7. Still no demand for your economic understanding or market for your skills, eh?

   What a surprise. Your Hillary will fix everything for you, Willy boy.... unless Phred enters the fray.

   Posted by JOHN MAASCH 06/09/2007 @ 8:24pm

   my Hillary? ah yes, perhaps in your alcoholic dementia you confused me for William Clinton.

   Who is interestingly enough... another Will C.

   Posted by Will C. at 06/09/2007 @ 10:31pm

8. It's a funny thing to compare and contrast aspects of popular culture to the occasional cut-away view of the engine of academia.

   A recent example was CNN's Soledad O'Brien hosted segment on "Faith Politics" asking the top three Democratic presidential candidates about the role of faith in their personal and political lives. It can hardly be overemphasized what a farce a forum like that is. It shows the thinness of our society every bit as powerfully albeit less obviously than the absurd helicopter and paparazzi infected Paris Hilton jailtime jamboree.

   Let's be perfectly clear. NO candidate for political office at any level should be subjected to such a demeaning and deeply unfair exercise as a "Faith Politics" forum. In a society that honors the absolutely foundational importance of the separation of church and state it should be understood that a person's "faith", or lack thereof, is not an appropriate subject for a public forum.

   It is equally true that it's entirely inappropriate for a candidate to use their "faith" (or lack thereof) as a badge of honor and, in a just society, this should be grounds for disqualification.

   Sadly, I don't see this kind of fairness happening in my lifetime.

   By the same token, it's not necessary for all of us to have an interest in attending a Jurgen Habermas / Richard Rorty debate (I recommend clicking on Hayes' link) to appreciate the fact that a minimal level of intellectual achievement or curiousity in a critical mass of the citizenry is probably an absolute requirement for democracy to function at anything approaching a level of competence.

   Whatever that critical mass might be, we seem to be rapidly slipping away from the target rather than approaching it.

   If we could conduct a thorough examination of the American body politic we shouldn't be surprised to find it riddled with disease starting with the head.

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 06/10/2007 @ 12:05am

9. It thus is a certainty he was not a Demoncrat; as nihilism, authoritarianism and cruelty is the basis of their current platform for power and control!

   Posted by RIO BRAVO 06/10/2007 @ 12:40am

   we might not have to actually wait for eight years of a Clinton administration to sing deck the halls of piggly wiggly

   Posted by Will C. at 06/10/2007 @ 12:45am

10. we might not have to actually wait for eight years of a Clinton administration to sing deck the halls of piggly wiggly

    Posted by WILL C. 06/10/2007 @ 12:45am

    you may be waiting longer than you even imagine..

    Keep pounding those nail, big boy..

    I'll be in Seatlle in the next 2 weeks...any place I can observe your handy work? Any lectures on street corners on your view on how the economy works?

    "perhaps in your alcoholic dementia you confused me for William Clinton.

    Who is interestingly enough... another Will C. "

    No,no Willard, one thing is for sure here,....and that is there are no confusion about who and what you are and, sadly, are doomed to remain..

    Posted by john maasch at 06/10/2007 @ 02:02am

11. damn maasch, you're getting angrier and angrier as hamsterland recedes further back into the dusty pages of history.

    Too bad it doesn't suck at my end like it does at yours

    :)

    Posted by Will C. at 06/10/2007 @ 02:09am

12. "Too bad it doesn't suck at my end like it does at yours "

    You are facing the wrong way.

    What are you going to do when Fred defeats her..and badly?

    Posted by john maasch at 06/10/2007 @ 02:55am

13. wake up

    Posted by Will C. at 06/10/2007 @ 03:01am

14. The Left's enchantment with truth-denying postmodernism is one of the main reasons it finds itself in the political wilderness in this country. Rorty was one of the minor offenders in this regard, but one of the most well known. We cannot speak truth to power if truth is denied.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 06/11/2007 @ 12:29pm

15. For me he was a great voice of modern American relative moralism. His words in "Achieving America" still give me hope: "...nothing a nation has done should make it impossible for a constitutional democracy to regain self-respect." I hope he was right. Posted by P_Prose at 06/11/2007 @ 6:58pm

16. It thus is a certainty he was not a Demoncrat; as nihilism, authoritarianism and cruelty is the basis of their current platform for power and control!

    Posted by RIO BRAVO 06/10/2007 @ 12:40am

    Argument by assertion doesn't work here. Please substantiate or prepare to be ignored.

    Posted by siegeljd at 06/14/2007 @ 12:43am

17. What are you going to do when Fred defeats her..and badly?

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 06/10/2007 @ 02:55am

    Fred the fake law and order guy?

    Fred the moralist with a wife his daughter's age?

    Fred the corporate lobbyist [thenation.com]?

    Fred the foreign corporate lobbyist [tinyurl.com]?

    Fred the fake patriot?

    That Fred?

    You may be right of course. Like other actors-turned-politicians, he may win on two strengths: (1) His screen persona rather than his actual credentials, despite the extent to which his real life actions demonstrate that his persona is a lie, and (2) the "librul" (cough) MSM's utter failure to blow the whistle on (1). Especially the corporate TV machine.

    Posted by siegeljd at 06/14/2007 @ 12:54am