The Cambridge companion to Rorty

• Titel: The Cambridge companion to Rorty
• Mitwirkende: Rondel, David [HerausgeberIn]
• Verf.angabe: edited by David Rondel, University of Nevada, Reno
• Verlagsort: Cambridge, United Kingdom ; New York, NY ; Port Melbourne, Australia ; New Delhi, India ; Singapore
• Verlag: Cambridge University Press
• Jahr: 2021
• Umfang: xi, 349 Seiten
• Fussnoten: Includes bibliographical references and index
• ISBN: 978-1-108-73395-3
• ISBN: 978-1-108-49657-5
• Schlagwörter: (p)Rorty, Richard
• Dokumenttyp: Aufsatzsammlung
• Sprache: eng
• Bibliogr. Hinweis: Erscheint auch als : Online-Ausgabe: Rondel, David, 1978-: Cambridge companion to Rorty. - Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2021 |(DLC)2020055260
• Bibliogr. Hinweis: Erscheint auch als : Online-Ausgabe: The Cambridge companion to Rorty. - Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 2021. - 1 Online-Ressource (xii, 352 pages)
• RVK-Notation: CI 6591
• K10plus-PPN: 1742970567

Abstract

"Richard Rorty (1931-2007) was perhaps the unique philosopher of his generation. Admired in some intellectual circles, reviled in others, he was unique for the sheer breadth of his interests and expertise. In an era when philosophy was becoming increasingly hyper-specialized, Rorty seemed more to resemble the great polymaths of the early modern period, writing on a dazzling variety of topics -both the recondite topics of specialist philosophers and, more frequently as he grew older, public-facing contributions on politics, literature, and culture. He drew from an equally dazzlingly diverse group of thinkers, from Darwin and Dewey to Derrida and Davidson, from Freud, Nietzsche, and Heidegger, to Nabokov, Orwell, and Harold Bloom. It puts the point mildly to say that Rorty's litany of intellectual heroes was an eclectic and idiosyncratic one. Writing on figures within the so-called analytic and continental traditions with (or so it seemed) equal familiarity and facility, it is no embellishment to say that Richard Rorty had a range of interests simply not found among his philosophical contemporaries"--