The text discusses the evolution and tension within modern academic philosophy, particularly

focusing on the linguistic turn and its pragmatic twist as articulated by Richard Rorty and others.
Here's a breakdown and analysis of the key points:

1. Transitional Period in Philosophy:

o Modern academic philosophy is experiencing a transition characterized by the rise
of pragmatic approaches, which now coexist with the traditional theoreticist
conception.
o The theoreticist approach emphasizes the conditions under which human
knowledge is possible, while pragmatic approaches focus on the intelligent
collaboration in shaping pragmatic ways to alter human reality.
2. Historical Context:
o The theoreticist approach became prominent in the 19th century and was carried
into the 20th century with the linguistic turn.
o The linguistic turn problematized and continued the theoreticist approach.
3. Richard Rorty's Contributions:
o Rorty highlighted the tensions within the linguistic turn in his 1967 "Introduction"
to The Linguistic Turn and further elaborated on these tensions in his later works.
o Rorty's work has often been misunderstood or overlooked regarding the
ambivalences he identified within the linguistic turn.
4. Three Ambivalences of the Linguistic Turn:
o First Ambivalence: The status of the linguistic method.
 Logical empiricists view logical syntax as neutral, whereas ideal and
ordinary language philosophers see meaning as relative to ideal languages
or languages-in-use.
o Second Ambivalence: The goal of the linguistic method.
 Some philosophers see linguistic reformulation as a constructive solution
to philosophical problems, while others view it as a therapeutic
dissolution.
o Third Ambivalence: Metaphilosophical presuppositions.
 Despite the belief in the reliability of the linguistic method for analyzing
philosophical problems, some positions within the linguistic turn
challenge this presupposition and its associated dogmas.
5. Pragmatization Movement:
o The pragmatic twist in the linguistic turn involves a shift in analytic philosophy
during the second half of the 20th century.
o This movement questions the theoretical foundations and emphasizes practical
consequences and applications.
6. Rorty's Later Work:
o Rorty’s later works focus on the critique of distinctions between different classes
of sentences, as seen in the "Wittgenstein-Sellars-Quine-Davidson attack."
o These critiques further the pragmatic approach by challenging the theoretical
underpinnings of linguistic analysis.
7. Current Debate: Representationalism vs. Antirepresentationalism:
o Rorty’s confrontation with philosophers like John McDowell and Robert
Brandom explores the socio-political implications of the debate between
representationalism (the idea that language represents reality) and
antirepresentationalism (the idea that language serves pragmatic purposes rather
than mirroring reality).

Summary: The text outlines the tension between theoreticist and pragmatic approaches within
modern academic philosophy, particularly through the lens of the linguistic turn. It emphasizes
Richard Rorty's critical role in highlighting and addressing these tensions, focusing on the
practical implications of philosophical methods and the ongoing debate between
representationalism and antirepresentationalism.

The text examines the pragmatization of analytic philosophy, particularly through the influence
of thinkers like Wittgenstein, Sellars, Quine, and Davidson, as interpreted by Richard Rorty. The
main points can be analyzed as follows:

1. Rorty's Interpretation of the Linguistic Turn:

o Rorty suggests in Consequences of Pragmatism that the linguistic turn, originally
motivated by logical positivism to avoid Kantian issues of 'experience' or
'consciousness,' evolved through the contributions of Wittgenstein, Sellars, Quine,
and Davidson.
o These philosophers moved analytic philosophy beyond its initial Kantian motives
toward a naturalistic and behavioristic perspective on language.
2. The Pragmaticization of Analytic Philosophy:
o Rorty introduces the term 'pragmaticization' to describe the shift in analytic
philosophy towards a pragmatic, naturalistic, and behavioristic understanding of
language.
o This shift signifies a move away from traditional theoretical concerns to a focus
on practical and empirical aspects of linguistic behavior.
3. Terminological Clarifications:
o Rorty differentiates his use of 'pragmatism' from formal or quasi-transcendental
pragmatics associated with ordinary language philosophy.
o He emphasizes a naturalistic and behavioristic interpretation, where philosophy
aligns with empirical sciences and common sense.
4. Misunderstandings and Clarifications:
o Rorty's idea of pragmatic naturalization has been misunderstood as advocating for
the dissolution of philosophy. However, he argues that philosophy should end its
adherence to traditional theoretical problems and adopt a new, practical
orientation.
o He envisions philosophy collaborating with sciences, arts, and technology,
developing a pragmatic vocabulary that emphasizes practical, normative feedback
rather than foundational analysis.
5. Transformative Nature of Pragmatic Philosophy:
o Rorty’s pragmatic philosophy is transformative, not just transitional. It redefines
philosophical inquiry as a transformative activity aimed at changing common-
sense knowledge practices.
o This transformative aspect is seen in three ways:
 As a transition within the tradition of philosophical research.
 As a fundamental change in the activity of philosophical research itself.
 As an activity focused on experimental transformation of common sense
and development of new knowledge practices.
6. Genealogy of the Pragmatic Turn:
o Rorty traces the development of the pragmatic turn from the dialectic of the
linguistic turn itself.
o He categorizes authors of the "Wittgenstein-Sellars-Quine-Davidson attack" into
three types:
 Sellars and Quine: Operate within the second ambivalence of the
linguistic turn and prepare for the pragmaticization through therapeutic de-
transcendentalization.
 Wittgenstein: A mixed type, transitioning between the second and third
ambivalences.
 Davidson: Radically embodies the transition from the second to the third
ambivalence, contributing significantly to the pragmatic turn.
7. Residual Differences and Further Analysis:
o Despite commonalities, Rorty notes residual differences between his views and
Davidson’s.
o Further analysis will explore how the second ambivalence shapes the thoughts of
Wittgenstein, Sellars, and Quine.

Summary: The text delves into how the pragmatic turn in analytic philosophy, influenced by
figures like Wittgenstein, Sellars, Quine, and Davidson, moves philosophy from traditional
theoreticist concerns to practical, naturalistic, and behavioristic approaches. Rorty emphasizes
this shift as a transformative redefinition of philosophical inquiry, aiming at practical changes in
common-sense knowledge practices and close cooperation with empirical sciences.

The analysis of Wittgenstein, Quine, and Sellars within the framework of the second
ambivalence of the linguistic turn reveals complex tensions and transformative potentialities
within their philosophical contributions. Here's a detailed breakdown of the key points:

Wittgenstein's Dual Philosophical Positions

1. Early vs. Late Wittgenstein:

o Tractatus (Early Wittgenstein): In his early work, Wittgenstein adopts a logicist
position, claiming to have solved the essential problems of philosophy through
logical analysis.
o Philosophical Investigations (Late Wittgenstein): His later work shifts to a use-
theoretic view, focusing on the therapeutic dissolution of philosophical problems
rather than their logical resolution.
2. Ambivalence in Late Wittgenstein:
o Irony and Critique: Wittgenstein critiques his earlier logicist program, reducing
philosophy to unmasking false claims of purity.
o Theory of Philosophy as Oversight: Despite his critique, he maintains a
distinction between empirical and grammatical investigations, proposing a form
of philosophical oversight that aims to clarify rather than solve.

Sellars and Quine: Therapeutic and Transformative Elements

1. Sellars and Quine's Therapeutic Contributions:

o Sellars: Challenges the distinction between the empirically given and the
conceptually postulated.
o Quine: Dismantles the synthetic-contingent/analytic-necessary distinction and
questions the separation between science and philosophy.
2. Weak Transformative Traits:
o Both thinkers exhibit transformative traits by advocating for a naturalistic
discourse, but this transformation is limited to a shift within the existing
disciplinary matrix of philosophy.
o Sellars: Critiques the hierarchical structure of academic philosophy but retains a
distinction between empirical sciences and non-empirical philosophy.
o Quine: Advocates for a naturalized epistemology that integrates philosophy with
empirical sciences, viewing philosophy as continuous with science.
Transformative Philosophy in the Strong Sense

1. Sellars' Holistic Approach:

o Sellars envisions a holistic philosophy that analyzes the relational dependencies
across everyday, scientific, and philosophical discourse, suggesting a network-
like structure rather than a hierarchical one.
o Despite this holistic view, Sellars maintains a methodological separation between
philosophy and science, emphasizing that philosophical analysis does not rely on
scientific methods or results.
2. Quine's Naturalized Epistemology:
o Quine promotes a naturalized epistemology where philosophy merges with
psychology and linguistics, dissolving traditional boundaries between philosophy
and science.
o He critiques the therapeutic current in linguistic philosophy, arguing that
epistemology continues within a scientific framework, aiming to understand how
evidence relates to theory.

Overcoming the Second Ambivalence: Davidson and Rorty

1. Davidson's Transformative Philosophy:

o Davidson moves beyond the problem-solving and problem-dissolving dichotomy,
redefining philosophical activity in a transformative sense.
o He advocates for a new understanding of philosophy that does not adhere to
traditional epistemological concerns but seeks to transform philosophical practice
itself.
2. Rorty's Strongest Sense of Transformative Philosophy:
o Rorty aligns with Davidson, emphasizing that philosophical activity should be
inherently transformative.
o Rorty's vision involves philosophy working in close cooperation with sciences,
arts, and technology to develop new vocabularies and practices that transcend
traditional philosophical problems.

Analysis of Davidson and Rorty's Philosophical Contributions

Davidson's Holistic Coherence Theory and the Critique of Scheme-Content Dualism

In "On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme" (1974), Donald Davidson critiques the dualism of
scheme and content, a notion central to much of contemporary philosophy. He argues against the
idea that language organizes reality, suggesting instead that no such separation exists. Davidson's
stance is that nothing can justify a belief except another belief, thus rejecting the concept of an
uninterpreted content and the necessity of conceptual schemes.

Behavioristic Perspective and Radical Interpretation

Davidson builds on Quine's behavioristic approach, focusing on the practical aspects of language
learning and interpretation. His theory of "radical interpretation" replaces Quine's nervous
stimuli with physical objects, reflecting a shift towards a hermeneutic naturalism. This approach
emphasizes understanding the causal mechanisms in linguistic behavior, where the field linguist
must align the native speakers' beliefs with their own, recognizing that all knowledge stems from
empirical study.

Triangulation and Externalized Epistemology

Davidson introduces the concept of triangulation, where the identification of objects of thought
is based on a social context. This is illustrated through the learning of language, where
communication is made possible by the interaction between teacher, learner, and external
situations. This social-pragmatic triangulation replaces the introspective perspective of
traditional epistemology, emphasizing an external, empirical understanding of knowledge.

Davidson's Dismissal of Language as a Fixed System

Davidson provocatively claims "there is no such thing as a language" in the traditional sense,
advocating for a pragmatic understanding of linguistic competence. He suggests that knowing a
language is akin to knowing how to navigate the world, a perspective that emphasizes practical
interaction over theoretical structure.

Davidson as a Transformative Philosopher

Davidson’s approach leads to a typological transformation of philosophical activity. He sees

philosophy as integrated with empirical research, where the field linguist uses logical tools to
understand natural languages. This view maintains the theoretical aspect of philosophy within a
naturalistic framework, contrasting with Rorty's more radical transformation.

Rorty's Transformative Pragmatism

Rorty takes Davidson's ideas further, proposing a transformative conception of philosophy that
aims to change common sense and social practices. He moves philosophical inquiry from
epistemology and metaphysics to cultural politics, suggesting that philosophy should focus on
socio-political goals rather than purely theoretical analysis.

Differences between Davidson and Rorty

1. Davidson's Hermeneutic Naturalism:

o Focus: Descriptive observation of natural languages as pragmatic tools.
o Approach: Uses formal-logical tools for empirical and hermeneutic analysis
without aiming to change linguistic reality.
2. Rorty's Transformative Pragmatism:
o Focus: Politically and socially motivated transformation of future actions.
o Approach: Renounces formal logic, drawing models from literature and art to
propose new socio-political practices.

Rorty's Cultural Politics

In his later works, Rorty emphasizes the strategic shift from traditional epistemological concerns
to cultural politics. He advocates for the pragmatic realization of democratic ideals, where
philosophy plays a role in shaping socio-political contexts rather than merely analyzing them.

Conclusion

Davidson and Rorty both contribute significantly to the pragmatic vocabulary of philosophy, yet
their approaches differ in scope and application. Davidson focuses on a naturalistic and empirical
analysis of language within a theoretical framework, while Rorty advocates for a broader,
transformative role for philosophy aimed at socio-political change. This distinction marks a
pivotal point in contemporary philosophical thought, reflecting the ongoing evolution of the
linguistic turn and its implications for both theoretical and practical philosophy.
The text discusses the evolution and tension within modern academic philosophy, focusing on
the linguistic turn and its pragmatic twist, particularly through the contributions of Richard Rorty
and other influential thinkers like Wittgenstein, Sellars, Quine, and Davidson. Here's a
comprehensive analysis of the key points:

Transitional Period in Philosophy:

Modern academic philosophy is undergoing a significant transition characterized by the rise of

pragmatic approaches, which coexist with the traditional theoreticist conception. The theoreticist
approach emphasizes the conditions under which human knowledge is possible, while pragmatic
approaches focus on intelligent collaboration in shaping ways to alter human reality.

Historical Context:

The theoreticist approach gained prominence in the 19th century and carried into the 20th
century with the linguistic turn, which problematized and continued the theoreticist approach.

Richard Rorty's Contributions:

Richard Rorty highlighted the tensions within the linguistic turn in his 1967 "Introduction" to
The Linguistic Turn and further elaborated on these tensions in his later works. Rorty's
contributions often center around the ambivalences he identified within the linguistic turn:

1. First Ambivalence: The Status of the Linguistic Method

o Logical empiricists viewed logical syntax as neutral, whereas ideal and ordinary
language philosophers saw meaning as relative to ideal languages or languages-
in-use.
2. Second Ambivalence: The Goal of the Linguistic Method
o Some philosophers saw linguistic reformulation as a constructive solution to
philosophical problems, while others viewed it as a therapeutic dissolution.
3. Third Ambivalence: Metaphilosophical Presuppositions
o Despite the belief in the reliability of the linguistic method for analyzing
philosophical problems, some positions within the linguistic turn challenged this
presupposition and its associated dogmas.

Pragmatization Movement:

The pragmatic twist in the linguistic turn involves a shift in analytic philosophy during the
second half of the 20th century. This movement questions the theoretical foundations and
emphasizes practical consequences and applications.

Rorty's Later Work:

Rorty’s later works focus on critiquing distinctions between different classes of sentences, as
seen in the "Wittgenstein-Sellars-Quine-Davidson attack." These critiques further the pragmatic
approach by challenging the theoretical underpinnings of linguistic analysis.

Current Debate: Representationalism vs. Antirepresentationalism:

Rorty’s confrontation with philosophers like John McDowell and Robert Brandom explores the
socio-political implications of the debate between representationalism (the idea that language
represents reality) and antirepresentationalism (the idea that language serves pragmatic purposes
rather than mirroring reality).

Wittgenstein, Quine, and Sellars:

Analyzing the contributions of Wittgenstein, Quine, and Sellars within the framework of the
second ambivalence of the linguistic turn reveals complex tensions and transformative
potentialities:

1. Wittgenstein's Dual Philosophical Positions:

o Early Wittgenstein (Tractatus): Adopted a logicist position, claiming to have
solved essential philosophical problems through logical analysis.
o Late Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations): Shifted to a use-theoretic view,
focusing on the therapeutic dissolution of philosophical problems rather than their
logical resolution.
2. Sellars and Quine: Therapeutic and Transformative Elements:
o Sellars: Challenged the distinction between the empirically given and the
conceptually postulated.
o Quine: Dismantled the synthetic-contingent/analytic-necessary distinction and
questioned the separation between science and philosophy.

Transformative Philosophy:

Sellars and Quine exhibited weak transformative traits by advocating for a naturalistic discourse
within the existing disciplinary matrix of philosophy. However, Rorty envisioned a stronger
transformative philosophy aimed at changing common-sense knowledge practices:

1. Sellars' Holistic Approach:

o Envisioned a holistic philosophy analyzing relational dependencies across
everyday, scientific, and philosophical discourse.
2. Quine's Naturalized Epistemology:
o Promoted a naturalized epistemology where philosophy merges with psychology
and linguistics, dissolving traditional boundaries between philosophy and science.

Davidson and Rorty: Overcoming the Second Ambivalence:

Davidson's transformative philosophy redefined philosophical activity, moving beyond

traditional epistemological concerns. Rorty aligned with Davidson but pushed further towards a
transformative conception of philosophy:

1. Davidson's Holistic Coherence Theory and Critique of Scheme-Content Dualism:

o Critiqued the dualism of scheme and content, arguing against the separation of
language and reality.
2. Rorty's Transformative Pragmatism:
o Advocated for a philosophical activity aimed at changing socio-political practices
rather than purely theoretical analysis.

Differences between Davidson and Rorty:

Davidson focused on descriptive observation of natural languages within a theoretical
framework, while Rorty proposed a broader, transformative role for philosophy aimed at socio-
political change.

Conclusion:

Davidson and Rorty both contributed significantly to the pragmatic vocabulary of philosophy,
yet their approaches differed in scope and application. Davidson emphasized a naturalistic and
empirical analysis of language, whereas Rorty advocated for a philosophy that focused on socio-
political goals and transformative practices. This distinction marks a pivotal point in
contemporary philosophical thought, reflecting the ongoing evolution of the linguistic turn and
its implications for both theoretical and practical philosophy.

8. Rorty's Interpretation of the Linguistic Turn:

o Rorty suggests in Consequences of Pragmatism that the linguistic turn, originally
motivated by logical positivism to avoid Kantian issues of 'experience' or
'consciousness,' evolved through the contributions of Wittgenstein, Sellars, Quine,
and Davidson.
o These philosophers moved analytic philosophy beyond its initial Kantian motives
toward a naturalistic and behavioristic perspective on language.
9. The Pragmaticization of Analytic Philosophy:
o Rorty introduces the term 'pragmaticization' to describe the shift in analytic
philosophy towards a pragmatic, naturalistic, and behavioristic understanding of
language.
o This shift signifies a move away from traditional theoretical concerns to a focus
on practical and empirical aspects of linguistic behavior.
10. Terminological Clarifications:
o Rorty differentiates his use of 'pragmatism' from formal or quasi-transcendental
pragmatics associated with ordinary language philosophy.
o He emphasizes a naturalistic and behavioristic interpretation, where philosophy
aligns with empirical sciences and common sense.
11. Misunderstandings and Clarifications:
o Rorty's idea of pragmatic naturalization has been misunderstood as advocating for
the dissolution of philosophy. However, he argues that philosophy should end its
adherence to traditional theoretical problems and adopt a new, practical
orientation.
o He envisions philosophy collaborating with sciences, arts, and technology,
developing a pragmatic vocabulary that emphasizes practical, normative feedback
rather than foundational analysis.
12. Transformative Nature of Pragmatic Philosophy:
o Rorty’s pragmatic philosophy is transformative, not just transitional. It redefines
philosophical inquiry as a transformative activity aimed at changing common-
sense knowledge practices.
o This transformative aspect is seen in three ways:
 As a transition within the tradition of philosophical research.
 As a fundamental change in the activity of philosophical research itself.
 As an activity focused on experimental transformation of common sense
and development of new knowledge practices.