I 16
Rorty thesis: knowledge has no foundations. >
Ultimate Justification.
I 163
Def recognize/Aristotle: insertion of something material into the soul.
I 167
Epistemic problem: the next two centuries of philosophical thought might have been very different if the "epistemic problem" had been formulated in the terminology of relations between propositions and their degree of certainty, rather than in the terminology of alleged components of propositions.
Kant: did not undertake the pragmatic turn. He did not talk about sentences, but but about inner ideas.
>
Kant, >
Imagination/Kant, >
Experience/Kant, >
Epistemology/Kant.
I 167
Knowledge/epistemic problem/Rorty: relations between propositions - not between components of propositions.
VsKant: then you do not need synthesis.
Kant/Rorty: he did not talk about sentences either, but about inner ideas.
I 175
Foundations/knowledge/Rorty: arguments instead foundations! - Before Locke, no one would have searched for a foundation of knowledge.
>
Recognition/Locke, >
Experience/Locke.
I 191
Def recognize/Rorty: the social justification of opinions. The contrasting of people and situations. This allows us to get rid of the mirror of nature.
I 210
Epistemology/SellarsVsEpistemology//Rorty: it confuses a theory of inner episodes with a theory about the right to make certain assertions.
I 248
Epistemology/Quine/Rorty: epistemology always wavered between two criteria: a) causal proximity to the physical stimulus - b) the focal point of consciousness.
I 249
Solution: The dilemma dissolves, if we merely speak of color spots.
>
sense data.
I 271
Rorty: there’s no way from psychology to epistemology. No way from the discovery of intermediary instances to a critique of opinions about the world. (RortyVsepistemology).
I 273
Epistemological Tradition: confused causal explanations of the acquisition of opinions with justifications of opinions.
I 278
Epistemology: can be done in an armchair, psychology cannot.
V 20f
Knowledge/Foucault/Rorty: knowledge and power can never be separated from each other.
RortyVFoucault: but these are no "rules of language".
>
Foucault, >
Recognition/Foucault.
