Various forms of relativism, sometimes under the label of "postmodernism", have attacked the idea of rationlaity as such. Rationality is supposed to be essentially oppressive, hegemonic, culturally relative, etc. ... I am as appalled as anyone by these attacks, but I do not bother to answer them because I do not believe they can even be made intelligible. For example, I have sometimes been challenged, "What is your argument for rationality"--a nonsensical challenge, because the notion of "argument" presupposes standard of rationality. This book is not a defense of rationality, because the idea of a "defense" in the form of argument, reasons. presupposes constraints of rationality, and hence the demand for such a defense is nonsensical. ... One can intelligibly debate theories of rationality, but not rationality.
(John Searle, Rationality in Action, xiii-xiv)
(John Searle, Rationality in Action, xiii-xiv)
'철학이야기' 카테고리의 다른 글
What Is Naturalism? (0) | 2011.09.19 |
---|---|
Why I Am a Naturalist (0) | 2011.09.19 |
다윈의 진화론에 대한 두 가지 평가 (0) | 2011.08.26 |
분석철학이란 무엇인가? (0) | 2011.08.26 |
Bryan Magee's Old TV Interviews with Philosophers (0) | 2011.05.29 |