The following is the summary of the
article:
Stanislaus Swamikannu. “A Postmodern Response to the
Relativism Debate,” Divyadaan: Journal of
Philosophy and Education 19, no.1-2 (2008): 193-211.
Self-questioning or self-criticism is considered to
be hallmark of philosophy. However, this act itself could cause the recent
phenomenon in philosophy called ‘end of philosophy’. On the one hand,
philosophers who deem philosophy as natural kind take this phenomenon as a part
of philosophical tradition where there is no complete rupture since the
tradition remains. On the other hand, philosophers who consider it as a
historical product regard it as a crisis and a failure. This article gives few
salient notions of the end of philosophy incorporating both the views
highlighting the postmodern philosophical approach.
The
end of philosophy can be spoken in terms of skepticism. This idea might have
its origin in the ancient Greek philosophy itself. Against the platonic
philosophy that was characterized by the desire for totalizing foundationalism,
Pyrrhonian skepticism was raised. While platonic philosophy provided a link
between contingent human reality and eternal divine realm, pyrrhonian skepticism
showed that there is always a room for objections and difficulties in any
philosophical position.
The same
procedure was repeated in the modern Western philosophy. The
epistemology-centered philosophy was epitomized by Descartes, Kant and Husserl
through the quest for indubitable foundation or the privileged starting point
of reality. Richard Rorty says that it was the hidden agenda since Plato.
According to Rorty, the whole epistemological activity is only the
representation of the mind which acts as a mirror. He says that the modern Western
philosophers were only trying to polish the mirror with various ideologies.
These philosophers searched for a more scientific, rational and deeper position
whereas Rorty trivialized the onus of philosopher as only to carry the
philosophical enterprise to the future than to find the key to all the problems
of philosophy. Taking inspiration from Dewey and James, he gives a pragmatic
intent to philosophy that one can quit philosophy at any moment.
Another aspect of the end of philosophy is the
paradigm shift from philosophy of consciousness to the philosophy of language;
from transcendental subjectivity to grammatical structure which is known as the
linguistic turn. It is farewell to the subject-centered philosophy and a
departure from the idea of language as mere instrument. Rorty gives a different
orientation to linguistic philosophy i.e. solving the philosophical problems by
reforming the language or understanding the language we use.
In this major turn of the philosophy of language,
there are three turns involved namely analytical philosophy, pragmatic turn and
rhetoric turn. Firstly, the analytical
philosophy played a role in solving the problems of the ordinary sentences with
the help of formal logic. It was held that by analyzing the structure of the
language one can find the structure of the reality as language is regarded as
the mirror of reality. But soon this revolution also faced a
counter-revolution. There was a division between the Ideal Language philosophy (that became the constructing model for
other types) and Ordinary Language
philosophy (in common people’s language where there is no philosophical problem).
The ideal language philosophy, according to Rorty, can only describe the
logical behaviour of the linguistic expression and in practice it was not shown
fruitful. Rorty concludes that analytical philosophy is only the beginning of
the epistemological problems.
Secondly, the idea of the pragmatic turn was
explained by Habermas. He explains the limitation of semanticism that
concentrates only on analysis and neglected linguistic context, speech etc. and
the structured semiotics where there is an over-emphasis on anonymous structure
in language. In contrast to this view, Habermas suggests pragmatic turn in
linguistic philosophy that aimed at weakening the logo-centric claim in Western
metaphysical tradition. This weakening consists not in autonomous subject but
in intersubjective communication towards mutual understanding. It is to bring
language from the private sphere (private language) to public sphere
(multi-contexts of use). It brings the neglected aspects of the linguistic
tradition into the formal analysis.
Thirdly, the importance is given to rhetoric over
logic. The philosophy of language in the West was based on logic than rhetoric.
It is due to the importance given to the study of logic and mathematics. On the
contrary, Derrida proposed rhetoric over logic in philosophy of language. This
notion of Derrida makes every text as secondary as it implies no original
meaning to it. According to him, formula and context are meaningful only in
convention; one cannot exhaust the context and contexts are changeable.
Consequently, there is no such distinction like original-imitation, literal-figural,
real-metaphoric, true-false, and reality-appearance. Thus relativism is the
only way in interpreting a text according to the different strands of the
linguistic turn explained in this article. This relativism brings the end of
philosophy and the end of metaphysical tradition of the West.