Talk:Neopragmatism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
I am the author both of the Wikipedia page on "Neopragmatism" and of the content at Neopragmatism.org.
Please restore the Wikipedia entry. I am the copyright holder and the owner of Neopragmatism.org.
David Hildebrand
[edit] POV + OR
All due respect, sir, but your views on what pragmatists believe aren't widely held. Neopragmatism is not fundamentally a linguistic thesis. I must remember to come back and fix this article at some future date. KSchutte 20:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
- Pragmatism isn't Neopragmatism. Neopragmatism is a very broad characterization, and Hildebrand's thesis about it being a return to the theoretical/linguistic approach is well-documented if probably not applicable to all neopragmatism (I mean, finding a common denominator for later Rorty and Quine is nigh impossible, except that they are both influenced by pragmatism but diverge from it - hence 'neo'). So, in my opinion, this article does need to be expanded and nuanced, but the information that is available now is not in any way fundamentally wrong as far as I can see. It is just very limited. By the way, Hildebrand's views in Beyond Realism & Anti-Realism are actually way more complete than what he presents here. Stdbrouw 02:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
