Rorty through and with Putnam: a viable antifoundationalism

Abstract

The article attempts to clarify the main issues underlying the debate between Richard Rorty and Hilary Putnam, with a view to showing how it is possible to see emerging from it a viable anti-foundationalist conception of normativity capable to eschew the corrosive pitfalls of radical scepticism and relativism. It is argued that this conception is centred on three key distinctions: between a physical and grammatical sense of the impossibility of foundationalism; between a view of the universalistic aspirations of normativity as grounds for our normative judgments as opposed to their scope; and between a view of the transcendent aspirations of normativity as self-transcendence as opposed to self-reflexivity.