Saturday, September 18, 2010
As so often, someone else says it much better than I could possibly. Here is Quodlibeta:
"This is pretty speculative on her part, but leaving that aside, translation from one system to another can only be done if both are coherent. If one of them is not, then translation would be impossible, there being either nothing to translate from or nothing to translate to. Since the eliminativist's claim is that the old system is entirely corrupt, to talk about translating it into another superior system is simply incoherent."
This is what I call a coup de force de main de grace. Or, one shot/one kill. Or, flawless victory. The religion of Progress cannot possibly work in that it operates on this basic irrationality. Or rather, it cannot possibly work well, or for long, or in a truly rational mode. For what it claims is not to be a fulfillment, or perfection, of what has gone before, but an entire transcending. But, for that transcending, it must borrow the geneaology of morals from the "older narrative(s)". Every uber-mensch, from Nietzsche to Rawls to Zizek, falls afoul of this cursed necessity: they cannot dispense with the older categories, until they have "made their argument". This is to strap themselves to the ships anchor in a hurricane, and expect to float.