This book claims that "the world" cannot decide whether Newtonian physics is superior to Aristotelian,and that Foucault and Habermas represent opposite and incomplete halves of a necessary personality type.The introduction to this book defines liberals as those who enjoy "whatever the outcome of an undistortedsociety might be," then notes that there is a certain class of liberals who cannot answer the question "Whynot be cruel?" The final chapter of this work addresses its last title concept as 
This book claims that "the world" cannot decide whether Newtonian physics is superior to Aristotelian,and that Foucault and Habermas represent opposite and incomplete halves of a necessary personality type.The introduction to this book defines liberals as those who enjoy "whatever the outcome of an undistortedsociety might be," then notes that there is a certain class of liberals who cannot answer the question "Whynot be cruel?" The final chapter of this work addresses its last title concept as the ability to include morepeople in "we" statements after addressing Nabokov and Orwell's shortcomings. It begins by stating that alllanguage's truth or falsehood depends on human evaluation. For 10 points, name this book offering aneo-pragmatist approach to constructing a better society, written by Richard Rorty.
This book claims that "the world" cannot decide whether Newtonian physics is superior to Aristotelian,and that Foucault and Habermas represent opposite and incomplete halves of a necessary personality type.
 Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity