Rorty

I just read that Richard Rorty passed away a few days ago. I never took a class from him, but he was the stuff of legend. He was a philosopher, but professor emeritus of comparative literature (and only of philosophy by courtesy). Rumor has it this was because his work tried to undermine analytic philosophy, and analytic philosophers (which make up departments of philosophy) were so infuriated they wouldn't let him join the department. He argued (and I concede I have never read his major works) that we cannot faithfully represent a mind-independent external reality. This really hamstrings epistemology (the scope and nature of belief and knowledge). He argued that the truth of propositions has nothing to do with their correspondence to facts; meaning and truth are purely socio-linguistic products. Something is "true" because its truth works in our society, not because it is "objectively" true. This has huge implications about philosophy and science; we can never describe the fundamental nature of the world, and it would be incorrect to think that our philosophical and scientific theories do so. I happen to think Rorty is simply mistaken, but philosophy is built on intellectual debate. He, Wittgenstein, Kuhn, and a host of other great thinkers have really helped me figure out what I think about truth, science, and analytic thinking.