{"id":4147,"date":"2017-11-29T12:32:20","date_gmt":"2017-11-29T10:32:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/?p=4147"},"modified":"2025-01-10T12:39:37","modified_gmt":"2025-01-10T10:39:37","slug":"shume-vlera-jotoleranca-antirelativizmi-dhe-richard-rorty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/kritike\/shume-vlera-jotoleranca-antirelativizmi-dhe-richard-rorty\/","title":{"rendered":"Shum\u00eb vlera? Jotoleranca, antirelativizmi dhe Richard Rorty"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

N\u00eb nj\u00eb bot\u00eb ku racizmi dhe jotoleranca jan\u00eb n\u00eb ngritje, a mundet q\u00eb relativzmi t\u00eb na udh\u00ebzoj\u00eb drejt nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrie m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb? Ana Sandoiu eksploron filozofin\u00eb e Richard Rortyt, r\u00ebnd\u00ebsin\u00eb e empatis\u00eb dhe vler\u00ebn e relativizmit.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
<\/div>\n
\n
<\/div>\n
\n

T\u00eb besosh me siguri absolute se ti, dhe t\u00eb tjer\u00ebt si ti, kan\u00eb t\u00eb drejt\u00eb, p\u00ebrderisa \u201ct\u00eb tjer\u00ebt\u201d e kan\u00eb pakthyeshm\u00ebrisht gabim, n\u00eb rastin m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb, shkat\u00ebrron \u00e7do mund\u00ebsi p\u00ebr dialog dhe vet\u00ebp\u00ebrmir\u00ebsim. N\u00eb rastin m\u00eb t\u00eb keq, kjo mund t\u00eb sjell\u00eb shp\u00ebrb\u00ebrjen e shoq\u00ebris\u00eb, dhe t\u00eb rr\u00ebnoj\u00eb komunitete t\u00eb t\u00ebra. T\u00eb krishter\u00ebt kund\u00ebr mysliman\u00ebve, ateist\u00ebt kund\u00ebr teist\u00ebve, liberal\u00ebt kund\u00ebr konservator\u00ebve \u00a0– mend\u00ebsia e \u201cne kund\u00ebr atyre\u201d \u00ebsht\u00eb po aq e rrezikshme, pa marr\u00eb parasysh se cil\u00ebt jemi \u201cne\u201d n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb dihotomi.<\/p>\n

P\u00ebr disa, alternativa \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrqafimi i mend\u00ebsis\u00eb s\u00eb \u201ctjetrit\u201d si di\u00e7ka t\u00eb barasvlershme me t\u00eb veten. N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb paradigm\u00eb, opinionet e ndryshme, zgjedhjet e ndryshme, dhe kulturat e ndryshme meritojn\u00eb respekt t\u00eb nj\u00ebjt\u00eb, meq\u00eb \u201cne\u201d nuk i shohim pik\u00ebpamjet tona si Absolute. P\u00ebrkundrazi, ne e kuptojm\u00eb se nocionet tona t\u00eb \u201cs\u00eb drejt\u00ebs dhe s\u00eb gabuar\u00ebs\u201d jan\u00eb ve\u00e7se konvencione q\u00eb jan\u00eb relative ndaj strukturave tona paraekzisteuse t\u00eb besimeve dhe praktikave kulturore, ambientit, dhe normave shoq\u00ebrore.<\/p>\n

Kjo pik\u00ebpamje \u2013 q\u00eb zakonisht (e shum\u00eb shpesh pezhorativisht) quhet \u201crelativiste\u201d \u2013 e pranon pluralitetin e vlerave, normave, e madje edhe nocioneve t\u00eb s\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebs dhe racionalitetit. Por a ka di\u00e7ka t\u00eb till\u00eb si tepri vlerash? A ka rreziqe n\u00eb pranimin e shum\u00eb e m\u00eb shum\u00eb pik\u00ebpamjeve t\u00eb ndryshme prej ton\u00ebs? A mundet q\u00eb progresi dhe nj\u00eb doz\u00eb e sh\u00ebndetshme e vet\u00ebkritik\u00ebs t\u00eb varroset n\u00ebn grumbullin e koncepteve, interpretimeve dhe kuptimeve q\u00eb kan\u00eb validitet t\u00eb barabart\u00eb? Dhe pse do t\u00eb duhej q\u00eb, pik\u00eb s\u00eb pari, t\u00eb braktisim nocionet e forta t\u00eb s\u00eb drejt\u00ebs dhe s\u00eb gabuar\u00ebs n\u00eb favor t\u00eb versioneve t\u00eb shumta e m\u00eb t\u00eb dob\u00ebta?<\/p>\n

Kjo ese do t\u00eb eksploroj\u00eb dhe do t\u00eb p\u00ebpiqet t\u2019i p\u00ebrgjigjet disa prej k\u00ebtyre pyetjeve duke p\u00ebrdorur korniz\u00ebn e t\u00eb ashtuquajtur\u00ebs ironi liberale t\u00eb Richard Rortyt. Nj\u00eb pragmatist i vet\u00ebdeklaruar, i cili e kaloi pjes\u00ebn m\u00eb t\u00eb madhe t\u00eb karrier\u00ebs duke refuzuar em\u00ebrtimet si \u201crelativist\u201d dhe \u201cpostmodernist\u201d, Richard argumentonte me pasion kund\u00ebr tiranis\u00eb s\u00eb dijes dhe pasojave sociale t\u00eb rrezikshme t\u00eb saj \u2013 ndarja e \u201cne kund\u00ebr atyre\u201d. Rorty inkurajonte liberal\u00ebt, intelektual\u00ebt dhe filozof\u00ebt q\u00eb t\u00eb ndalonin s\u00eb p\u00ebrdoruri nocionet e \u201cs\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebs\u201d dhe \u201cracionalitetit\u201d si terma q\u00eb nd\u00ebrprejn\u00eb bashk\u00ebbisedimin. N\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj, propozonte ai, ne do t\u00eb duhej t\u00eb p\u00ebrqendronim p\u00ebrpjekjet tona intelektuale drejt eliminimit t\u00eb mizoris\u00eb, n\u00eb krijimin e dialogut, inkurajimin e autonomis\u00eb individuale dhe nj\u00eb pluraliteti vlerash, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb poashtu nd\u00ebrtojm\u00eb solidaritet dhe komunitete sa m\u00eb gjith\u00ebp\u00ebrfshir\u00ebse.<\/p>\n

1<\/p>\n

N\u00eb librin e Richard Rortyt Kontingjenca, Ironia, dhe Solidariteti [Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity] \u00ebsht\u00eb filozofi Friedrich Nietzsche ai i cili solli n\u00eb drit\u00eb kontingjenc\u00ebn \u2013 karakterin arbitrar e aksidental \u2013 e ekzistenc\u00ebs njer\u00ebzore. P\u00ebr Rortyn, Nietzsche na \u00e7liron nga tradita platonike dhe nga p\u00ebrpjekjet e saj p\u00ebr t\u00eb gjetur Universalen, T\u00eb Domosdoshm\u00ebn, Absoluten.<\/p>\n

P\u00ebr mendimtar\u00ebt e Iluminizmit, E V\u00ebrteta arrihej p\u00ebrmes mjeteve q\u00eb i p\u00ebrdornim p\u00ebr ta kapur. Filozof\u00ebt e shekujve 17 dhe 18 e shihnin t\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebn si nj\u00eb dhurat\u00eb t\u00eb \u00e7muar q\u00eb Zoti e solli n\u00eb Tok\u00eb, nj\u00eb dhurat\u00eb q\u00eb do t\u00eb mund ta hapim duke p\u00ebrdorur arsyen q\u00eb na e ka dh\u00ebn\u00eb Zoti (me kusht q\u00eb ta p\u00ebrdorim si duhet). K\u00ebtu kishte nj\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnie t\u00eb barasvler\u00ebs s\u00eb p\u00ebrsosur mes nocionit t\u00eb t\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebs, validitetit t\u00eb saj, origjin\u00ebs s\u00eb saj, dhe udh\u00ebs drejt zbulimit t\u00eb saj.<\/p>\n

Por Nietzsche i ndryshoi t\u00eb gjitha. Antinomit\u00eb e forta q\u00eb kishin preokupuar filozof\u00ebt q\u00eb prej fillimeve t\u00eb metafizik\u00ebs, deklaronte Nietzsche, duhet t\u00eb flaken tutje. Te\u00a0P\u00ebrtej t\u00eb Mir\u00ebs dhe t\u00eb Lig\u00ebs<\/a>\u00a0[Beyond Good and Evil],\u00a0ai argumentonte se \u201cVullneti p\u00ebr t\u00eb V\u00ebrtet\u00ebn\u201d \u00ebsht\u00eb burim i t\u00eb gjitha rebuseve filozofike, rr\u00ebnj\u00eb e hutimeve tona dhe problemeve t\u00eb koklavitura epistemologjike.<\/p>\n

Nuk u kishte r\u00ebn\u00eb n\u00eb mend asnj\u00ebher\u00eb filozof\u00ebve, argumentonte Nietzsche, q\u00eb antinomit\u00eb si ato mes \u201cs\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebs\u201d dhe \u201cfalsitetit\u201d, \u201ct\u00eb mir\u00ebs\u201d dhe \u201ct\u00eb lig\u00ebs\u201d mund t\u00eb mos ekzistojn\u00eb \u201cn\u00eb realitet,\u201d por t\u00eb jen\u00eb sjell\u00eb n\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb bot\u00eb nga vet\u00eb ne. Se \u201ce liga\u201d, po ta shihnim nga nj\u00eb k\u00ebndv\u00ebshtrim tjet\u00ebr, mund t\u00eb jet\u00eb po aq e vlefshme p\u00ebr ne sa ajo q\u00eb e quajm\u00eb \u201ce mir\u00eb\u201d. Se filozofia, moraliteti, dhe aft\u00ebsia njer\u00ebzore p\u00ebr t\u00eb njohur bot\u00ebn jan\u00eb aq kontingjente saq\u00eb secili sistem metafizik s\u2019\u00ebsht\u00eb gj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr pos thjesht \u201crr\u00ebfim i autorit t\u00eb tij.\u201d Ngrehina m\u00eb madh\u00ebshtore metafizike \u00ebsht\u00eb ve\u00e7 nj\u00eb pasqyrim i r\u00ebndomt\u00eb psikologjik i krijuesit t\u00eb saj, nj\u00eb lloj mondan i \u201cautobiografis\u00eb s\u00eb pavet\u00ebdijshme e t\u00eb pavullnetshme.\u201d<\/p>\n

T\u00eb maskuar si filozof\u00eb moral\u00eb (dhe moralist\u00eb), k\u00ebta autobiograf\u00eb (vet\u00eb) mashtrues pretendojn\u00eb t\u00eb ofrojn\u00eb nj\u00eb llogari t\u00eb ndershme t\u00eb asaj se \u00e7far\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb e drejt\u00eb e \u00e7far\u00eb e gabuar. Ata g\u00ebnjejn\u00eb vetveten duke menduar se po shpalosin fakte p\u00ebr bot\u00ebn, kur n\u00eb fakt ata vet\u00ebm po shpalosin fakte p\u00ebr vetveten. Intuitat e tyre jan\u00eb t\u00eb rast\u00ebsishme, e interesat e tyre arbitrare. Fjal\u00ebt \u201ce v\u00ebrtet\u00eb\u201d dhe \u201cmir\u00eb\u201d dhe \u201ce lig\u00eb\u201d p\u00ebrdoren p\u00ebr t\u00eb arsyetuar narrativ\u00ebn e ndonj\u00eb bot\u00ebkutpimi t\u00eb posa\u00e7\u00ebm e jo ndonj\u00eb tjet\u00ebr. P\u00ebrpjekjet tona p\u00ebr t\u00eb kapur, p\u00ebr t\u00eb kuptuar, p\u00ebr t\u00eb \u201cgjetur\u201d nuk jan\u00eb asgj\u00eb pos p\u00ebrpjekje kreative p\u00ebr t\u00eb zbutur bot\u00ebn dhe p\u00ebr t\u2019ia p\u00ebrshtatur nevojave tona. Realiteti \u00ebsht\u00eb tejet shum\u00ebdimensional p\u00ebr t\u2019u p\u00ebrmbledhur me sakt\u00ebsi nga dihotomit\u00eb e pagdhendura t\u00eb filozofis\u00eb. Nietzsche na k\u00ebrkon q\u00eb t\u00eb z\u00ebvend\u00ebsojm\u00eb unitetin me pluralitet, monizmin me multiplicitet.<\/p>\n

Uniteti n\u00eb dukje i koncepteve tona t\u00eb uritura t\u00eb realitetit \u00ebsht\u00eb di\u00e7ka q\u00eb ne kemi krijuar. \u201cVetja\u201d jon\u00eb, thot\u00eb ai, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb atomon i vet\u00ebm, e i pandash\u00ebm, por nj\u00eb shum\u00ebsi instinktesh e pasionesh, shprehish e p\u00ebrvojash. \u00cbsht\u00eb gjuha ajo q\u00eb na fut n\u00eb kurth dhe na mashtron, p\u00ebrderisa gjoja uniteti i fjal\u00ebve \u201cvete\u201d, \u201ce v\u00ebrtet\u00eb\u201d, \u201ce mir\u00eb\u201d na jep iluzionin e nj\u00eb realiteti poaq homogjen e t\u00eb vet\u00ebmbyllur. Por nocionet e p\u00ebrb\u00ebra n\u00eb gjuh\u00ebn ton\u00eb jan\u00eb artefakte, konvencione, po aq arbitrare sa vet\u00eb gjuha. Njeriu \u201c\u00ebsht\u00eb shum\u00eb m\u00eb artist se \u00e7\u2019mund t\u00eb imagjinohet.\u201d<\/p>\n

N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb kontekst, filozof\u00ebt duhet t\u00eb njohin kufijt\u00eb e dijes s\u00eb tyre dhe n\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj t\u00eb p\u00ebrqafojn\u00eb rolin e tyre si krijues. Nuk ka rrug\u00eb tjet\u00ebr. Filozofi, proklamon Nietzsche, \u00ebsht\u00eb \u201ci d\u00ebnuar q\u00eb t\u00eb krijoj\u00eb.\u201d<\/p>\n

Nietzsche z\u00ebvend\u00ebson dijen me krijimin, dhe vet\u00ebnjohjen me vet\u00ebkrijimin. P\u00ebrkundrazi me Platonin, ai nuk e sheh artin si degradues, por si sh\u00eblbues. Disa kritik\u00eb e kan\u00eb quajtur \u201cetik\u00eb vet\u00ebmodeluese.\u201d\u00a0N\u00eb intepretimin q\u00eb i b\u00ebn Nietzsches<\/a>, Alexander Nehamas, mund\u00ebsia p\u00ebr t\u00eb krijuar vetveten \u00ebsht\u00eb e t\u00ebra q\u00eb na ka mbetur pas braktisjes se k\u00ebrkimit t\u00eb s\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebs. N\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb kuptim, k\u00ebrkimi p\u00ebr veten e v\u00ebrtet\u00eb duhet t\u00eb z\u00ebvend\u00ebsohet me krijimin artistik t\u00eb karakterit q\u00eb duam t\u00eb jemi. Ne b\u00ebhemi ata q\u00eb duam t\u00eb jemi p\u00ebrmes krijimit t\u00eb ligjeve t\u00eb reja p\u00ebr vetveten. \u201cT\u00eb b\u00ebh\u00ebsh ai q\u00eb je\u201d do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se identeti juaj \u00ebsht\u00eb i konstruktuar, i modeluar, m\u00eb shum\u00eb sesa i dh\u00ebn\u00eb. Individ\u00ebt unik\u00eb, t\u00eb vet\u00ebkrijuar jan\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimisht p\u00ebrtej t\u00eb mir\u00ebs dhe t\u00eb lig\u00ebs, n\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin kuptim n\u00eb t\u00eb cilin nj\u00eb personazh letrar \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrtej t\u00eb mir\u00ebs dhe t\u00eb lig\u00ebs.<\/p>\n

Ballafaqimi me kontingjenc\u00ebn q\u00eb i karakterizon vetet tona ngjiz nevoj\u00ebn p\u00ebr nj\u00eb gjuh\u00eb t\u00eb re: vokabular\u00eb t\u00eb rinj p\u00ebr vet\u00ebp\u00ebrshkrim. Pas Nietzsches, askush m\u00eb nuk ka t\u00eb drejt\u00eb q\u00eb t\u00eb t\u00eb p\u00ebrkufizoj\u00eb se kush je, por ti vet\u00eb je i zoti dhe krijuesi i vet\u00ebm i individualitetit t\u00ebnd.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb leximin e Rortyt, Nietzscheja na nxit q\u00eb t\u00eb braktisim k\u00ebrkimin e s\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebs absolute dhe n\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebsaj t\u00eb shpikim multiplicitete narrativash t\u00eb reja t\u00eb vet\u00ebp\u00ebrshkrimit. P\u00ebr Rortyn, kontingjenca e pranuar s\u00eb pari nga Nietzscheja, sjell liri. Nj\u00eb multiplicitet vlerash do t\u00eb thot\u00eb \u00e7lirim nga autoritarizmi i arsyes i Iluminizmit.<\/p>\n

2<\/p>\n

Trash\u00ebgimia tiranike e Iluminizmit p\u00ebr t\u00eb cil\u00ebn flet Rorty p\u00ebrfshin nj\u00eb fiksim me at\u00eb se \u00e7\u2019do t\u00eb thot\u00eb t\u00eb jesh njeri, nj\u00eb admirim suprem p\u00ebr pushtetin e arsyes, dhe disa prej dihotomive helmuese q\u00eb rrjedhin nga k\u00ebto. N\u00eb fakt, rr\u00ebnj\u00ebt e disa prej problemeve mund t\u00eb gjurmohen edhe me her\u00ebt te Greqia e Lasht\u00eb, q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb arsyeja pse Rorty i ka dedikuar nj\u00eb pjes\u00eb t\u00eb madhe t\u00eb karrier\u00ebs s\u00eb tij denoncimit t\u00eb asaj q\u00eb e quan \u201csekuenc\u00eb t\u00eb kanonit Platon-Kant.\u201d<\/p>\n

Ne duhet t\u00eb braktisim pyetjet si \u201c\u00e7\u2019do t\u00eb thot\u00eb t\u00eb jesh njeri?\u201d sepse historikisht, p\u00ebrkufizimet e njer\u00ebzimit kan\u00eb sjell\u00eb ve\u00e7 segregim, diskriminim, dhe arsyetim t\u00eb mizoris\u00eb. \u00c7do her\u00eb kur kemi b\u00ebr\u00eb krime t\u00eb m\u00ebdha ndaj t\u00eb tjer\u00ebve, ne i kemi b\u00ebr\u00eb n\u00ebn pretekstin se viktimat tona nuk jan\u00eb njer\u00ebzore. Aparteidet racore, gjenocidet, dhe luft\u00ebrat e dhunshme, q\u00eb t\u00eb gjitha jan\u00eb mb\u00ebshtetur n\u00eb dehumanizimin e viktimave t\u00eb tyre. Diskurse t\u00eb tilla t\u00eb pasura me metafora e krahasime kafsh\u00ebsh kan\u00eb qen\u00eb dhe do t\u00eb jen\u00eb t\u00eb suksesshme sepse kultura jon\u00eb bazohet n\u00eb dallime aq t\u00eb rrepta mes njeriut dhe kafsh\u00ebs. Rorty na shtyn q\u00eb t\u00eb braktisim k\u00ebt\u00eb dihotomi, sepse pragmatikisht nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb e mir\u00eb p\u00ebr ne, dhe merr sugjerim nga narrativa darviniane q\u00eb na tregon se njer\u00ebzit nuk jan\u00eb thelb\u00ebsisht t\u00eb ndrysh\u00ebm prej njer\u00ebzve. P\u00ebrkundrazi, dallimi \u00ebsht\u00eb thjesht dallim shkalle, p\u00ebrderisa njer\u00ebzit jan\u00eb ve\u00e7se kafsh\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb nd\u00ebrlikuara dhe m\u00eb t\u00eb sofistikuara.<\/p>\n

Dihotomia \u201cracionale-joracionale\u201d, bashk\u00eb me konkluzionet e saj, \u00ebsht\u00eb poashtu fajtore p\u00ebr plot mizori t\u00eb shkaktuara. N\u00eb esen\u00eb e tij \u201cT\u00eb drejta e njeriut, racionaliteti, dhe sentimentaliteti<\/a>\u201d[Human Rights, Rationality, and Sentimentality], Rorty fillon me nj\u00eb raport lufte nga Bosnja, q\u00eb p\u00ebrkshkruan krimet e tmerrshme t\u00eb serb\u00ebve n\u00eb luft\u00ebn e tyre kund\u00ebr mysliman\u00ebve. Tema e \u00e7njer\u00ebzimit [dehumanizimit] \u00ebsht\u00eb e kudondodhshme, dhe vras\u00ebsit e p\u00ebrdhunuesit nuk mendojn\u00eb se po b\u00ebhen mizor\u00eb ndaj qenieve t\u00eb tjera njer\u00ebzore. P\u00ebr ta, armiku \u00ebsht\u00eb vet\u00ebm pseudo-njer\u00ebzor. N\u00eb luft\u00eb, kampet e armikut e b\u00ebjn\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjtin dallim q\u00eb luft\u00ebtar\u00ebt e Kryq\u00ebzat\u00ebs kishin b\u00ebr\u00eb mes njer\u00ebzve dhe \u201cqenve t\u00eb pafe\u201d. Po e nj\u00ebjta dihotomi mund t\u00eb shpjegoj\u00eb pse dikush aq i ndri\u00e7uar si Thomas Jefferson do t\u00eb shkruante Deklarat\u00ebn e Pavar\u00ebsis\u00eb \u2013 q\u00eb proklamonte se \u201ct\u00eb gjith\u00eb njer\u00ebzit jan\u00eb krijuar t\u00eb barabart\u00eb\u201d \u2013 p\u00ebrderisa n\u00eb t\u00eb nj\u00ebjt\u00ebn koh\u00eb posedonte skllev\u00ebr. Jeffersoni qe n\u00eb gjendje t\u00eb shtypte t\u00eb drejtat e njeriut t\u00eb zezak\u00ebve sepse ai e kishte bindur vetveten q\u00eb zezak\u00ebt nuk ishin plot\u00ebsisht njer\u00ebzor\u00eb. Te\u00a0Sh\u00ebnime mbi Shtetin e Virgjinias<\/a>\u00a0[Notes on the State of Virginia]), \u00a0Jefferson dokumenton sjelljen e zezak\u00ebve dhe i p\u00ebrshkruan me nj\u00eb ton t\u00eb shkujdesur, e v\u00ebzhgues sikur t\u00eb nj\u00eb shkenc\u00ebtari q\u00eb p\u00ebrshkruan specie t\u00eb ndryshme. Mendja e nj\u00eb zezaku, thot\u00eb ai, \u00ebsht\u00eb si e kafsh\u00ebve, \u201cka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb m\u00eb shum\u00eb me ndjenjat se me t\u00eb menduarit.\u201d<\/p>\n

Dallimi kafsh\u00eb-njeri \u00ebsht\u00eb vet\u00ebm nj\u00ebra nga tri m\u00ebnyrat n\u00eb t\u00eb cilat \u201cnjer\u00ebzit paradigmatik\u201d (zakonisht shtyp\u00ebsit) dallojn\u00eb vetveten nga ata q\u00eb Rorty, n\u00eb Kontingjenca, Ironia, dhe Solidariteti, i quan \u201craste kufitare\u201d [borderline cases]. M\u00ebnyra e dyt\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb thirrja n\u00eb dallimin t\u00eb rritur-f\u00ebmij\u00eb, q\u00eb shpesh p\u00ebrdoret p\u00ebr t\u00eb shtypur \u00a0\u201ct\u00eb paedukuarit\u201d, t\u00eb padijshmit, apo bestyt\u00ebt. K\u00ebta njer\u00ebz do t\u00eb b\u00ebhen v\u00ebrtet njer\u00ebz, thon\u00eb shtyp\u00ebsit, vet\u00ebm n\u00ebse marrin edukimin e duhur. Historikisht, afro-amerikan\u00ebt jan\u00eb margjinalizuar dhe f\u00ebminizuar [infantilizuar], q\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb arsyeja se pse ishte e zakonshme t\u2019u drejtoheshe meshkujve zezak\u00eb me \u201cdjalosh,\u201d pa marr\u00eb parasysh mosh\u00ebn e tyre. Grat\u00eb gjithnj\u00eb infantilizohen nga burrat, dhe mohimi q\u00eb u b\u00ebhet grave p\u00ebr t\u00eb arritur n\u00eb pozita t\u00eb pushtetit, b\u00ebhet n\u00ebn pretekstin se ato jan\u00eb p\u00ebrgjithnj\u00eb f\u00ebminore. M\u00ebnyra e tret\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb dalluar njer\u00ebzit nga pseudo-njer\u00ebzit \u00ebsht\u00eb \u201cburr\u00eb kund\u00ebr grua\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u00cbsht\u00eb koha q\u00eb t\u00eb braktisen pyetjet si \u201c\u00e7\u2019\u00ebsht\u00eb njeriu?\u201d dhe \u201c\u00e7\u2019\u00ebsht\u00eb e v\u00ebrteta?\u201d dhe n\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebtyre t\u00eb p\u00ebrqendrohemi n\u00eb t\u00eb pyeturit se \u201csi mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrgatisim nj\u00eb bot\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb p\u00ebr nip\u00ebrit e mbesat tona?\u201d. Koha p\u00ebr t\u00eb braktisur k\u00ebrkimin e T\u00eb Mir\u00ebs dhe T\u00eb V\u00ebrtet\u00ebs, dhe n\u00eb vend t\u00eb k\u00ebtyre t\u00eb fillojm\u00eb s\u00eb krijuari \u201ct\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebn\u201d dhe \u201ct\u00eb mir\u00ebn.\u201d Koh\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb z\u00ebvend\u00ebsuar pyetjen \u201c\u00e7\u2019\u00ebsht\u00eb natyra?\u201d me \u201c\u00e7\u2019mund t\u00eb b\u00ebjm\u00eb me vetet tona?\u201d.<\/p>\n

At\u00ebher\u00eb \u00e7\u2019mund t\u00eb b\u00ebjm\u00eb me vetet tona? Si mund ta b\u00ebjm\u00eb nj\u00eb bot\u00eb m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb p\u00ebr nip\u00ebrit e mbesat tona? K\u00ebto jan\u00eb pyetje p\u00ebr t\u00eb cilat let\u00ebrsia, artet, antropologjia, e shkenca t\u00eb tjera humane jan\u00eb po aq, p\u00ebr t\u00eb mos th\u00ebn\u00eb m\u00eb mir\u00eb t\u00eb pajisura sesa filozofia. P\u00ebrpjekja p\u00ebr t\u00eb tejkaluar kontingjenc\u00ebn p\u00ebrmes universalizimit t\u00eb nocioneve t\u00eb \u201cs\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebs\u201d, \u201cracionaliteti,\u201d dhe \u201cnjer\u00ebzimit\u201d do t\u00eb duhej t\u00eb braktiseshin dhe, n\u00eb vendin e tyre, ne do t\u00eb duhej t\u00eb p\u00ebrqafojm\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekjet p\u00ebr vet\u00ebkrijim q\u00eb i p\u00ebrkasin artit e poezis\u00eb.<\/p>\n

Shoq\u00ebria ideale e liberale akomodon nj\u00eb shum\u00ebllojshm\u00ebri t\u00eb pakufi fjalor\u00ebsh individual\u00eb t\u00eb vet\u00ebp\u00ebrshkrimit. Shoq\u00ebria ideale lejon jo vet\u00ebm secilin komunitet, kulturor apo jo, q\u00eb t\u00eb jetoj\u00eb n\u00eb baz\u00eb t\u00eb ligjeve t\u00eb veta, por edhe secilin individ. Ve\u00e7antia, autonomia, dhe liria p\u00ebr t\u00eb krijuar vetveten dhe disa prej shtyllave t\u00eb nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrie ideale, si\u00e7 e parashikon Rorty.<\/p>\n

Edhe vet\u00eb pluralizmi i tij funksionon n\u00eb shum\u00eb nivele. Aty \u00ebsht\u00eb pluraliteti i vetes, pluraliteti i vlerave autonome q\u00eb propagohen nga individ\u00eb postni\u00e7ean\u00eb e t\u00eb vet\u00ebmodeluar, pluraliteti i hap\u00ebsirave q\u00eb mund t\u00eb ofrojn\u00eb zgjidhje ndaj problemeve sociale, dhe pluraliteti i fjalor\u00ebve, vet\u00ebp\u00ebrshkrimeve, dhe narrativave t\u00eb disponueshme.<\/p>\n

3<\/p>\n

Por n\u00ebse e pranojm\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb num\u00ebr n\u00eb dukje t\u00eb pafund vlerash, a ka ndonj\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb ditur se kur ne ose kultura jon\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb moralisht e c\u00ebnuar? N\u00ebse t\u00eb gjitha projektet e vet\u00ebmodelimit etik jan\u00eb nj\u00ebjt\u00eb t\u00eb pranueshme, si do t\u00eb mund t\u00eb p\u00ebrmir\u00ebsoheshim? A nuk e eliminon relativizmi i Rortyt \u00e7do mund\u00ebsi t\u00eb vet\u00ebkritik\u00ebs, vet\u00ebreform\u00ebs, dhe progresit?<\/p>\n

Antirelativist\u00ebt frik\u00ebsohen se t\u00eb pranuarit e shum\u00eb vlerave do t\u00eb \u00e7oj\u00eb n\u00eb nj\u00eb lloj entropie vlerash, apo si\u00e7 e ka th\u00ebn\u00eb Clifford Geertz: \u201cnj\u00eb vdekje t\u00eb mendjes nga nxeht\u00ebsia\u201d. P\u00ebr antirelativist\u00ebt, t\u00eb \u00e7muarit dhe akomodimi i barabart\u00eb i vlerave do t\u00eb thot\u00eb se do t\u00eb ishte e pamundur t\u00eb dallosh t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn nga e gabuara dhe t\u00eb r\u00ebnd\u00ebsishmen prej t\u00eb par\u00ebnd\u00ebsishmes. P\u00ebr kritik\u00ebt, relativizmi \u00ebsht\u00eb asgj\u00ebsim i vet\u00eb gjykimit.<\/p>\n

P\u00ebr disa prej tyre, ai \u00ebsht\u00eb madje edhe asgj\u00ebsim i njer\u00ebzimit. Filozofi Ian Jarvie shkruan se \u201cme kufizimin e vler\u00ebsimit kritik t\u00eb pun\u00ebve njer\u00ebzore, [relativizmi] na \u00e7armatos, na \u00e7njer\u00ebzon, na l\u00eb t\u00eb paaft\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u2019iu futur nd\u00ebrveprimit komunikativ; me fjal\u00eb t\u00eb tjera, t\u00eb paaft\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb kritikuar nd\u00ebrmjet kulturave, nd\u00ebrmjet subkulturave\u201d. Alan Bloom, n\u00eb bestsellerin e tij t\u00eb famsh\u00ebm, Mbyllja e Mendjes Amerikane [The Closing of the American Mind], shkruan poashtu se \u201ct\u00eb jetosh, t\u00eb kesh \u00e7far\u00ebdo substance t\u00eb brendshme, njeriu duhet t\u00eb ket\u00eb vlera, duhet t\u00eb p\u00ebrkushtohet, apo t\u00eb angazhohet [engage].\u201d Ky angazhim \u00ebsht\u00eb shpesh nd\u00ebrluftues p\u00ebr nga natyra, por p\u00ebr Bloomin, nj\u00eb konflikt i vlerave hard-minded \u00ebsht\u00eb m\u00eb \u201ci natyrsh\u00ebm\u201d, m\u00eb \u201cnjer\u00ebzor\u201d, dhe me m\u00eb shum\u00eb gjas\u00eb q\u00eb t\u00eb \u00e7oj\u00eb drejt p\u00ebrparimit sesa toleranca e pashpirtshme dhe sip\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsore q\u00eb shp\u00ebrfaqin relativist\u00ebt.<\/p>\n

Relativizmi kupton gjith\u00e7ka, dhe me t\u00eb kuptuarit vjen pranimi. Rezultati do t\u00eb ishte stagnimi moral, apo madje edhe regresi. Pluralizmi i vlerave q\u00eb p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebson lirin\u00eb p\u00ebr Rortyn \u00ebsht\u00eb kulmi i vet\u00ebk\u00ebnaqsis\u00eb p\u00ebr disa prej kritik\u00ebve. Relativizmi \u00ebsht\u00eb doktrina e \u201cgjith\u00e7ka b\u00ebn.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cGjith\u00e7ka b\u00ebn\u201d mund t\u00eb n\u00ebnkuptoj\u00eb toleranc\u00eb dhe hapje t\u00eb tepruar. P\u00ebr dik\u00eb si Alan Bloom, kjo mundet q\u00eb paradoksalisht t\u00eb p\u00ebrfundoj\u00eb s\u00eb ngushtuari aft\u00ebsit\u00eb tona intelektuale. Nj\u00eb tepri e vlerave tona morale e kulturore dhe nj\u00eb kuptim\u00ebsi absolute e t\u00eb gjitha kulturave minon t\u00eb menduarit kritik. P\u00ebr Bloomin, nj\u00eb \u201ckultur\u00eb\u201d \u00ebsht\u00eb, p\u00ebr nga vet\u00eb p\u00ebrkufizimi i saj, agresive. Nj\u00eb kultur\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb \u201cnj\u00eb luft\u00eb kund\u00ebr kaosit, dhe nj\u00eb luft\u00eb kund\u00ebr kulturave tjera.\u201d Ky tension duhet t\u00eb pranohet dhe t\u00eb g\u00ebzohet, meq\u00eb shkrep diskutime t\u00eb frytshme e kontradiktore. Por nj\u00eb zjarr i till\u00eb mund t\u00eb mbahet vet\u00ebm n\u00ebse vazhdojm\u00eb t\u00eb synojm\u00eb nocione t\u00eb forta t\u00eb s\u00eb v\u00ebrtet\u00ebs. P\u00ebr Bloomin, komunikimi nd\u00ebrkulturor \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb mit: \u201cKulturat b\u00ebjn\u00eb luft\u00ebra kund\u00ebr nj\u00ebra tjetr\u00ebs. Ato duhet ta b\u00ebjn\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb sepse vlerat mund t\u00eb pohohen apo t\u00eb shpallen vet\u00ebm duke mposhtur t\u00eb tjer\u00ebt, e jo duke arsyetuar me ta. Kulturat kan\u00eb p\u00ebrceptime t\u00eb ndryshme, q\u00eb e p\u00ebrcaktojn\u00eb at\u00eb se \u00e7far\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb bota. Ato nuk mund t\u00eb pajtohen me nj\u00ebra tjetr\u00ebn. Nuk ka komunikim rreth gj\u00ebrave m\u00eb t\u00eb larta.\u201d<\/p>\n

Rorty, n\u00eb an\u00ebn tjet\u00ebr, do t\u00eb donte t\u2019i hiqte qafe fare k\u00ebto \u201cgj\u00ebrat m\u00eb t\u00eb larta\u201d. Antirelativist\u00ebt frik\u00ebsohen se tepria e vlerave morale mund t\u00eb asgj\u00ebsoj\u00eb \u201cgjykimet\u201d tona e madje edhe \u201cnjer\u00ebzin\u00eb\u201d ton\u00eb, por Rortyt, pik\u00eb s\u00eb pari, k\u00ebto nocione i duken t\u00eb rrezikshme. Kritik\u00ebt brengosen se argumentet e nj\u00ebjta relativiste mund t\u00eb b\u00ebh\u00ebn p\u00ebr t\u00eb mb\u00ebshtetur pik\u00ebpamje kontradiktore, por Rorty mendon se argumentet do t\u00eb duhej t\u00eb flaken tutje poashtu. E \u00e7far\u00eb, at\u00ebher\u00eb, do t\u00eb vendosej n\u00eb vendin e tyre?<\/p>\n

4<\/p>\n

Nj\u00eb nga sfidat m\u00eb t\u00eb m\u00ebdha p\u00ebr Rortyn \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrshkrimi sesi mundet q\u00eb individ\u00ebve t\u2019u jepet nj\u00eb liri e plot\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u2019u b\u00ebr\u00eb \u00e7far\u00eb duan t\u00eb jen\u00eb pa shkelur mbi mir\u00ebqenien e njer\u00ebzve t\u00eb tjer\u00eb. Dhe sesi t\u00eb pasurit e nj\u00eb pluraliteti vlerash n\u00eb dukje t\u00eb pafund, \u00ebsht\u00eb i mir\u00eb p\u00ebr progresin.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb \u201cutopin\u00eb liberale\u201d t\u00eb Rortyt, projektet private t\u00eb vet\u00ebkrijimit nuk do t\u00eb duhej q\u00eb t\u00eb zhvendoseshin n\u00eb sfer\u00ebn publike. N\u00eb fakt, ato do t\u00eb duhej t\u00eb mbahen t\u00ebr\u00ebsisht t\u00eb ndara, meq\u00eb adaptimi i utopive t\u00eb tilla individuale n\u00eb politika publike \u00ebsht\u00eb ajo \u00e7far\u00eb historikisht ka sjell\u00eb projektet e tmerrshme t\u00eb spastrimit etnik apo konfiskimet e dhunshme t\u00eb pronave dhe shkeljet e t\u00eb drejtave t\u00eb njeriut.\u00a0Projekte t\u00eb tilla kan\u00eb sjell\u00eb p\u00ebrpjekje t\u00eb dhunshme e shkat\u00ebrruese p\u00ebr t\u00eb zbatuar fantazi hitleriane e maoiste t\u00eb \u201ckrijimit t\u00eb nj\u00eb lloji t\u00eb ri t\u00eb qenies njer\u00ebzore.\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cUtopia liberale\u201d e Rortyt duhet t\u2019i jap\u00eb secilit individ t\u00eb drejt\u00ebn dhe lirin\u00eb p\u00ebr t\u00eb ndjekur q\u00ebllimet e veta t\u00eb vet\u00ebkrijimit individual, p\u00ebrderisa nj\u00ebkoh\u00ebsisht e kupton se gj\u00ebja e keqe q\u00eb dikush mund t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb q\u00eb t\u00eb jet\u00eb mizor ndaj t\u00eb tjer\u00ebve. N\u00eb vend t\u00eb imponimit t\u00eb pik\u00ebpamjeve dhe vlerave tona epistemike ndaj tjer\u00ebve, Rorty mendon se \u201cn\u00ebse e promovojm\u00eb lirin\u00eb, e v\u00ebrteta do t\u00eb kujdeset p\u00ebr vetveten.\u201d<\/p>\n

Qytetari ideal i Rortyt \u00ebsht\u00eb ajo q\u00eb ai e quan \u201cironisti\/ja liberal\/e,\u201d t\u00eb cilin ai e v\u00eb n\u00eb kund\u00ebrshti me metafizicienin liberal. Si i kund\u00ebrt me k\u00ebt\u00eb t\u00eb fundit, ai i pari nuk provon q\u00eb t\u2019i dor\u00ebzohet ndonj\u00eb T\u00eb V\u00ebrtete transhendentale. P\u00ebr ironistin liberal, e v\u00ebrteta nuk mund t\u00eb ndahet prej gjuh\u00ebs. Ajo \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00eb cil\u00ebsi q\u00eb i p\u00ebrkufizon fjalit\u00eb tona rreth bot\u00ebs, por jo edhe vet\u00eb bot\u00ebn. Fjalit\u00eb tona dhe e t\u00ebra gjuha jon\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb kontingjente. Nj\u00eb prej premisave qendrore t\u00eb argumentit t\u00eb Rortyt \u00ebsht\u00eb se mendja njer\u00ebzore nuk mund t\u00eb mendoj\u00eb jasht\u00eb gjuh\u00ebs. Prandaj, e v\u00ebrteta nuk ekziston jasht\u00eb veteve tona kontingjente, edhe pse bota ekziston. Si pasoj\u00eb dija, ose e v\u00ebrteta dhe justifikimet e saj nuk mund t\u00eb jen\u00eb p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsuese.<\/p>\n

N\u00ebse nuk mundemi q\u00eb t\u00eb arsyetojm\u00eb bindjet tona bazuar n\u00eb at\u00eb se sa mir\u00eb e p\u00ebrfaq\u00ebsojn\u00eb realitetin, at\u00ebher\u00eb e vetmja gj\u00eb mbi t\u00eb cil\u00ebn do t\u00eb mund t\u2019i testonim besimet tona, \u00ebsht\u00eb nj\u00ebri tjetri. Ajo q\u00eb i jep validitet pohimeve tona p\u00ebr bot\u00ebn (qofshin epistemologjike a morale) \u00ebsht\u00eb praktika shoq\u00ebrore e bashk\u00ebbisedimit. Arsyetimi social i besimit nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb \u00e7\u00ebshtje e nj\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnie t\u00eb ve\u00e7ant\u00eb mes ideve dhe objekteve, por si pohonte Rorty te Filozofia dhe Pasqyra e Natyr\u00ebs [Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature] \u201cbashk\u00ebbisedimit, praktik\u00ebs shoq\u00ebror\u00eb.\u201d<\/p>\n

P\u00ebrderisa dikush si Bloomi e sheh komunikimin nd\u00ebrkulturor si nj\u00ebfar\u00eb miti helmues, Rorty e sheh at\u00eb si di\u00e7ka jetike: brenga jon\u00eb e vetme morale do t\u00eb duhej t\u00eb ishte zgjerimi i nocioni t\u00eb \u201cne\u201d.<\/p>\n

\u201cProgres\u201d do t\u00eb thot\u00eb zgjerimi i asaj se \u00e7far\u00eb duam t\u00eb themi me \u201cneve.\u201d Dihotomit\u00eb t\u00eb cilat na kan\u00eb l\u00ebn\u00eb Platoni e Kanti, jan\u00eb t\u00eb d\u00ebmshme sepse ato e trashin kufirin mes \u201cneve\u201d dhe \u201catyre.\u201d Historikisht, kurdo q\u00eb kemi b\u00ebr\u00eb progres moral ne n\u00eb fakt e kemi zgjeruar p\u00ebrkufizimin ton\u00eb t\u00eb \u201cneve\u201d dhe kemi l\u00ebvizur drejt shoq\u00ebrive m\u00eb gjith\u00ebp\u00ebrfshir\u00ebse. Shum\u00eb prej nesh mund t\u00eb jemi t\u00eb mir\u00eb ndaj njer\u00ebzve t\u00eb af\u00ebrt p\u00ebr ne, ose ndaj atyre q\u00eb jan\u00eb p\u00ebrgjith\u00ebsisht t\u00eb ngjash\u00ebm me ne. Sfida reale \u00ebsht\u00eb si t\u00eb shtrihet kjo mir\u00ebsi ndaj atyre t\u00eb cil\u00ebt duken dhe mendojn\u00eb ndryshe nga ne. Kanti e kishte v\u00ebn\u00eb re k\u00ebt\u00eb sfid\u00eb por zgjidhja e tij p\u00ebr tejkalimin e saj qe e prirur t\u00eb d\u00ebshtonte. Regullat dhe argumentet racionale nuk na b\u00ebjn\u00eb njer\u00ebz m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb, mendon Rorty. Narrativat sentimentale na b\u00ebjn\u00eb. Kur ne b\u00ebjm\u00eb progres dhe kur b\u00ebjm\u00eb mir\u00eb, nuk \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebr shkak t\u00eb ndonj\u00eb obligimi moral, si\u00e7 do t\u00eb kishte dashur Kanti, por sepse ne ndjejm\u00eb empati a dashuri ndaj atyre p\u00ebrreth nesh.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb nj\u00eb bot\u00eb pa T\u00eb V\u00ebrtet\u00ebn apo T\u00eb Mir\u00ebn, shqet\u00ebsimi yn\u00eb kryesor b\u00ebhet t\u00eb edukuarit sentimental i yni n\u00eb m\u00ebnyr\u00eb q\u00eb t\u00eb\u00a0\u201czgjerohet korniza e referimit p\u00ebr fraz\u00ebn \u201cnjer\u00ebzit si ne\u201d dhe \u201cnjer\u00ebzit tan\u00eb.”<\/a>\u00a0E vetmja m\u00ebnyr\u00eb p\u00ebr ta b\u00ebr\u00eb k\u00ebt\u00eb \u00ebsht\u00eb p\u00ebrmes narrativave emocionale, artistike. Shoq\u00ebris\u00eb son\u00eb liberale i duhet arti e poezia q\u00eb t\u00eb ndihmoj\u00eb n\u00eb zgjerimin e sfer\u00ebs s\u00eb \u201cneve\u201d. Utopia liberale e Rortyt \u00ebsht\u00eb \u201ckultur\u00eb e poetizuar\u201d.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb vend t\u00eb vendosjes s\u00eb nocioneve t\u00eb forta t\u00eb T\u00eb V\u00ebrtet\u00ebs, progresi ka t\u00eb b\u00ebj\u00eb me zgjerimin e imagjinat\u00ebs son\u00eb. Historikisht, ne kemi b\u00ebr\u00eb p\u00ebrparim duke imagjinuar s\u00eb pari nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebri ideale, utopike, e pastaj duke e nd\u00ebrtuar udh\u00ebn drejt saj duke krijuar ligje e parime morale. Progresi ka ndodhur kur burrat kan\u00eb v\u00ebn\u00eb veten n\u00eb pozit\u00eb t\u00eb grave, kur heteroseksual\u00ebt kan\u00eb empatizuar me homoseksual\u00ebt, e k\u00ebshtu me radh\u00eb. Por ne gjithmon\u00eb kemi filluar me empatin\u00eb dhe imagjinat\u00ebn. N\u00eb fjal\u00ebt e Rortyt, \u201carsyeja mund t\u00eb ndjek\u00eb vet\u00ebm udh\u00ebt q\u00eb i ka shkelur imagjinata<\/a>.”<\/p>\n

Ironisti liberal kupton se zvog\u00eblimi apo eliminimi i mizoris\u00eb dhe vuajtjes jan\u00eb q\u00ebllimet tona t\u00eb vetme q\u00eb na bashkojn\u00eb. E sa i p\u00ebrket rrezikut t\u00eb vlerave t\u00eb tep\u00ebrta kulturore \u2013 e madje edhe individuale \u2013 k\u00ebto shihen si t\u00eb ndara prej sfer\u00ebs publike. Ironisti liberal e kupton se vokabulari dhe p\u00ebrshkrimet e tij p\u00ebr bot\u00ebn nuk jan\u00eb p\u00ebrfundimtare, por me t\u2019i ballafaquar ato me p\u00ebrshkrime alternative (o p\u00ebrmes bashk\u00ebbisedimit me t\u00eb tjer\u00ebt o p\u00ebrmes bashk\u00ebbisedimit me librat dhe narrativat letrare), ironisti liberal dyshon dhe e rifreskon vokabularin e tij sa m\u00eb shpesh t\u00eb jet\u00eb e mundur.<\/p>\n

Privatisht, ironisti liberal shqet\u00ebsohet me \u00e7lirimin e vetvetes prej fjalor\u00ebve dhe p\u00ebrshkrimeve t\u00eb trash\u00ebguara a t\u00eb imponuara. Ata jan\u00eb t\u00eb z\u00ebn\u00eb me krijimin e autonomis\u00eb s\u00eb tyre. Sidoqoft\u00eb, publikisht, ironist\u00ebt liberal jan\u00eb t\u00eb bashkuar kundrejt rrezikut t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt t\u00eb mizoris\u00eb dhe posht\u00ebrimit.<\/p>\n

Ironist\u00ebt liberal e kuptojn\u00eb se ata nuk jan\u00eb n\u00eb ndonj\u00eb marr\u00ebdh\u00ebnie m\u00eb t\u00eb privilegjuar me realitetin sesa t\u00eb gjith\u00eb t\u00eb tjer\u00ebt, por ata brengosen me t\u00eb qenit persona m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb nes\u00ebr se ata q\u00eb jan\u00eb sot. Dallimi i vet\u00ebm q\u00eb vlen p\u00ebr Rortyn \u00ebsht\u00eb ai mes t\u00eb kaluar\u00ebs dhe s\u00eb tashmes, dhe mes t\u00eb tashmes dhe s\u00eb ardhmes. N\u00eb Kontingjenca, Ironia, dhe Solidariteti ai shkruan se:<\/p>\n

Metafizicieni liberal do q\u00eb d\u00ebshira e jon\u00eb t\u00eb jet\u00eb e p\u00ebrzem\u00ebrt p\u00ebr t\u2019u mbeshtetur nga nj\u00eb argument, i till\u00eb q\u00eb k\u00ebrkon nj\u00eb vet\u00ebrip\u00ebrshkrim i cili do t\u00eb n\u00ebnvizonte nj\u00eb thelb t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt njer\u00ebzor, nj\u00eb thelb i cili \u00ebsht\u00eb di\u00e7ka m\u00eb shum\u00eb sesa aft\u00ebsia jon\u00eb e p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt p\u00ebr t\u00eb vuajtur posht\u00ebrim. Ironistja liberale do ve\u00e7 q\u00eb mund\u00ebsit\u00eb tona p\u00ebr t\u00eb qen\u00eb t\u00eb dashur, p\u00ebr t\u00eb shmangur posht\u00ebrimin e t\u00eb tjer\u00ebve, t\u00eb zgjerohen p\u00ebrmes rip\u00ebrshkrimit. Ajo mendon se t\u00eb pranuarit e nj\u00eb brisht\u00ebsie t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt ndaj posht\u00ebrimit \u00ebsht\u00eb e vetmja lidhje shoq\u00ebrore q\u00eb nevojitet. . . Sensi i saj i solidaritetit njer\u00ebzor bazohet n\u00eb nj\u00eb sens t\u00eb rrezikut t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt, e jo n\u00eb nj\u00eb posedim t\u00eb p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt t\u00eb nj\u00eb Pushteti t\u00eb ndar\u00eb.<\/p>\n

N\u00eb vend t\u00eb t\u00eb pasurit frik\u00eb nga tepria e vlerave, ironist\u00ebt liberal\u00eb po p\u00ebrpiqen q\u00eb t\u00eb njihen me aq vlera sa t\u00eb jet\u00eb e mundur. Ata mund t\u00eb navigojn\u00eb mes narrativave t\u00eb ndryshme me nj\u00eb zhd\u00ebrvjellt\u00ebsi intelektuale e emocionale, nd\u00ebrkoh\u00eb q\u00eb gjithmon\u00eb kan\u00eb n\u00eb mendje rrezikun e p\u00ebrbashk\u00ebt t\u00eb mizoris\u00eb. Ata p\u00ebrpiqen t\u00eb empatizojn\u00eb dhe t\u00eb krijojn\u00eb solidaritet me sa m\u00eb shum\u00eb njer\u00ebz t\u00eb ndrysh\u00ebm prej tyre q\u00eb t\u00eb jet\u00eb e mundur. Sepse p\u00ebr ironistin liberal, progres nuk do t\u00eb thot\u00eb t\u2019i afrohesh T\u00eb V\u00ebrtet\u00ebs, por t\u2019i afrohesh nj\u00ebri tjetrit.<\/p>\n

******<\/p>\n

Ana Sandoiu \u00ebsht\u00eb shkrimtare dhe hulumtuese q\u00eb jeton n\u00eb Mbret\u00ebrin\u00eb e Bashkuar.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Artikulli origjinal<\/a><\/p>\n

P\u00ebrktheu: Bardhi Bakija<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

\n<\/div>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

N\u00eb nj\u00eb bot\u00eb ku racizmi dhe jotoleranca jan\u00eb n\u00eb ngritje, a mundet q\u00eb relativzmi t\u00eb na udh\u00ebzoj\u00eb drejt nj\u00eb shoq\u00ebrie m\u00eb t\u00eb mir\u00eb? Ana Sandoiu eksploron filozofin\u00eb e Richard Rortyt, r\u00ebnd\u00ebsin\u00eb e empatis\u00eb dhe vler\u00ebn e relativizmit. T\u00eb besosh me siguri absolute se ti, dhe t\u00eb tjer\u00ebt si ti, kan\u00eb t\u00eb drejt\u00eb, p\u00ebrderisa \u201ct\u00eb tjer\u00ebt\u201d […]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":597,"featured_media":11873,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[2271,2270,2269],"ppma_author":[2268],"class_list":["post-4147","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-kritike","tag-antirelativizmi","tag-toleranca","tag-vlera"],"authors":[{"term_id":2268,"user_id":597,"is_guest":0,"slug":"ana-sandoiu","display_name":"Ana Sandoiu","avatar_url":{"url":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/500x500_Ana_Sandoiu.webp","url2x":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/500x500_Ana_Sandoiu.webp"},"user_url":"","last_name":"Sandoiu","first_name":"Ana","description":"Ana worked as a freelance writer, bringing philosophy to a wider audience and examining its intersections with technology and popular culture."}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4147","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/597"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4147"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4147\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":11874,"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4147\/revisions\/11874"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11873"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4147"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4147"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4147"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sbunker.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=4147"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}