Professionalism, Relativism, and Rationality
- 1 January 1992
- journal article
- Published by Modern Language Association (MLA) in PMLA/Publications of the Modern Language Association of America
- Vol. 107 (1) , 51-64
- https://doi.org/10.2307/462800
Abstract
Translation, interpretation, adjudication, and objective knowledge are possible in a world without a foundation, a world that precludes the testing and squaring of claims against a reality external to conceptual schemes. In critical studies the prevailing relativist views assume that meanings and references are unstable, that facts, things, emphases, and values depend on various culture- or community-driven conceptual schemes, and hence that defining the inherent interests of literary and other texts is impossible. On the contrary, texts are knowable as internally justified, preregistered systems of intentionality and rationality. Each text exists as such a system prior to interpretation, and it is this system of determinate values and emphases to which interpretive analysis is accountable.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Resistance and Independence: A Reply to Gerald GraffNew Literary History, 1985
- Interpretation on Tlon: A Response to Stanley FishNew Literary History, 1985
- Anti-ProfessionalismNew Literary History, 1985
- The Fisher King: "Wille zur Macht" in BaltimoreCritical Inquiry, 1984
- The Craving for ObjectivityNew Literary History, 1984
- Realism and ReasonPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,1983
- Data, Danda, and Disagreementdiacritics, 1983
- The Politics of Theories of InterpretationCritical Inquiry, 1982
- Fact, Theory, and Literary ExplanationCritical Inquiry, 1974
- On the Very Idea of a Conceptual SchemeProceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 1973