In Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity, public intellectual and philosopher Richard Rorty continues with his theories on truth, knowledge, and information, but instead of using analytical philosophy to explain his hunches, he explains his ideas in three sections: Contingency, Irony/Theory, and Solidarity.
PART ONE: Contingency
1. The contingency of language
Rorty begins by discussing the problem of conceptualizing reality through language. Because humans have no secondary point of view to reckon their perceptions to, they are left experiencing and describing only the world as they experience and describe it, which means that our descriptions of the universe are more a reflection of our minds than of the external world. He also mentions the problem of reference and subjectivity (Rorty might say "Two subjective people agreeing does not make real objectivity").
2. The contingency of selfhood
Rorty explains his belief that each person holds a set of ideas to be true about themselves, and this fundamental set of axioms Rorty calls, "final vocabulary." Rorty argues that this final vocabulary helps us to interpret our past so we can develop a sense of unique identity.
3. The contingency of a liberal community
This section is in response to the claims that Rorty is a moral relativist. Basically, he defends his relativism and reminds the reader that to use "relativism" as an insult is to beg the question about the Platonic ideal (in other words: If he's right about his metaphysics, then relativism is not insulting; it's just happens to be true). He continues this line of thinking to show that when people are scared to admit the truth of relativism, they introduce a kind of moral conservatism that holds the community back from discovering the truth of human nature.
PART TWO: Ironism and Theory
4. Private irony and liberal hope
Here Rorty outlines a fairly meticulous system showing that a person who holds all three of his fundamental axioms (or contingencies) should be considered an "ironist" or a person with a sense of humor about their own existence. They understand that their ability to construct meaning is a limited ability, so they hold their beliefs about themselves with a grain of salt.
5. Self-creation and affiliation
This chapter examines literary and philosophical sources that support Rorty's perspective, as well as demonstrating "ironism" in action. He discusses Proust, Nietzsche, and Heidegger, noticing that Nietzsche has some subtle Platonic tendencies (especially the idea of an "over man").
6. From ironist theory to private allusions
This chapter examines the contributions of Derrida, especially The Post Card. Derrida side steps the issue of subjectivity/objectivity entirely by using free associations (without the pretense of logical proof). In other words, Derrida doesn't use the illusion of structure in his disproving of structure.
PART THREE: Cruelty and Solidarity
7. The barber of Kasbeam
To introduce the last major theme of the book, Rorty discusses one of the greatest novelists to ever live, Nabokov. The main thrust of Rorty's ideas is basically this: A person who holds their final vocabularies in doubt will notice in Nabokov's novels that there are arguments that we should augment or change ourselves. This is because, in addition to society's systemic brokenness, there is a secondary brokenness that comes from the limitations of our personal development. We can sometimes afflict others with parts of our personality that we didn't even know could affect them. In other words, we have to fight for solidarity, because our default mode is cruel in its idiosyncrasy.
8. The last intellectual in Europe
By this title, Rorty is referring to George Orwell. He argues that Orwell manages to capture both public and private cruelty in 1984 and Animal Farm. He spends this section analyzing Orwell's version of utopia, and he notices that Orwell seems not to be an ironist about his point of view.
9. Solidarity
Rorty finishes his book by arguing that humans tend to use classifying statements about ourselves, but Rorty says here that we should broaden our sense of "we" from our clan or tribe, to our broader community, and then onward still, until when we say "we" we mean the whole earth. Rorty explains his view that this kind of open-mindedness is the only defense we have against tribalism and dehumanizing others.
