Synopsis: Prior to his death in 2007, the self-described secular philosopher Richard Rorty began to modify his previous position concerning religion. Moving from "atheism" to "anti-clericalism," Rorty challenges the metaphysical assumptions that lend justification to abuses of power in the name of religion. Instead of dismissing and ignoring Rorty's challenge, the essays in this volume seek to enter into meaningful conversation with Rorty's thought and engage his criticisms in a constructive and serious way. In so doing, one finds promising nuggets within Rorty's thought for addressing particular questions within Christianity. The essays in this volume offer charitable yet fully confessional engagements with an impressive secular thinker. Endorsements: "Jacob Goodson and Brad Stone have brought together a fair sampling of contemporary thinkers . . . The three sections of Rorty and the Religious take on the status of Christianity in analytic philosophy, the implications of Rorty's thought for Christian moral understanding, and the prospects for social hope. This book . . . brings together the intellectual life, as exemplified by Rorty, and the 'sustained practice' informed by 'spiritual nourishment and the hope of the risen Christ.'" --G. Scott Davis, University of Richmond "Goodson and Stone's spirited gathering of Christian thinkers shows us not only why, but how Rorty's pragmatism needs an account of religion to ground its vision of hope and love. It shows] why and how contemporary Christian theology needs a chastened pragmatism to bring its imaginings back down to earth. Here is an engaging philosophy and a critically minded theology, a reason for hope. --Peter Ochs, University of Virginia "Goodson and Stone have brought together an excellent group of religious thinkers who take seriously the invitation to start a new conversation with a secular, though not antireligious, thinker, one who recognized the power of telling and retelling in our private lives, but also in the generation of civic solidarity. By doing so, they have enriched and expanded our understanding of Rorty's thought and of our religious America." --Eduardo Mendieta, Stony Brook University Author Biography: Jacob L. Goodson (PhD, University of Virginia) is Visiting Professor of Religious Ethics in the Department of Religious Studies at the College of William & Mary. He has published scholarly essays in The American Journal of Theology and Philosophy and Contemporary Pragmatism. Brad Elliott Stone is Associate Professor of Philosophy and Director of the University Honors Program at Loyola Marymount University. He has published several essays and book chapters in pragmatism, continental philosophy, and Spanish philosophy.

This volume marks a new chapter in the long-standing debate between Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault regarding argumentative methods and their political implications. The essays chart the undertheorized dialogue between the two philosophers on questions of life, death, punishment, and power—an untapped point of departure from which we might continue to read the convergence and divergence of their work. What possibilities for political resistance might this dialogue uncover? And how might they relate to contemporary political crises? With the resurgence of fascism and authoritarianism across the globe, the rise of white supremacist and xenophobic violence, and the continued brutality of state-sanctioned and extrajudicial killings by police, border patrols, and ordinary citizens, there is a pressing need to critically analyze our political present. These essays bring to bear the critical force of Derrida's and Foucault's biopolitical thought to practices of mass incarceration, the death penalty, life without parole, immigration and detention, racism and police violence, transphobia, human and animal relations, and the legacies of colonization. At the heart of their biopolitics, the volume shows, lies the desire to deconstruct and resist in the name of a future that is more just and less policed. It is this impulse that makes reading their work together, at this moment, both crucial and worthwhile.

Rorty and the Prophetic interrogates and provides a constructive assessment to the American neo-pragmatist philosopher Richard Rorty's critiques of Jewish ethics. Rorty dismisses the public applicability of Jewish moral reasoning, because it is based on "the will of God" through divine revelation. As a self-described secular philosopher, it comes as no surprise that Rorty does not find public applicability within a divinely-ordered Jewish ethic. Rorty also rejects the French Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas's ethics, which is based upon the notion of infinite responsibility to the Face of the Other. In Rorty's judgment, Levinas's ethics is "gawky, awkward, and unenlightening." From a Rortyan perspective, it seems that Jewish ethics simply can't win: either it is either too dependent on the will of God or over-emphasizes the human Other. The volume responds to Rorty's criticisms of Jewish ethics in three different ways: first, demonstrating agreements between Rorty and Jewish thinkers; second, offering reflective responses to Rorty's critiques of Judaism on the questions of Messianism, prophecy, and the relationship between politics and theology; third, taking on Rorty's seemingly unfair judgment that Levinas's ethics is "gawky, awkward, and unenlightening." While Rorty does not engage the prophetic tradition of Jewish thought in his essay, "Glorious Hopes, Failed Prophecies," he dismisses the possibility for prophetic reasoning because of its other-worldliness and its emphasis on predicting the future. Rorty fails to attend to and recognize the complexity of prophetic reasoning, and this book presents the complexity of the prophetic within Judaism. Toward these ends and more, Brad Elliott Stone and Jacob L. Goodson offer this book to scholars who contribute to the Jewish academy, those within American Philosophy, and those who think Richard Rorty's voice ought to remain in "conversations" about religion and "conversations" among the religious.

This volume marks a new chapter in the long-standing debate between Jacques Derrida and Michel Foucault regarding argumentative methods and their political implications. The essays chart the undertheorized dialogue between the two philosophers on questions of life, death, punishment, and power—an untapped point of departure from which we might continue to read the convergence and divergence of their work. What possibilities for political resistance might this dialogue uncover? And how might they relate to contemporary political crises? With the resurgence of fascism and authoritarianism across the globe, the rise of white supremacist and xenophobic violence, and the continued brutality of state-sanctioned and extrajudicial killings by police, border patrols, and ordinary citizens, there is a pressing need to critically analyze our political present. These essays bring to bear the critical force of Derrida's and Foucault's biopolitical thought to practices of mass incarceration, the death penalty, life without parole, immigration and detention, racism and police violence, transphobia, human and animal relations, and the legacies of colonization. At the heart of their biopolitics, the volume shows, lies the desire to deconstruct and resist in the name of a future that is more just and less policed. It is this impulse that makes reading their work together, at this moment, both crucial and worthwhile.

Prophetic pragmatism is a gritty philosophical framework that undergirds the intellectual and political work done by those who seek to overcome despair, dogmatism, and oppression. It seeks to unite one's intellectual vocation and one's duty to fight for justice. Cognizant of the ways in which political forces affect thought, while also requiring political action to not be so sure of itself that it simply replaces one oppressive structure with another, prophetic pragmatism requires a critical temper through the mode of Socratic questioning. Introducing Prophetic Pragmatism argues that hope lies between critical temper and democratic faith. Socratic questioning, prophetic witness, and tragicomic hope open a space for democratic energies to flourish against the forces of nihilism and poverty. Critical temper keeps democratic faith from becoming too idealistic and Pollyannaish, and democratic faith keeps critical temper from being pessimistic about the ability to change current realities. These twin pillars provide the best and most helpful framework for understanding the nature and purpose of prophetic pragmatism. Through their dialogue, Jacob L. Goodson and Brad Elliott demonstrate why prophetic pragmatism is, in the words of Cornel West, "pragmatism at its best."