Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
1
Student of PhD in Department of Public Law, Shi.C., Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
2
Assistant Prof of Department of Public Law, Shi.C., Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
3
Assistant Prof, Department of Public Law, Shi.C., Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran
10.22099/jls.2026.55688.5486
Abstract
This Article Reconstructs Richard Rorty’s Democratic Outlook as an Integrated Constellation of Dialogue, Irony, and Solidarity. The Central Problem is How Political legitimacy and Social Cohesion can be Sustained Once Foundationalism and Timeless Standards of Truth are Rejected. Using a Descriptive–Analytical, Documentary Method, the Study First Examines Rorty’s Critique of Representationalism and his linguistic Turn, and then Traces their Implications for Ethics and Public law. The Findings Suggest that, in a Rortyan Framework, Truth is Displaced from Correspondence with Reality to Justification Within free Conversation; Irony—Understood as Awareness of the Historical Contingency of one’s “Final Vocabularies”—Supports Epistemic Humility and Social Tolerance; and Solidarity Functions as the Cultural Adhesive of Pluralistic Societies, Replacing the Foundation-Building Role Formerly Assigned to “Truth.” The Article Concludes that Rorty Offers less a Closed Institutional Blueprint than a Practical Criterion for Evaluating Democracy: the Degree of Dialogic Openness and Revisability. Accordingly, Democratic Stability Depends on Institutional Guarantees that Keep Conversation Viable, Especially Free Expression, Accountability, and Genuine Possibilities for Revision.
Keywords: Democracy, Dialogue, Irony, Rorty, Solidarity.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)