Argues for two key claims: first, that the so-called Neo-Pragmatist critique of traditional epistemology is unconvincing; second, that Rorty is guilty of taking... » 

Argues for two key claims: first, that the so-called Neo-Pragmatist critique of traditional epistemology is unconvincing; second, that Rorty is guilty of taking the name of Pragmatism in vain, since there are crucial and far-reaching differences between Neo-Pragmatism and the Classical Pragmatism of James and Dewey. «