ABSTRACT
Richard Rorty had a long-standing feud with Ronald Dworkin over metaethics. Dworkin appears to have disliked Rorty’s “Archimedeanism”, while Rorty appears to have disavowed “objectivity”, something Dworkin held dear. As it turns out, this debate was only apparent. Dworkin and Rorty were both early adherents of metaethical minimalism, or what some have called “quietist realism”. Not only do Rorty and Dworkin reach the same metaethical conclusions, but they also relied on similar arguments to get there. The difference between them was largely a difference in emphasis. Dworkin stresses his continuity with traditional moral realism, while Rorty often castigates that line of thought. Rorty’s emphasis is the preferable one as it is truer to the larger ambitions of both thinkers.
