Genuine question of interest, I understand the concerns continental philosophers raise regarding traditional or analytic philosophy's conception of truth, representation etc., but what is their response to pragmatists like Putnam and Rorty who, in quite different ways, say that judgements between things shouldn't be simply dismissed but should be considered in terms of their usefulness. Janet, I don't have a response, i generally consider myself a neo-pragmatist, but not i've never heard a continental attempt to refute them so i wondered if they had one.