ABSTRACT The paper is a response to the articles published in the current issue analysing Rorty’s philosophy of hope. In these articles, Bianca Thoilliez, Stefano Oliverio and Kai Wortmann highlight the pragmatist characteristics of post-critical pedagogy. Taking a poststructuralist perspective, I propose to examine some limits of the association between Rorty’s philosophy of hope and post-critical pedagogy. I will discuss, in turn, their take on the definition of hope, on the place of critique in post-critical pedagogy and on the affirmative ethos of post-critical pedagogy.

中文翻译：

---

肮脏，批判后的教学法和希望：回应

摘要本文是对本期发表的文章的回应，该文章分析了罗蒂的希望哲学。在这些文章中，Bianca Thoilliez，Stefano Oliverio和Kai Wortmann强调了后批评教育学的实用主义特征。从后结构主义的角度来看，我建议考察罗蒂的希望哲学与后批判教育学之间的联系的某些局限性。我将依次讨论他们对希望的定义，批评在后批评教育学中的地位以及后批评教育学的肯定精神。