Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorKaspers, Tom
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-01T09:30:01Z
dc.date.available2022-03-01T09:30:01Z
dc.date.issued2022-02-28
dc.identifier277903547
dc.identifier1ab7bf31-5136-4549-b9d9-1a2cee367a60
dc.identifier85125654655
dc.identifier000768294000008
dc.identifier.citationKaspers , T 2022 , ' Alethic pluralism for pragmatists ' , Synthese , vol. 200 , no. 1 . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-022-03558-5en
dc.identifier.issn0039-7857
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/24968
dc.description.abstractPragmatism and the correspondence theory of truth are longtime foes. Nevertheless, there is an argument to be made that pragmatists must embrace truth as correspondence. I show that there is a distinctive pragmatic utility to taking truth to be correspondence, and I argue that it would be inconsistent for pragmatists to accept the utility of the belief that truth is correspondence while resisting the premise that this belief is correct. In order to show how pragmatists can embrace truth as correspondence, I develop a kind of alethic pluralism, which treats pragmatist truth as theoretically fundamental to truth as correspondence. This theoretical fundamentality of pragmatist truth allows the pragmatist to conditionally accept truth as correspondence for certain discourses without falling prey to the typical pragmatist objections to correspondence. This pluralist account of truth thus allows pragmatists to concede that, for certain domains of discourse, truth is correspondence, without thereby betraying their pragmatist principles.
dc.format.extent19
dc.format.extent757284
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofSyntheseen
dc.subjectPragmatismen
dc.subjectAlethic pluralismen
dc.subjectTruthen
dc.subjectCorrespondenceen
dc.subjectB Philosophy (General)en
dc.subjectT-DASen
dc.subjectNISen
dc.subject.lccB1en
dc.titleAlethic pluralism for pragmatistsen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. University of St Andrewsen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Philosophyen
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11229-022-03558-5
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record