Superafirmabilidad, justificación, y los retos de una verdad antirrealista
Main Article Content
Abstract
Superassertibility (SA) aims to be an anti-realist notion of truth in discourses such as the comic, the moral, and the social, where truth depends on subjects’ judgments. Its success lies in that an increased justification can be stable: an assertion would remain justified despite the emergence of new information. Yet, SA faces difficulties in achieving such stability due to a restricted anti-realist conception of access to evidence. I propose to reinterpret stability through epistemic trust: a normative and practical commitment underlying any act of assertion. When someone asserts p, they not only recognize the evidence but also rationally assume that justification will persist unless legitimate counterevidence arises.
Downloads
Article Details
PLUMX Metrics
References
Brueckner, Anthony, 1998, “Is ‘Superassertible’ a Truth Predicate?”, Noûs, vol. 32, no. 1 (March), pp. 76–78.
Christensen, David, 2007, “Does Murphy’s Law Apply in Epistemology? Self-Doubt and Rational Ideals”, en Tamar Szabó Gendler, and John Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology, vol. 2, pp. 3–31.
Coliva, Annalisa (ed.), 2012, Mind, Meaning, and Knowledge: Themes from the Philosophy of Crispin Wright, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Dodd, Julian, 1999, “There Is No Norm of Truth: A Minimalist Reply to Wright”, Analysis, vol. 59, no. 4 (October), pp. 291–299.
Dummett, Michael, 1993, The Seas of Language, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Edwards, Jim, 1996, “Anti-Realist Truth and Concepts of Superassertibility”, Synthese, vol. 109, no. 1 (October), pp. 103–120.
Ferrari, Filippo, 2018, “Normative Alethic Pluralism”, en Jeremy Wyatt, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen y Nathan Kellen (eds.), Pluralisms in Truth and Logic, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, Suiza y Basingstoke, Hampshire, Reino Unido, pp. 145–168.
Floyd, Juliet, 2003, “The Fact of Judgement. The Kantian Response to the Humean Condition”, en Jeff Malpas (ed.), From Kant to Davidson Philosophy and the Idea of the Transcendental, Routledge, Nueva York.
Fodor, Jerry. A. y Ernest Lepore, 1992, Holism: A Shopper’s Guide, Blackwell, Reino Unido.
Horwich, Paul, 2013, “Belief-Truth Norms”, en Timothy Chan (ed.), The Aim of Belief, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 17–31.
Horwich, Paul, 1998, Truth (2nd edition), Oxford University Press, Oxford.
James, William, 1975, Pragmatism and the Meaning of Truth, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Kant, Immanuel, 2000, Critique of the Power of Judgment, trad. Paul Guyer y Eric Matthews, y Paul Guyer (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. (Texto publicado originalmente en 1790.)
Kvanvig, Jonathan L., 1999, “Truth and Superassertibility”, Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, vol. 93, no. 1 (January), pp. 1–19.
Lynch, Michael, 2013, “Three Questions for Truth Pluralism”, en Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen y Crispin Wright (eds.), Truth and Pluralism: Current Debates, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 21–41.
Rosenkranz, Sven, 1999, Objectivity and Realism:Meeting the Manifestation Challenge, tesis doctoral, University of St. Andrews, Escocia.
Sher, Gila, 2020, “Pluralism and Normativity in Truth and Logic”, American Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 337–354.
Sher, Gila, 2017, “Truth and Scientific Change”, Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 371–394.
Shieh, Sanford, 2018, “Truth, Objectivity, and Realism”, in Michael Glanzberg (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Truth, Oxford Handbooks (online edn, Oxford Academic, 10 Sept. 2018). https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199557929.013.14
Smith, Deborah C., 2007, “Superassertibility and the Equivalence Schema: A Dilemma for Wright’s Antirealist”, Synthese, vol. 157, no. 1, pp. 129–139.
Szubka, Tadeusz, 1998, “Idealized Acceptability Versus Superassertibility”, Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, vol. 98, no. 2 (March), pp. 175–186.
Williams, Bernard, 1973, Problems of the Self, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Williamson, Timothy, 2000: Knowledge and Its Limits, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Williamson, Timothy, 1996, “Unreflective Realism”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 905–909.
Wright, Crispin, 2004, “Warrant for Nothing (and Foundations for Free)?”, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 78, pp. 167–212.
Wright, Crispin, 2003, Saving the Differences: Essays on Themes from Truth and Objectivity, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Wright, Crispin, 2001, “On Being in a Quandary. Relativism Vagueness Logical Revisionism”, Mind, vol. 110, no. 1, pp. 45–98.
Wright, Crispin, 1993, Realism, Meaning, and Truth, Blackwell, Cambridge, Mass.
Wright, Crispin, 1992, Truth and Objectivity, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Crítica, Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía by Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México is licensed under a Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional License.
Creado a partir de la obra en http://critica.filosoficas.unam.mx/index.php/critica.