Consensus as a synecdoche and consensus as a sign. A critique of Rorty’s conception of truth, justification, and consensus

  • Óscar L. González-Castán Dpto. de Filosofía Teorética Facultad de Filosofía Universidad Complutense de Madrid
Keywords: Argumentation, truth, justification, fallibilism, rational hope.

Abstract

In this essay I shall propose a theoretical model that will help us to understand the meaning and scope of rational agreements. I build this model from a previous conception of the relationship between truth and justification. With this model at hand, that I shall call “agreement as a sign”, it is possible to asses Rorty´s ethnocentric claim according to which any rational agreement that a human community could reach, included scientific communities, can only refer to its idiosyncratic beliefs and to its internal ways of justifying them without reference to reality. Against the background of the “agreement as a sign” model, Rorty´s model of agreements can be seen as a case of synecdoche.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Crossmark

Metrics

Published
2014-11-19
How to Cite
González-Castán Ó. L. (2014). Consensus as a synecdoche and consensus as a sign. A critique of Rorty’s conception of truth, justification, and consensus. Revista de Filosofía , 39(2), 33-56. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_RESF.2014.v39.n2.47303
Section
Articles