Abstract
The paper examines Wright’s attempt to inflate deflationism about truth. It accepts the details of Wright’s argument but contends that it should best be seen as posing a dilemma for the deflationist: either truth is independent of norms of warranted assertibility—in which case it is substantial—or it is not—in which case epistemicism about truth is a consequence. Some concerns about epistemicism are raised in avoiding the second horn. The first is avoided by distinguishing between independence and substantiality and arguing that only the first applies to truth and only the second is worrisome to deflationism. So, despite its sub-title, the following is not a diatribe against Home Rule but a modest defence of deflationism.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brandom R. (1994). Making it explicit. Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press
Brandom R. (2000). Articulating reasons. Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press
Weiss B. (2002). Michael Dummett. Chesham, Acumen Press
Weiss B. (2007). Anti-realist truth and anti-realist meaning. American Philosophical Quarterly 44(3): 213–229
Wright C. (1992). Truth and objectivity. Cambridge, Mass, Harvard University Press
Wright C. (1993). Realism, meaning and truth (2nd ed.). Oxford, Blackwell
Wright C. (1996). Responses to commentators. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 56(4): 911–941
Wright C. (1998). Truth: A traditional debate reviewed. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 24(supp.): 31–74
Wright C. (2001). Minimalism, deflationism, pragmatism, pluralism. In: Lynch M.P. (ed). The nature of truth. Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Weiss, B. Minimalism deflated: independence without substance. Synthese 171, 521–529 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9324-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9324-8