news

more

In defence of realism

How this sober philosophy defies its critics

Issue 94, 29th January 2021
1,621 words
Read time: approx. 8 mins

Many philosophers, such as Isabelle Thomas-Fogiel, claim to have refuted realism. None has succeeded. We must recognise the distinction between truth and knowledge and the distinction between truth and falsity. Philosophical ideas have a way of leaking into the rest of society; we cannot speak truth to power if we have given up on truth argues Timothy Williamson.

 

The word ‘realism’ is used in very different ways. I will explain one philosophical view which can reasonably be called ‘realist’. It is not exactly the same as the view Isabelle Thomas-Fogiel calls ‘realism’ in her article ‘Is realism the future of philosophy?’, but I think my realism captures the insights in the realism she criticizes. Although many philosophers claim to have refuted this kind of realism, none of them has succeeded. Realism is a sober philosophy; rejecting it brings both the pleasures and the dangers of drunkenness.

Issue 94, 29th January 2021

Continue reading

Enjoy unlimited access to the world's leading thinkers.

Start by exploring our subscription options or joining our mailing list today.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Log in

Latest Releases

The future of multiculturalism

Objects from other worlds

6 Philosophers on the Contradictions of Christmas

Join the conversation

dome vad 10 January 2024

wtjtj

Eira Jeremy 17 November 2023

This defense, in my opinion, could have been stronger. Actually, that was a serious defense. We constantly think and behave based on realism. All it is is an intriguing hypothesis of post-modernism. What good is it if it doesn't change the way we connect with the outside world?

Dominier Panny 10 August 2022

You did an excellent job on this topic. It's quite readable and smart. I know a game called this that has the same simple and clever gameplay.

jones Elizabeth 30 July 2021

That gives off an impression of being fabulous anyway i am still not very beyond any doubt that I like it. At any rate will look much more into it and choose by and by!   <b><a href="https://www.facebook.com/OreManga/">oremanga</a></b>

jones Elizabeth 27 July 2021

That gives off an impression of being fabulous anyway i am still not very beyond any doubt that I like it. At any rate will look much more into it and choose by and by! oremanga

selena kale 28 June 2021

It's a great piece of information, when I search for it, I don't know how to use it
run 3

David Morey 1 March 2021

Regularities and patterns are reasonably reliable but do not necessitate metaphysical realism or materialism. But despite our unavoidable interpretation of all language, questions and answers we still have to listen to reality to obtain answers, data, experiences, etc. How we value and use data and experiences is up to us. But the independence and potential surprises of nature/reality remains, a kind of conversation but always in languages we have constructed, including mathematics, but we 'test' reality, we explore what is possible and impossible, what is open, what is closed or repeats. Non-realism or post-realism, maybe, but there remains some sort of distinction between the actual and the possible or possibility space (as explored by mathematicians and poets), but it is all very real, we are far from constrained by what actually is.

Seth Edenbaum 1 February 2021

"Realism is a sober philosophy; rejecting it brings both the pleasures and the dangers of drunkenness."
No man is the best judge of his own drunkenness.
Empiricism is "realism". Rationalists rationalize.

Minnie_S 1 February 2021

I think this defence could have been more robust. It was a sober defence, in fact. We rely on realism to think and act all the time. Post-modernism is an interesting theory, nothing more. If it does not affect how we interact with the world, what's the point?