國立臺灣大學哲學論評

Abstract /

The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the following main theses of Almeder’s blind realism: (T1) Even if we abandon the correspondence theory of truth, we would still know that there is an external world. (T2) At any time, some of our presently completely authorized beliefs about the external world must correctly describe the external world. (T3) We cannot justifiably pick out which of our presently completely authorized beliefs do correctly describe the external world. I try to show that Almeder’s argument for T1 is based upon his misunderstanding of Peirce’s well-known Harvard experiment and it also fails to support T1. Moreover, T2 is not well elaborated and, even worse, incoherent with T3.