Rorty sees his task in radically deconstructing and overcoming the traditional view of philosophy as a discipline that provides an accurate representation of being. The philosopher proposes a post-positivist concept of coherence as the correspondence of an affirmation to the principles and requirements of a particular language game operating in a specific historical community of individuals (Owens, 2019). Society is understood primarily as a linguistic community, and the philosopher considers it possible to view it as the only justification for human knowledge, norms, and standards of behavior.
According to Foucault, being inside an era, a person cannot understand its nature entirely. As Foucault emphasizes, traditional history is based on the idea of a particular predetermined subject of knowledge, thanks to which the disclosure of truth is possible; Foucault’s task is to trace the formation of this subject in the depths of history. Thus, the philosopher argued that an adequate truth about love or, for example, madness is inaccessible to the cognizing subject. These objects are accessible to knowledge only through representations that change depending on the era. It is practically impossible to separate the “thing-in-itself” from the discourse in which it is enclosed.
Another point of view was proposed by the English philosopher of science Roy Bhaskar. Within the framework of critical realism, he argues that research aimed at finding truth makes sense only when its results are valid not only in the laboratory but also outside it (Buch-Hansen & Nielsen, 2020). The philosopher talks about the issues of perception and reality, which makes people doubt the truth of many familiar ideas and perceptions. Through this critical approach, people can rethink old beliefs and take a fresh look at the truth.
Undoubtedly, every philosophical idea has a reasonably solid foundation and scientific justification. They are based on concepts from other philosophers who have worked on these issues for centuries. Thus, any of these ideas can be accepted or refuted; however, in any case, they should be treated with respect and understanding. This will help us look at the issue from different points of view and accept the most suitable idea for ourselves or, possibly, work out a new one.
I am close to Foucault’s idea, who argued that it is difficult to understand the truth, being inside a particular era. Indeed, a person cannot always cover the entire event horizon and consider all the influencing factors to get the correct perspective. At the same time, looking back, we often understand where we made a mistake and how we should have behaved to achieve a better outcome. Thus, knowing the truth is a complex process that requires broad views and attention to detail from people.
However, I believe that any philosophical idea has some significant meaning. Thus, for example, the concepts of critical realism force people to consider reality carefully, “scientifically.” This allows us to rely on reason and draw conclusions from strict logic. Sometimes this can support correct and informed decisions, which may seem wrong from the point of view of feelings, but ultimately lead to beneficial consequences. In any case, the search for truth is a long and ongoing process. Even when looking into the past, researchers do not always agree on where exactly the truth was. Consequently, everyone should determine this issue for themselves independently, but at the same time, remember that the point of view should not be detrimental to others.
References
Buch-Hansen, H., & Nielsen, P. (2020). Critical realism: Basics and beyond. Macmillan Education UK.
Owens, J. (2019). Rorty, religion, and metaphysics. Lexington Books.