Alethic Rights and Alethic Pluralism in Libraries

Author:

Ridi Riccardo1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Humanities , Ca’ Foscari University of Venice , Dorsoduro 3484/d, 30123 , Venezia , Italy

Abstract

Abstract The concept of truth, although unavoidable, is very problematic from a philosophical point of view and, in the field of librarianship, it is even more disputed for various reasons: inapplicability to libraries’ collections and reference services; scarcity of resources necessary in the event of a possible application; conflict with the value of intellectual neutrality. The “alethic rights” proposed by D’Agostini in 2017, pertinent to truth claims in social contexts, can be interpreted in two ways: the “strong” way is not applicable to libraries because it would lead to the same problems caused by the research of the truthfulness of each document preserved by libraries and of any information provided by their reference services; the “weak” way would instead be applicable to libraries, but it is more appropriate not to apply this either, both because there would be the risk that it could be interpreted in the strong way, and because its application would still be redundant compared to what already happens in libraries and to what, if necessary, could be obtained in emergency situations by applying instead the principle of social responsibility. In the library field it would be more sensible and useful to apply, instead of alethic rights, the epistemological theory of “alethic pluralism” by Wright (1992). Truth and Objectivity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press and Lynch (2009). Truth as One and Many. Oxford: Clarendon, which defines the concept of truth in a way compatible with technical practices and with deontological rules currently more widespread in libraries.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Library and Information Sciences

Reference47 articles.

1. ALA. 2019. Library Bill of Rights, adopted June 19, 1939, by the American Library Association Council; amended October 14, 1944; June 18, 1948; February 2, 1961; June 27, 1967; January 23, 1980; January 29, 2019. ALA. http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill (accessed March 17, 2022).

2. Antoniacomi, G. 2018. “I percorsi ingannevoli nella gestione delle collezioni di una biblioteca pubblica tra censura e legittimazione della post verità: Verso il paradigma dei diritti aletici.” AIB studi 58 (1): 65–82. https://aibstudi.aib.it/article/view/11753 (accessed March 17, 2022).

3. Armour-Garb, B., and J. Woodbridge. 2021. “Deflationism About Truth.” First published August 28, 1997, substantive revision December 14, 2021. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by E. N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-deflationary/ (accessed March 17, 2022).

4. Blackburn, S. 2018. On Truth. New York: Oxford University Press.

5. Bufacchi, V. 2021. “Truth, Lies and Tweets: A Consensus Theory of Post-truth.” Philosophy and Social Criticism 47 (3): 347–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0191453719896382.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3