On The Anti-Realism Theory Of Dummett

The debate between realism and anti-realism is the most fundamental and glamorous topic in modern philosophy, because it is correlated with the answer and process about the most interesting issues in metaphysics.Dummett,with his"Research Programme", intends to change the traditional arguments, so that to establish a proper meaning theory as a basis of the debate. Compared with Realists, who presuppose the reality of the world, Dummett is an Anti-realism, because he concerns about the meaning of languages rather than engages in judging the independent reality that is out of human’s recognize.This paper shows a justification about the bottom-top perspective, which means from meaning theory to metaphysics, from two aspects:(1)Longitudinal dimension.If the solutions about metaphysical issues all rely on the correctly selection of a meaning theory, then I would say, the above theory needs a solid semantic basis. In other words, the sense of the semantic theory is closely correlated with the interpretation about logical constants. If only the logical laws are self-justified, the meaning theory is properly. The method,which is similar to recursion, guarantees the concordance and rationality of the "Research programme";(2)Horizontal dimension. The core of justifiable meaning theory is intuitional interpretation about"truth"concept, then justificationism put forward some new criteria about meaning-deciding, all the above criteria need to face examination from all sorts of statements. Dummett’s justification originates from intuitionism, in which the intuitionalists give the constructional proof of mathematics. The way that defines universality can be completely implemented if it is proved to be significant in any non-mathematical statements, or at least can conform to the classical way of interpretation.In details, I argue that Dummett’s "Research Programme" has four demonstration:(1)the failure of the traditional Anti-realism;(2)When it is used in the particular topics(time and meaning theory), the"Research Programme" demonstrates a trend of anti-realism;(3)The logic laws of Intuitionism are generally valid but are not the only correct choices;(4)The existence of un-decidable Statement. A proper meaning theory is composed with meaning/reference theory and force/practical theory. It is not only the basis of Dummett’s anti-realism, but is also the manifestation pattern of Anti-realism. Only start from the heart of meaning theory as a decidable criteria of justification, that Dummett can examines all debates in metaphysics. So, I would say, it is both the micro reflection of the "Research Programme"and the way which Dummett uses to against the realism. From the above,with the formation of a meaning theory, which is self-defensive, we can solve all the problems in metaphysics forever.Of course, I confess that the Dummett’s "Research Programme" is not good enough, it still has three problems:(1)Dummett has not, neither rigorously nor carefully, defined what is a justifiable meaning theory;(2)The problems about the scopes of classification of statements and the criteria for judging meaning still exist. In details, the problems are as following:how can a justifiable theory of meaning, in a precise that an un-decidable statement is explained, make an explanation about decidable statements that is better than or at least as good as the explanation made by the classical theory of meaning;(3)The way of using the meaning theory to deal with the problems in metaphysics, in what extent, can conform to the rules in science exploration and life-world. In other words, in what way, can we define the scope of a meaning theory, or just point out directly what is true metaphysics. In the end of this paper, I try to open a route about keeping off the way which Dummett use to against realism’s thought and finding my possible solutions to the above problems, though this try may be inappreciable.