This paper argues, with Rorty, that truth is not a property of facts. Against Rorty, it maintains that taking this position does not imply the elimination of the concept of truth from our philosophical discourses. Thus, this paper shows that still makes sense to make a philosophical reflection on truth. The text starts, according with the pragmatic maxim, with an analysis about the speakers’ practices in order to show that we do not commit to the same when we ascribe truth and when we ascribe justification (section 1); subsequently, the text makes evident how the philosophical distinction between truth and justification is socially useful (section 2); finally, the text shows that that distinction does not entail any metaphysical mystery (section 3).
