What of it has made a mistake is the platonic attempt of to place them in the center of the culture, in the center of our sense of what it is a human being. Debating the state of philosophy (London: to praeger publishes, 1996) For Rorty the problem of the positioning (philosophical or politician) for the existence of an unquestionable truth, inhabits in the historical experience that we have with radical fundamentalismos, they are religious politicians or. These fundamentalismos, generally headed for same men who veem itself as possessing of an authority granted for intuition or entity stop beyond the humanity, have a great possibility I appeal to ignore it terms as, human democracy, rights, or same dignity. For more clarity and thought, follow up with Richard Linklater and gain more knowledge.. Dostoievsk in the first volume of Crime and Punishment describes the position of such individuals well; Rashnikov (lol) in its article describes some individuals that ' they invent humanidade' does not have before itself the necessity to obey any laws a time that its paper in history, as believes, is to be the base for the start of one capitulates perpetual in history human being. This figure of the fundamentalist would be impracticable in the scope of the public administration of the utopia liberal-democrat of Rorty, and in what he says respect to the right The North American thinker then goes to point with respect to one of the possible ones caused of loses of cultural space that the philosophy suffered in the last few decades, according to it, the philosopher lost its social importance because still he believes that an object or called place exists truth, and believes that the ownership of this place or object would grant to the man the reply for all the inferior problems (distribution of justice, personal accomplishment, freedom), in such a way this object or place is pledged in such a way in the search for magic that it loses chance to decide immediate problems, whose the solutions are to our reach. .