Part 1: What is "Truth?"
What does the idea of truth actually amount to? What is it for a belief to be true?
Remember that we are not now asking what things are true. We are asking about the nature of Truth. The philosophical question to which we are devoting this material concerns the composition of Truth. What type of theory of Truth should we endorse? What are the elements of Truth?
There are three basic theories concerning the nature of Truth: Coherence Theory, Pragmatic Theory and correspondence Theory.
Part 2: Truth and Coherence Theory
According to Coherence Theory a belief is true it if coheres with the persons other beliefs. In other words a belief is true if it fits in with the other beliefs that a person endorses or holds. In defense of this view we have to think about things and compare a belief with other beliefs that we endorse. For example, someone may ask if wind surfing is a dangerous activity. From observation we might conclude that it is, but the person who practices wind surfing may not think it to be so dangerous. This leads to inevitable problems not the least of which is what appears to be true for one person is not true for another person. In short, this theory leads to the conclusion that this is true for you but not true for me. The Coherence Theory arrives at the conclusion of relativity.
But there is another problem with the theory as well. It leaves out the world or the external world in a crucial way. A belief is true if it is consistent with a range of beliefs according to Coherence Theory. But this definition eclipses the external world. It argues that a belief is true if it corresponds to other beliefs which one holds but it also neglects the realities of the external world. The question emerges as to what makes one's entire web of beliefs true or what makes the things which one endorses to be true in the first place. The fact is that we can have a set of very coherent beliefs that are all false. These beliefs can essentially be illusory. Some have proposed this with regard to the existence of God. One can have a set of beliefs concerning the existence of God which is all-neat and tidy but which is predicated upon illusion. The converse could also be said regarding the failure to believe in God since atheism or agnosticism can also consist of a very tidy set of beliefs. We can further illustrate this with regard to the topic of ordinary literary fiction. A fictional story can consist of a very coherent narrative which is extremely impressive but which is all predicated upon falsity.
Part 3: Truth and Pragmatic Theory
Pragmatic theory is the same thing as utility or usefulness. At first glance this approach to the topic of truth has a ring of truth to it. For example, if I believe that if I will jump off of a tall building gravity will inure me then the pragmatism of that truth helps to preserve my existence. Pragmatics has a place. The pragmatist however is saying that if I endorse a belief I then will not be hurt. He is saying that truth relied upon increases our well-being. Conversely, he is also saying that falsity lacks usefulness. Truth will lead to success and truth is the same thing as successful belief. This approach emerged in America with William James and it has its appeal. It is a very practical approach. It brings truth down from the Platonic heavens and makes truth to be practical and relevant. The particular truth that this theory is advancing is the idea that when we believe something to be true it is then always useful and beneficial. However the fact is that this is a questionable conclusion.
For example, suppose that i live in a country that is a despotic tyranny. Believing what the government tells me is better for me than believing what is actually true. Therein exists the conflict. If you go along with the government then you will flourish thought you might not be guided by actual truth. However, if you believe otherwise you will be persecuted, imprisoned and possible even die as a result. Truth therefore may not always be advantageous.
In addition, there is another problem with the theory. Pragmatic theory contends that you can will and adopt a belief that is useful.
But there is also a third problem. The theory puts the cart before the horse. Pragmatic theory contends that the truth depends on the usefulness rather than the usefulness depending on the truth. Perhaps this is the most blatant of the errors of Pragmatic Theory. Put differently, pragmatic theory contends that what determines truth is the usefulness of the truth rather than its actual truth or validity.
Part 4: Truth and Correspondence theory
Every common sense person intuitively believes this theory. It says for a belief to be true is for it to represent how things really are in the world outside having us. If I believe that Paris is in France then it is based on the fact that there are two things outside of me, the city and the country, which I can validate. The same is true of the statement "the rain is coming down outside." I can investigate and determine if the statement corresponds to the facts outside in the external world. Further, suppose I have a belief that all snow is white. I can determine that this is true because it corresponds to the facts of the external world. There is an external reality upon which I can base my facts so to speak. There must be a correspondence between what I hold to be true and the external world.
Whether i know that my beliefs are true is another question. What this is addressing is how i can know my beliefs to be true. The question of truth is the question of how I can find the truth of my beliefs.
Part 5: Problems with Correspondence theory
If I say that truth is a correspondence relationship between truth and fact this does inevitably lead to some problems however. For example, what is this "correspondence?" Philosophers have proposed questions such as, "What is this correspondence? Is it mapping? Is it mirroring? What kind of mirror is it if it is so? How does this correspondence work? How can physical things be isomorphic to mental things in my mind?"
Correspondence theory however has an advantage over the other theories in that it brings the external world into the correspondence of truth. It brings the external world in directly to my consideration of truth. In short, truth depends on reality. The American Philosopher Quine is famous for asserting, "Nothing is true but reality says it so." Correspondence theory affirms Quine's assertion.
Part 6: Truth and Objectivity
But the question emerges as to whether truth is objective. The fact is that truth does depend on something independent of us. That snow is white depends on the snow that is outside of me. That it is raining outside depends on the rain, which is outside of me.
Some wonder how truth can be objective. They argue that something can be true for you and not for me. Consequently, they regard truth as relative. Something is true in the east but not in the west. Something is true in one culture but not in another culture. Something is true in one context but not in another context. This is the relativist and the subjectivist way of thinking. But the fact is that this is simply erroneous. What you think is true is not made to be true just because you believe it to be true. For example, I can believe that dogs purr or that cats bark, but believing such no matter how fervently I believe does not correspond to the external world around me. In short, the external world of reality establishes truth.
Part 7: Truth, Objectivity and Intolerance
The question then emerges as to whether or not the belief in the objectivity of truth inevitably leads to intolerance toward others who do not regard truth, as do we. This is a natural question. Intolerance is indeed a dangerous thing. Tolerance is not supposing believe that everything that anybody believes is true. This is not tolerance.
Suppose for instance that a society is formed which contends that the earth is flat. The external world does not support this belief and quite to the contrary denies this belief. However, this society is not to be persecuted, jailed or imprisoned. Tolerance, therefore, has nothing to do with whether or not a person's belief is true. Tolerance has to do with issues of civility and integrity and sometimes even pity and compassion.
