E Pluribus Unum - Out of Many, One

Note, however, that the general end of surveillance – for example, survival – has the same right under a “necessary” purpose: it is naturally defined as a living species of a species that has developed through natural selection. And so, according to the same logic, one could sign a categorical standard of faith, even if it is always prudent, especially in deaths of life or deaths like that of the cancer diagnosis mentioned above. Although it contains the theory of correspondence as an ingredient, aletth pluralism is nevertheless a real competitor, because it rejects the thesis that truth is correspondence with reality. In addition, it also includes competitors in the match theory as additional elements. Truth is the purpose of faith; Lying is a mistake. People need the truth about the world to prosper. Truth is important. Believing what is not true is likely to ruin people`s plans and even cost them their lives. What is not true can lead to legal and social sanctions. On the other hand, a committed search for the truth characterizes the good scientist, the good historian and the good detective.

So what is the truth that it should have such gravity and such a central place in people`s lives? The objection, which perhaps most effectively led to dissatisfaction with the theory of correspondence, is based on an episteral concern. In short, the objection is that a theory of the correspondence of truth must inevitably lead to skepticism towards the outside world, because the necessary equivalent between our thoughts and reality is not perceptible. Since Berkeley`s attack on the theory of the representation of the mind, objections of this type have enjoyed considerable popularity. It is generally stated that we cannot leave our minds to compare our thoughts to the reality independent of the mind. But, the objection goes on, about the theory of the correspondence of truth, this is what we should do to acquire knowledge. We should access reality as it is in itself, regardless of our knowledge, and determine whether our thoughts correspond to it. As this is impossible, since our access to all is transmitted by our knowledge, the theory of correspondence makes knowledge impossible (cf. Kant 1800, intro vii). Assuming that the resulting skepticism is unacceptable, the theory of correspondence must be rejected and another representation of truth, an epistemic (antirealist) representation of any kind, must be substituted (e.g. ex.B Blanshard 1941). In response to this: (a) Definitions such as (1) or (2) are “mini-theories” – mini-theories are very common in philosophy – and it is not obvious that they are empty simply because they are imitable for general use.

 

Comments are closed.