I en ny artikel för Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ”The Correspondence Theory of Truth”, presenterar och analyserar professor Marian David den s.k. korrespondensteorin, som i en enkel form säger följande:
x is true iff x corresponds to some fact;
x is false iff x does not correspond to any fact.
I have never had any doubts about truth, because it seems a notion so transcendentally clear that nobody can be ignorant of it … the word ”truth”, in the strict sense, denotes the conformity of thought with its object.
Denna förståelse av sanning kan verka intuitivt rimlig även för en icke-filosof, men som David påpekar finns många utmanare:
The correspondence theory of truth is often associated with metaphysical realism. Its traditional competitors, coherentist, pragmatist, and verificationist theories of truth, are often associated with idealism, anti-realism, or relativism. In recent years, the traditional competitors have been virtually replaced (at least from publication-space) by deflationary theories of truth and, to a lesser extent, by the identity theory: they now lead the attack against correspondence theories. Another approach to truth that has recently received considerable attention is truthmaker theory; it is sometimes viewed as a competitor to, sometimes as a more liberal version of, the correspondence theory.
Vilken teori om vad sanning är anser du vara sann?