The Five Major Theories of Truth, and How They Define Our World, Part One.

Truth, however you like to define it, is a fickle thing.

Some suggest everything's subjective, while others claim there must be some sort of objective reality; separate from our interpretation of it.

The focus of this two part article series is to outline and define the Five major theories of truth, as well as explain how they help define and direct the function of our society.

The first theory we'll discuss is Correspondence Theory of Truth, which states that Truth (or a true statement) corresponds to the actual state of affairs. Put another way, Correspondence theory states that truth is "what is".

A favorite framework for philosophers, this type of theory strives to accurately describe what's known as "objective reality", using words and other symbols. Not perfect, some critics state this view doesn't take into account (or acknowledge) various interpersonal/community power struggles, biases and other factors involved when deciding what is seen as truth.

Statements as simple as "the vehicle crashed" to more complex observations, such as, " a blue ball bounced in front of the red car, and this, combined with the driver staring at their phone, all contributed to the crash", are both True under Correspondence Theory, as long as they reflect "what actually happened".

The next theory, known as Coherence Theory, states that all elements must fit properly in a whole system in order to be true. But beyond just needing to fit, they need to mutually support and even necessitate one another, in order to be "true".

This theory can seem confusing, and is helpful to remember that it views truth as a combination of factors, rather than a statement without any underpinnings or inferences. Truth is a system, and interconnected one where all the of pieces are essential to the whole.

Popular among a variety of different logicians, from Spinoza to Hegel, this theory has largely been retired to antiquity, though it does see to have gained popularity among various contemporary positivists.

While sound in its logic and probably an ideal definition of the word truth (one where correspondence theory could define "facts" rather than "truths"), its complexity has been sacrificed for more simple and easier to manipulate theories that dictate today's society.

Our third major theory of truth is titled Pragmatic, and for good reason: This theory states that what is true is what works, and can be verified by the results of ones practice.

Pioneered by a few big thinkers of their day, including William James, John Dewey and Charles Peirce, the definition of this specific theory has varied depending on which figurehead is defending it, but all viewed the definition as some sort of inherent quality in a specific behavior or thinking.

The challenge with this theory is you can attribute incorrect assertions/premises as to why something is functioning the way it is, and draw the conclusion that this reason is what caused said success/reality.

For example: Many body-builders tout that their physique is a result of their behavior, when many times it is equally a result of great genetics. Not that their work doesn't impact their results, but it is not the main reason, or only reason, that they succeed in the realm of physical strength/looks.

As you can see, this type of conclusion-drawing can make it easy for this version of truth defining or conclusion-drawing to be manipulated. Fortunately, we can protect ourselves from this type of manipulation in our upcoming series on dialectical and rhetorical reasoning!

Stay tuned for part two of our series on Truth, where we'll discuss some of the more complex and popular expressions of truth in our society today, and be sure to sign up for our weekly newsletter, where we send an ad-free inspirational email discussing our favorite philosophers and their most famous quotes!