Determining what is true or false is a very complex subject. Examining the three theories presented by Plato, Locke and Hume, deciding what is true or false still remains a challenge. All the three theories have strengths and weaknesses that continue to be a puzzle up to the present date. However, of the three theories, the coherence theory seems to be convincing. According to the coherence theory, truth is determined if the proposition in question consists in its coherence with some specified set of propositions. On the other hand, in Plato’s correspondence theory, truth or falsity of a statement is ascertained only by how it relates to the world and whether it appropriately describes that world. Humes on the other hand defines truth or falsehood as an agreement or disagreement either to the real relations of ideas or to real existence and matter of fact.
The definition of truth provided by the coherence theory is convincing because there are numerous situations where truth can lack worldly or factual attachment. A statement can be true based on what has been observed or believed by the parties over a period of time. The assertion that truth is only based on beliefs as stated by Plato is not entirely convincing because some beliefs can be misleading, for instance, the myths within our society. Many people believe in myths but these myths are not entirely true because they lack coherence. Therefore, for something to be considered true it must have been proven over a period of time thus showcasing consistency.
Humes on the other hand notes that for a statement to be true it must be facts. However, not everything can be proven by evidence as there are cases where evidence lacks. For example, it might be challenging to prove whether something was stolen because the stolen thing cannot be presented as evidence of theft. However, through accounts of people who saw it there over a period of time can be used to prove that it has been stolen from where it was.
Additionally, the correspondence theory notes that truth conditions of propositions are not in general propositions but rather objective features of the world. Plato argues that people are born with innate knowledge on what is wrong or right. However, this account cannot be proven and has much critique since many believe that right or wrong is something that is learned. Therefore, for something to be true, it has to exist not entirely tangible but as a consistent belief among a group of people. The truth can only be determined in relation to accounts that have been evident. Deducing from Locke's theory, the truth conditions of something or a statement can be found in other propositions. The explanation provided by correspondence theory regarding propositions or rather truth values is convincing since something can be claimed true through analyzing other facets within the niche in which a statement or condition is presented.
Ascertaining whether something is true or not relies on many factors. First, it depends on the context, time, population and even region. Due to these complexities, it can be agreed that truth depends on beliefs as asserted by Plato and Locke. Difference societies have differing beliefs and thus what can be true in one society can be regarded as false in one society. A proponent of Humes theory can argue that facts are needed to decide whether something is true but there are things whose facts or evidence cannot be obtained. Humes's concept of truth can be valid in specific contexts only. For instance, in a court of law, for a claim to be considered true or false, the evidence must be presented. However, in other contexts, evidence alone cannot be the true determining factor of truth since even evidence can be fabricated thus providing a falsifying truth.
However, the argument is not conclusive since there are many gaps on how to examine the subject of truth. Examining the conversation between Socrates and Euthyphro, it is apparent that definitions can be very challenging based on the fact that all concepts around the world have multiple or even infinite dimensions. It was hard for Socrates and Euthyphro to reach the definition of the term piety because the term can be applied in different places and situations. In this sense, defining truth is also challenging because for one to ascertain whether something is true or false, the conditions to which the claim is made have to be examined first.
Summing up, evaluating whether a statement is true or not is a complex subject. From the three theories presented, it is apparent that all the theories have weaknesses. Therefore, the closest answer to what truth entails can be drawn by combining all three theories to come up with the best answer. It is good to analyze the beliefs of people in which a claim is presented and counter the beliefs with consistencies surrounding it and lastly examine whether there are facts to back up the claim in question.
0
1432