In the history of philosophy, there have been three main theories concerning Truth. They are the correspondence, coherence, and pragmatic theories of truth.
Correspondence - Something is true if it corresponds to reality. This theory is often traced backed to Aristotle who once wrote,
To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true (Metaphysics).
What Aristotle is saying is that something is true or false depending on whether it corresponds with reality, with what is “out there.”
Coherence – Something is true if it “fits” within one’s own set of beliefs. The key thing about coherence is that it turns from looking outward (at reality), to turning inward to one’s own beliefs irrespective of others’ beliefs.
Pragmatic – Something is true if it works or produces good results.
The coherence and pragmatic theories of truth can lead to relativism and contradiction, because they turn away from describing “what is” (objective reality) to subjective (personal) or conventional (social) reality.
Given that about the different theories of Truth, a worldview (a set of beliefs and assumptions) should be tested by all three of these categories. When evaluating your worldview or critiquing another’s, you can ask these different questions (although I would rephrase the pragmatic theory):
- Does my belief about [X] match with reality (e.g. – “Suffering is an illusion”)?
- Does my belief about [X] logically cohere internally with my other beliefs (e.g. – “There is no Truth”)?
- Does my belief about [X] lead to anything good (e.g. – “People are evolved and have no dignity”)?
