more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 3593

[filed under theme 3. Truth / C. Correspondence Truth / 3. Correspondence Truth critique ]

Full Idea

The trouble with appeal to facts in the correspondence theory is that, in general, we have no way of indicating what fact a sentence, when true, corresponds to other than asserting the sentence.

Gist of Idea

The only way to specify the corresponding fact is asserting the sentence

Source

Michael Williams (Problems of Knowledge [2001], Ch.12)

Book Ref

Williams,Michael: 'Problems of Knowledge' [OUP 2001], p.140


The 29 ideas from 'Problems of Knowledge'

We control our beliefs by virtue of how we enquire [Williams,M]
Is it people who are justified, or propositions? [Williams,M]
Sometimes I ought to distrust sources which are actually reliable [Williams,M]
Externalist reliability refers to a range of conventional conditions [Williams,M]
Externalism does not require knowing that you know [Williams,M]
How could there be causal relations to mathematical facts? [Williams,M]
In the causal theory of knowledge the facts must cause the belief [Williams,M]
Externalism ignores the social aspect of knowledge [Williams,M]
Scepticism can involve discrepancy, relativity, infinity, assumption and circularity [Williams,M]
Foundationalists are torn between adequacy and security [Williams,M]
Strong justification eliminates error, but also reduces our true beliefs [Williams,M]
Experience must be meaningful to act as foundations [Williams,M]
Are empirical foundations judgements or experiences? [Williams,M]
Sense data avoid the danger of misrepresenting the world [Williams,M]
Propositions make error possible, so basic experiential knowledge is impossible [Williams,M]
Sense data can't give us knowledge if they are non-propositional [Williams,M]
Justification needs coherence, while truth might be ideal coherence [Williams,M]
Coherence needs positive links, not just absence of conflict [Williams,M]
Seeing electrons in a cloud chamber requires theory [Williams,M]
Only a belief can justify a belief [Williams,M]
Foundationalists base meaning in words, coherentists base it in sentences [Williams,M]
Why should diverse parts of our knowledge be connected? [Williams,M]
Coherence theory must give a foundational status to coherence itself [Williams,M]
We could never pin down how many beliefs we have [Williams,M]
The only way to specify the corresponding fact is asserting the sentence [Williams,M]
Phenomenalism is a form of idealism [Williams,M]
What works always takes precedence over theories [Williams,M]
Scepticism just reveals our limited ability to explain things [Williams,M]
Deduction shows entailments, not what to believe [Williams,M]