This seems not to do justice to our sense that experience plays a special role in controlling our systems of belief, but coherentists have contested the claim in various ways. For a pure coherence theorist, experience is only relevant as the source of perceptual beliefs, which take their place as part of the coherent or incoherent set. It is the 'theory of knowledge which maintains that truth is a property primarily applicable to any extensive body of consistent propositions, and derivatively applicable to any one proposition in such. To many thinkers the weak point of pure coherence theories is that they fail to include a proper sense of the way in which actual systems of belief are sustained by persons with perceptual experience, impinged upon by their environment. According to one view, the coherence theory of truth regards truth as coherence within some specified set of sentences, propositions or beliefs. The theory, though surprising at first sight, has two strengths: (i) we test beliefs for truth in the light of other beliefs, including perceptual beliefs, and (ii) we cannot step outside our own best system of belief, to see how well it is doing in terms of correspondence with the world.
As with Coherence Theory, truth in this sense is nothing to do with the way the world ‘really is’ but is just a function of whether an idea can be used as. 3 The Coherence Theory: seems circular or question begging: it defines truth in terms of coherence with our knowledge. The view that the truth of a proposition consists in its being a member of some suitably defined body of other propositions: a body that is consistent, coherent, and possibly endowed with other virtues, provided these are not defined in terms of truth. The Pragmatic Theory of truth determines whether or not a belief is true or not based on whether it has a useful (pragmatic) application in the world. An investigation of the coherence of a moral system will thus take as primary the logical relationships between moral words.
0 kommentar(er)
