What’s the difference between coherent and correspondent truth?


It’s my first time reading about philosophy yet i still can’t grasp my head over this concept, if someone can explain it in a pretty simple way, that’d be much appreciated

In: Other

correspondence = probably more or less how someone who thinks about truth already thinks of it (and apparently you do) . Something you might say or express or communicate (that you’ll probably see in philosophy being called a ‘proposition’) is or is not *true* by virtue of whether it reflects some way objective reality is (you could look up the concept of morphism in mathematics). So truth is a relation between propositions and objective reality.

coherence = probably alien to how you think of truth already, so according to this there is a given set of propositions that outline the forms truth can take, and any given proposition is *true* if it relates to these core truths in a specific way (not exactly logical consistency, but you can think of it that way). So truth is a relation between propositions and other propositions, there’s no connection to an objective reality independent of mind. This idea comes from idealist philosophy which rejected mind-independent reality. Not to say there’s no objective reality here, here the objective reality *is* mind – it shouldn’t be understood to mean everyone makes up their own reality or something.

Correspondent truth corresponds to (or is accordance with) some objective reality.

Coherent truth need only to make sense within it’s own set of rules.

When people complain of plot holes in movies they usually don’t complain about things that aren’t in accordance with objective reality (correspondent truth), they complain about things that dont adhere to the rules established within the movie (coherent truth)

Like: The Last Jedi – if you could take out an entire fleet by ramming a ship at lightspeed why didn’t they do that with the first ship that ran out of fuel rather than the last?