Truth Theories, Knowledge, and Human Nature: A Philosophical Analysis
Theories of Truth
In the epistemological sense, a proposition is true when what is said corresponds to truth.
Correspondence Theory
A proposition is true if it corresponds to the truth. That means there is basically a representational correspondence because it has something to do with what is supposed to arise. Problems arise for those who attempt to analyze the correspondence. This theory is associated with realism, which assumes that reality exists independent of our minds and that this reality is basically as shown in it. Representation consists in the abstraction of form.
Coherence Theory
It holds that a proposition is true not because it corresponds with reality, but because it is consistent with all other propositions that are true. For a proposition to hold true, it needs to be supported by others, preferably deductively. This theory avoids the comparison between truth and reality, as you only compare statements. However, it still has problems, since the coherence of a series of propositions that contradict each other not only ensures that if one is true, the others are not, but the whole could be false. Coherence is defended by metaphysical and epistemological positions such as idealism and rationalism.
Pragmatic Theory
A position is true if its effects are positive for those who support it. This theory disagrees with correspondence, but here adequacy means that the statement provides positive support for a purpose, however useful that may not be reached at any given time. According to pragmatism, truth is not an immutable characteristic.
The Possibility of Knowledge
Skepticism
Skepticism comes from the Greek Skeptomai (look closely). This thorough analysis should make us be absolutely sure before making a decision. As this is sometimes impossible, hence the call for thoughtful skeptics who believed it was impossible to achieve absolute certainty. We must distinguish two levels:
- Radical: Claims that man is unable to achieve any knowledge of what goes beyond analyzing what knowledge should be. To know if it is understood that a subject grasps an object in his mind, which is not possible because this object cannot be considered to physically penetrate. The founder, Pyrrho of Elis, stated that we cannot attain knowledge of any object because we cannot physically grasp it. The best, said Pyrrho, is the suspension of judgment, not commenting on anything (epokhe). This sort of skepticism is contradictory.
- Moderate: Believes it is impossible to reach any knowledge, not because we lack the ability, but because we will never be certain whether a statement is true. We can only say that some are more probable. It began with Arcesilaus and Carneades, and its leading figures were Michel de Montaigne, Pierre Charron, and Tomas Sanchez. However, the most important philosophical skepticism was that of David Hume. His theoretical skepticism makes us distrust reason and leads us away from dogmatism.
Dogmatism
This is the opposite position to skepticism. It comes from the word meaning “doctrine.” Dogma is a set of principles primarily used in religion to refer to doctrines that are absolutely true. A dogmatic person uncritically accepts that human beings can reach absolute truth. The person to be dogmatic is convinced that any opposing thought must be false.
Relativism
Those who believe that true knowledge can be reached, but these are not valid for all subjects and for all time, hold a relativist position. There are different types of relativism:
- Individual Relativism: The truth may be different for each individual. This position was defended by Protagoras, who said that “man is the measure of the world.”
- Social Relativism: Believes there is a system of truth for each culture. The great development of cultural anthropology contributes to the defense of relativism.
- Historical Relativism: Argues that each age has its own set of truths, and there are no universal or transhistorical truths, but only truths in relation to a particular human group.
Criticism
Before any position, to say whether something is true or false, one must analyze human reason to see if it has the ability to access such knowledge and under what conditions it can. Kant said that the first task of reason is to analyze its own way of knowing, its possibilities, and limits. Without prior criticism, one could easily fall into deception. Human reason can have objective knowledge, but not of reality itself, but of the object of knowledge. Kant came to the conclusion that we can know phenomenal reality, i.e., that which is manifest to us. An objective reality is that which is the subject of human knowledge for Kant.
Practically no current philosophical dogmatism takes a radical position that corresponds to the metaphysics we call naive realism. If by dogmatism we mean that position which has confidence in the human capacity to know, we can include moderate dogmatism. All philosophers who have developed a metaphysical system and any theory of knowledge defend it through reason because they believe their theories to be true.
Contemporary Review of the Human
Karl Marx
According to Marxist theory, the ideas of individuals are determined by their class position, which means that politics, law, philosophy, art, or religion are merely ideological. Beneath the coating hides human material reality. He said, “What one is and what he thinks is determined by the kind of society we live in.”
Nietzsche
Nietzsche considered that what was believed to be the best of man throughout the history of culture is merely a defensive reaction of weak creatures to justify their impotence against the forces of life, their inability to live them. Values and ideals are the refuge that humans build to hide their fear of disorder and chaos. So he thinks we should stop all the false ideals and leave the ground prepared for the arrival of a “superman” able to live without resentment in a world of that nature.
Freud
Freud believed that man had two dimensions: the conscious and the unconscious. By introducing this assumption, the idea of man is devoid of what was identified, his ideas, which were considered a tool for the exploitation of one class by another. Values are a cover for moral poverty, and life and consciousness are a brake on the subconscious that directs.