Pragmatic Truth • Discussion 27

Re: Pragmatic Truth • Discussion 26
Re: FB | CybersemioticsRichard Saunders

RS:
Agreed, but given those qualifications (the perspective on facts qualified by the pragmatic maxim and the perspective on correspondence qualified by irreducible triadic relations) the pragmatic theory of truth is still a specialized correspondence theory.

Dear Richard,

It is always possible to expand the coverage of any term until it becomes vacuous, but that is not the sense in which “correspondence theory of truth” is normally used.  The usual suspects are always dyadic relations, the “mirror of nature”, Russell’s “isomorphism theory”, and iconographies of that ilk.

Resources

cc: FB | Inquiry Driven SystemsLaws of Form • Mathstodon • Academia.edu
cc: Conceptual GraphsCyberneticsStructural ModelingSystems Science

This entry was posted in Aristotle, C.S. Peirce, Coherence, Concordance, Congruence, Consensus, Convergence, Correspondence, Dewey, Fixation of Belief, Information, Inquiry, John Dewey, Kant, Logic, Logic of Science, Method, Peirce, Philosophy, Pragmatic Maxim, Pragmatism, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Truth, Truth Theory, William James and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Pragmatic Truth • Discussion 27

  1. Pingback: Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems • 6 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  2. Pingback: Pragmatic Truth • Discussion 28 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  3. Pingback: Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems • 7 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  4. Pingback: Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems • 6 | Inquiry Into Inquiry

  5. Pingback: Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems • 7 | Systems Community of Inquiry

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.