Re: Pragmatic Truth • Discussion • (26) • (27)
Re: FB | Cybersemiotics • Richard Saunders

RS:

My intention was not to expand the correspondence theory of truth but to narrow it with specific constraints.  I think of it as an evolution of the theory making it a progressively accurate representation of reality in that form.  That said, I think earlier, simpler forms of the correspondence theory are still good enough for government work and for the girls I go with. 😃

Dear Richard,

As a veteran of the Wikipedia Truth Theory Wars of 2005–2007 I can tell you the restriction of “correspondence theory of truth” to dyadic truth predicates is deeply entrenched in the popular imagination and we have no choice but leave the field to established usage.

Even if we take Peirce’s hint to recognize the “triple correspondences” of triadic sign relations as a category unto itself, they are almost invariably misinterpreted as logical conjunctions of three dyadic relations.  That of course misses the point of what Peirce is trying to point out.

Taking the long history of “failures to communicate” into consideration, a less misleading generic term might be “relational theories of truth”.  There is a residual ambiguity owing to the different ways people interpret the word “relation”, either (1) a mathematical object or (2) a syntactic entity.  But that’s about the best we can do in so many words.  When it comes to names for the species, then, we may enumerate monadic, dyadic, and triadic relational theories of truth.  Which brings us back to the top of the thread.

Resources

• Pragmatic Maxim
• Pragmatic Theory Of Truth
• Survey of Inquiry Driven Systems

cc: FB | Inquiry Driven Systems • Laws of Form • Ma^thstodon • Academia.edu
cc: Conceptual Graphs • Cybernetics • Structural Modeling • Systems Science