Has the Correspondence Theory of Truth Been Refuted? From Gottlob Frege to Donald Davidson

1995 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorenz Krüger
2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 578-595
Author(s):  
JOHN ALLAN KNIGHT

AbstractThis article defends the correspondence theory of truth against criticisms of three theologians: Stephen Long, Kevin Hector, and Bruce Marshall. Long's criticisms arise from his metaphysical commitments, Hector's from his anti-metaphysical commitments, and Marshall's from his methodological commitments. I treat Long and Hector briefly, before giving a more extended treatment of Bruce Marshall's attack on the correspondence theory using the slingshot argument of Donald Davidson. I argue that correspondence theories withstand their criticisms. They therefore pose no obstacle to using them in theology.


Author(s):  
Katarzyna Popek

The purpose of the text is to make some reconnaissance in the area of title "districts of metaphor" (or hunting grounds of metaphor) as well as reference to the unsolvable problems which are implied by a metaphorical mystery of metaphysical expressions. Thy are the order of the day in the main currents of philosophy. Starting from the rhetorical tradition of metaphor (the Aristotelian attempts of definition of metaphor as such) and of terms additional related with it (Max Black), I gradually illustrate what involves its post-rhetorical tradition. I show that philosophical symbolism derives from Aristotle’s hermeneutics, which becomes a gateway for understanding the mystery of metaphor. Like browsing in themselves mirrors, it grows also from simple phrases in complex sentences. In semantic sense, while the symbol has many meanings, the metaphor has a double meaning. It is not however limited by this matter, because in some sense, it has broader content than a symbol, as it introduces into language meanings that in the symbol are only internal (Paul Ricoeur). We also encounter reflective metaphors in our everyday speech and in the attempts of associative penetration into other people's expression. Conceptual decoding of metaphors is common for users of language (George Lakoff, Mark Johnson). On the other hand, there are specific districts of metaphorical expressions, which are reserved for poetic metaphors (Donald Davidson). Noteworthy are also the very unobvious contexts of metaphor in which the authors do not talk about this linguistic phenomenon directly (eg. Gottlob Frege, Ernst Cassirer). Declarative answer to the question whether the metaphor is a simply ornament of discourse or rather a mirror of the soul, is not possible too. Perhaps the metaphor as such includes the both variants. One must consider that being an ornament of speech or writing does not rule out it is also something more than just decoration. It wonders, bothers, disquiet, returning us into our souls. It is also like the unifying soul of all people – in cognitive sense.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document