Scientific realism with correspondence truth: A reply to Asay (2018)

Asay (2018) criticizes our contention that psychologists do best to adhere to a substantive theory of correspondence truth. He argues that deflationary theory can serve the same purposes as correspondence theory. In the present article we argue that (a) scientific realism, broadly construed, requires a version of correspondence theory and (b) contrary to Asay’s suggestion, correspondence theory does have important additional resources over deflationary accounts in its ability to support generalizations over classes of true sentences.

Kitcher’s Explanatory Demand and the Appropriate-Means Requirement on Successful Action

The most important challenge to the deflationary views of truth is the success argument. Kitcher defends this argument by demanding that a proper account of successful action should explain why one and the same action can be not only psychologically pertinent but also effectively pertinent, and by arguing that correspondence truth is required to meet this explanatory demand. In this paper, I argue that a proper account of successful action should explain why an agent’s action is an appropriate means to attain his goal, and that a deflationist can meet Kitcher’s explanatory demand by this appropriate-means requirement.