Posted by carlopenco on January 8, 2010
Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic?
Accept or lean toward: correspondence 1450 / 3226 (44.9%)
Accept or lean toward: deflationary 670 / 3226 (20.7%)
Other 659 / 3226 (20.4%)
Accept or lean toward: epistemic 447 / 3226 (13.8%)
It looks like philosophers tend towards the most traditional vision of truth, despite the big effort of “experts” in truth theories to give alternative options (*). However, this is not true; we don’t know exactly what hides behind “Other”, and if we want a yes/no divide, correspondence is 44,9% against non-correspondence (54,9% ..something is missing). Doest it mean traditional views lose against more sophisticated views? The point is that we like winning-losing; but the contraposition is weak; that there is some aspect of correspondence is an idea generally shared, without accepting a strict correspondence view of truth. Therefore it is not clear whether people accepting correspondence were just rejecting coherence theory of truth or something else. What is true: many philosophers have spent some time in answering a question about truth.
(*) Remark: who are the experts? Probably the few that have made the meta-survey where you were asked to say not what you think, but what you think philosophers think; in the meta-survey (“mean estimate”) correspondence is less that the actual and epistemic is more than the actual. I suppose that in the meta-survey there were more philosophers aware of the epistemic chance.