Criteria of truth - Revision history

wikademia>Eme: /* See also */

2011-04-22T05:01:51Z

wikademia>Eme: /* Pragmatic */

2010-11-26T08:10:13Z

Pragmatic

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:10, 26 November 2010
Line 54:		Line 54:

	===Pragmatic===		===Pragmatic===
	~~{{seealso\|Pragmatic theory of truth}}~~		If an idea works then it must be true, to the Pragmatist. The consequences of applying a concept reveal its truth value upon examination of the results. The full meaning of an idea is self-apparent in its application. For example, the therapeutic value and effect of penicillin in relation to infections is proven in its administration. Although [[Pragmatism]] is considered a valuable criterion, it must be used with caution and reservation, due to its potential for false positives. For example, a doctor may prescribe a patient medication for an illness, but it could later turn out that a placebo is equally as effective. Thus, untrue concepts could appear to be working contrary to the purpose of the pragmatic test. However, it has validity as a test, particularly in the form [[William Hocking]] called "Negative Pragmatism". In essence, it states that ideas that do not work cannot possibly be true, though ideas which do work may or may not be true.<ref>Sahakian & Sahakian, ''Ideas'', p. 9.</ref>
	If an idea works then it must be true, to the Pragmatist. The consequences of applying a concept reveal its truth value upon examination of the results. The full meaning of an idea is self-apparent in its application. For example, the therapeutic value and effect of penicillin in relation to infections is proven in its administration. Although [[Pragmatism]] is considered a valuable criterion, it must be used with caution and reservation, due to its potential for false positives. For example, a doctor may prescribe a patient medication for an illness, but it could later turn out that a placebo is equally as effective. Thus, untrue concepts could appear to be working contrary to the purpose of the pragmatic test. However, it has validity as a test, particularly in the form [[William Hocking]] called "Negative Pragmatism". In essence, it states that ideas that do not work cannot possibly be true, though ideas which do work may or may not be true.<ref>Sahakian & Sahakian, ''Ideas'', p. 9.</ref>

	===Revelation===		===Revelation===

wikademia>Eme: /* Footnotes */

2010-09-19T18:23:16Z

Footnotes

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:23, 19 September 2010
Line 88:		Line 88:
	==Footnotes==		==Footnotes==
	{{reflist\|2}}		{{reflist\|2}}

	~~{{Philosophy topics}}~~

	[[Category:Epistemology]]		[[Category:Epistemology]]

wikademia>Wikademia at 16:05, 5 June 2009

2009-06-05T16:05:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:05, 5 June 2009
Line 1:		Line 1:
	In [[epistemology]], '''criteria of truth''' (or '''tests of truth''') are standards and rules used to judge the accuracy of statements and claims. They are tools of verification. Understanding a [[philosophy]]'s criteria of [[truth]] is fundamental to a clear evaluation of that philosophy. This necessity is driven by the varying, and conflicting, claims of different philosophies. The rules of [[logic]] have no ability to distinguish truth on their own. An individual must determine what standards distinguish truth from [[Falsity\|falsehood]]. Not all criteria are equally valid. Some standards are sufficient, while others are questionable.<ref>{{cite book\|last=Sahakian\|first=William\| coauthors=Mabel Lewis Sahakian\|year=1993\|title= Ideas of the Great Philosophers\|publisher=Barnes and Noble\|isbn=1-56619-271-4\|pages=pp. 3–4}}</ref>		In [[epistemology]], '''criteria of truth''' (or '''tests of truth''') are standards and rules used to judge the accuracy of statements and claims. They are tools of verification. Understanding a [[philosophy]]'s criteria of [[truth]] is fundamental to a clear evaluation of that philosophy. This necessity is driven by the varying, and conflicting, claims of different philosophies. The rules of [[logic]] have no ability to distinguish truth on their own. An individual must determine what standards distinguish truth from [[Falsity\|falsehood]]. Not all criteria are equally valid. Some standards are sufficient, while others are questionable.<ref>{{cite book\|last=Sahakian\|first=William\| coauthors=Mabel Lewis Sahakian\|year=1993\|title= Ideas of the Great Philosophers\|publisher=Barnes and Noble\|isbn=1-56619-271-4\|pages=pp. 3–4}}</ref>
			{{ntnes}}
	==Primary truths==		==Primary truths==
	There are three "primary truths" inherently accepted in the investigation of knowledge and truth. They are the first fact (the fact of our existence), the first principle (the principle of non-contradiction) and the first condition (the ability of the mind to know truth). They cannot be validated with positive proof, as they are an inherent in every analysis. As a demonstration of their a priori nature, a person objecting to these essential truths cannot set a standard of proof without implicitly accepting the premises.<ref name="dolhenty">{{cite web \|url=http://www.radicalacademy.com/epistom.htm \|title=Part Thirteen:The Criterion of Truth \|accessdate=2007-10-31 \|last=Dolhenty \|first=Jonathan \|work= The Problem of Knowledge: A brief introduction to epistemology}}</ref>		There are three "primary truths" inherently accepted in the investigation of knowledge and truth. They are the first fact (the fact of our existence), the first principle (the principle of non-contradiction) and the first condition (the ability of the mind to know truth). They cannot be validated with positive proof, as they are an inherent in every analysis. As a demonstration of their a priori nature, a person objecting to these essential truths cannot set a standard of proof without implicitly accepting the premises.<ref name="dolhenty">{{cite web \|url=http://www.radicalacademy.com/epistom.htm \|title=Part Thirteen:The Criterion of Truth \|accessdate=2007-10-31 \|last=Dolhenty \|first=Jonathan \|work= The Problem of Knowledge: A brief introduction to epistemology}}</ref>

wikademia>Wikademia: 64 revisions

2009-04-12T20:06:19Z

64 revisions

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:06, 12 April 2009
(No difference)

wikademia>Sioraf: /* Revelation */

2009-04-09T17:10:03Z

Revelation

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:10, 9 April 2009
Line 58:		Line 58:

	===Revelation===		===Revelation===
	The principal distinction between intuition and [[revelation]] is that revelation has an assumed source: [[God]] (or another "higher power"). Revelation may be defined as truth emanating from God. Many [[religion]]s fundamentally rely on revelation as a test of truth. This criterion is subject to the same criticisms as intuition. It may be a valid reference of truth for an individual, but it is inadequate for providing a coherent proof of the knowledge to others.<ref>Sahakian & Sahakian, ''Ideas'', pp. 6–7.</ref>		The principal distinction between intuition and [[revelation]] is that revelation has an assumed source: [[God]] (or another higher power). Revelation may be defined as truth emanating from God. Many [[religion]]s fundamentally rely on revelation as a test of truth. This criterion is subject to the same criticisms as intuition. It may be a valid reference of truth for an individual, but it is inadequate for providing a coherent proof of the knowledge to others.<ref>Sahakian & Sahakian, ''Ideas'', pp. 6–7.</ref>

	===Time===		===Time===

wikademia>Letranova: /* See also */

2009-01-21T21:27:47Z

wikademia>Letranova: /* See Also */

2009-01-21T21:25:09Z

wikademia>Letranova: /* Tradition */

2009-01-21T21:23:44Z

Tradition

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:23, 21 January 2009
Line 65:		Line 65:
	===Tradition===		===Tradition===
	[[Tradition]], closely related to custom, is the standard stating that which is held for generations is true. Those accepting tradition argue that ideas gaining the loyalty multiple generations possesses a measure of credibility. Tradition possesses many of the same failings as custom. It is possible for falsehoods to be passed down from generation to generation, since tradition generally emphasizes repetition over [[critical thinking\|critical evaluation]].<ref name=sahakian1993p4/>		[[Tradition]], closely related to custom, is the standard stating that which is held for generations is true. Those accepting tradition argue that ideas gaining the loyalty multiple generations possesses a measure of credibility. Tradition possesses many of the same failings as custom. It is possible for falsehoods to be passed down from generation to generation, since tradition generally emphasizes repetition over [[critical thinking\|critical evaluation]].<ref name=sahakian1993p4/>

			==See Also==
			{{portal\|Thinking\|Brain.png}}
			* [[Bivalence]]
			* [[Perspectivism]]

	==Footnotes==		==Footnotes==

wikademia>Mpoulshock: /* Correspondence */

2009-01-07T14:31:52Z

Correspondence

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:31, 7 January 2009
Line 33:		Line 33:
	===Correspondence===		===Correspondence===
	{{seealso\|Correspondence theory of truth}}		{{seealso\|Correspondence theory of truth}}
	Correspondence is quite simply when a claim corresponds with its object. For example, the claim that the White House is in Washington, D.C. is true, if the White House actually is located in Washington. Correspondence is held by many philosophers to be the most valid of the criteria of truth. An idea which corresponds to its object is indeed true, but determining if the correspondence is perfect requires additional tests of truth. This indicates that correspondence is a perfectly valid ''definition'' of truth, but is not of itself a valid criterion of truth. An additional test beyond this "definition" is required to determine the precise degree of similarity between what is posited and what exists in [[objective reality]].<ref>Sahakian & Sahakian, ''Ideas'', p. 8.</ref>		Correspondence is quite simply when a claim corresponds with its object. For example, the claim that the White House is in Washington, D.C. is true, if the White House is actually located in Washington. Correspondence is held by many philosophers to be the most valid of the criteria of truth. An idea which corresponds to its object is indeed true, but determining if the correspondence is perfect requires additional tests of truth. This indicates that correspondence is a perfectly valid ''definition'' of truth, but is not of itself a valid criterion of truth. An additional test beyond this "definition" is required to determine the precise degree of similarity between what is posited and what exists in [[objective reality]].<ref>Sahakian & Sahakian, ''Ideas'', p. 8.</ref>

	===Custom===		===Custom===

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:01, 22 April 2011
Line 66:		Line 66:

	== See also ==		== See also ==
	~~{{portal\|Thinking\|Brain.png}}~~
	{{multicol}}		{{multicol}}
	* [[Conceptual framework]]		* [[Conceptual framework]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:27, 21 January 2009
Line 68:		Line 68:
	== See also ==		== See also ==
	{{portal\|Thinking\|Brain.png}}		{{portal\|Thinking\|Brain.png}}
			{{multicol}}
	* [[Conceptual framework]]		* [[Conceptual framework]]
	* [[Contextualism]]		* [[Contextualism]]
	* [[Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche]]
	* [[Fallibilism]]		* [[Fallibilism]]
	* [[Anekantavada]]		* [[Anekantavada]]
	* [[Immanuel Kant]]
	* [[George Berkeley]]
	* [[Rhizome (philosophy)]]
	* [[Exclusive disjunction]]		* [[Exclusive disjunction]]
	* [[Degrees of truth]]		* [[Degrees of truth]]
			{{multicol-break}}
	* [[False dilemma]]		* [[False dilemma]]
	* [[Fuzzy logic]]		* [[Fuzzy logic]]
Line 86:		Line 84:
	* [[Relativism]]		* [[Relativism]]
	* [[Principle of Bivalence]]		* [[Principle of Bivalence]]
			{{multicol-end}}

	==Footnotes==		==Footnotes==

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:25, 21 January 2009
Line 66:		Line 66:
	[[Tradition]], closely related to custom, is the standard stating that which is held for generations is true. Those accepting tradition argue that ideas gaining the loyalty multiple generations possesses a measure of credibility. Tradition possesses many of the same failings as custom. It is possible for falsehoods to be passed down from generation to generation, since tradition generally emphasizes repetition over [[critical thinking\|critical evaluation]].<ref name=sahakian1993p4/>		[[Tradition]], closely related to custom, is the standard stating that which is held for generations is true. Those accepting tradition argue that ideas gaining the loyalty multiple generations possesses a measure of credibility. Tradition possesses many of the same failings as custom. It is possible for falsehoods to be passed down from generation to generation, since tradition generally emphasizes repetition over [[critical thinking\|critical evaluation]].<ref name=sahakian1993p4/>

	==See ~~Also~~==		== See also ==
	{{portal\|Thinking\|Brain.png}}		{{portal\|Thinking\|Brain.png}}
	* [[~~Bivalence~~]]		* [[Conceptual framework]]
	* [[~~Perspectivism~~]]		* [[Contextualism]]
			* [[Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche]]
			* [[Fallibilism]]
			* [[Anekantavada]]
			* [[Immanuel Kant]]
			* [[George Berkeley]]
			* [[Rhizome (philosophy)]]
			* [[Exclusive disjunction]]
			* [[Degrees of truth]]
			* [[False dilemma]]
			* [[Fuzzy logic]]
			* [[Logical equality]]
			* [[Logical value]]
			* [[Multivalued logic]]
			* [[Propositional logic]]
			* [[Relativism]]
			* [[Principle of Bivalence]]

	==Footnotes==		==Footnotes==