What is Truth

Truth, as a concept, is one of the central topics in various contexts, including philosophy and theology. Most human thought, understanding and communication depends on how we perceive the concept of truth.

Most commonly, the word truth is used to mean, and is understood as, being in accord with fact or reality¹. This is also known as the correspondence theory of truth. Additionally, a 2020 PhilPapers survey of 7,685 philosophers found that more than 48% accepts or lean towards the correspondence theory account of truth².

For the purposes of this wiki, we will adopt the correspondence theory of truth primarily.

However, this is not the only theory of truth and there are many issues and controversy surrounding the concept of truth³. This is not further discussed, as it appears to be largely irrelevant to this wiki’s context.

Also see Truth

Truth-aptness

A sentence is truth-apt if it expresses propositions—declarative statements that describe reality and can be evaluated as true or false (having a truth-value). These can come in different forms such as theories, facts, beliefs etc.

Not all sentences are truth-apt, some examples include the following:

Questions: e.g. can you close the door?
Commands: e.g. close the door!
Expressions of emotion: e.g. ouch!

Propositions as the bearer of truth

Truth-apt sentences expresses propositions which are the primary bearer of truth. For example, the sentence “The cup is white” expresses the proposition that the cup is white. Crucially, the truth-value of a sentence is evaluated on the proposition level, which does not depend on human convention or language.

If another word besides “white” is used to denote the color of the mug that we observe, the proposition that the cup is white would still be true—only the language and convention that we use changes. A more realistic illustration of the sentence-proposition distinction is that the same proposition “The cup is white” can be expressed in other languages.

It is important to recognize that the same sentence can express different propositions depending on the context. For example, when someone says, “It has rained today” on 4 March 2025, they are conveying the proposition that rain occurred on that date. However, if the same sentence is spoken on 5 March 2025, it instead expresses the proposition that rain occurred on 5 March 2025.

The theory that propositions are the bearer of truth is the more favored theory, though there are other theories⁴.

Theories of Truth

There are five widely accepted contemporary theories of truth⁴: (1) Correspondence Theory; (2) Semantic Theory; (3) Deflationary Theory; (4) Coherence Theory; (5) Pragmatic Theory.

Note that there are objections and issues raised for each theory, however, that is outside of the scope of this wiki. This entry serves to give a basic overview of the various theories of truth.

Correspondence Theory — Truth is that which corresponds to reality

The correspondence theory of truth says that a proposition is true if it accurately represents reality—the way things actually are. In other words, the correspondence between a proposition and reality is what gives rise to the proposition’s truth value.

Semantic Theory — Truth is that which corresponds to the conditions under which it is satisfied.

The Semantic theory of Truth (STT) was originally developed by Alfred Tarski in the 1930s as a formal approach to defining truth, particularly in mathematical logic and formal languages. While Tarski gave reasons for not extending his theory to natural languages, there were others, notably Donald Davidson, that attempted to.

To understand STT, one needs to understand the following key concepts.

Object Language: the language that one is talking about (quoted text)
Metalanguage: the language used to describe, analyze, or talk about the object language.

Tarski’s STT demands that the object language would have to be contained in the metalanguage, and that the truth-predicates, “true” and “false” would be limited to the metalanguage.

A truth sentence (or T-sentence) in Tarski’s framework follows the general form (1):

(1) “P” is true if, and only if, P.

For example, (2)

(2) “Snow is white” is true if and only if snow is white

It is important to note that STT is not saying (3)

(3) Snow is white if and only if snow is white

While (3) is a logically true statement, it does not provide any insight into what truth means—it is merely a restatement of the same proposition on both sides of the equivalence. Tarski’s STT, in contrast, clarifies the concept of truth by explicitly distinguishing between object language and metalanguage.

In more abstract domains such as mathematics, the correspondence theory of truth encounters difficulties in specifying what mathematical propositions correspond to, since they do not directly relate to physical reality. However, STT can account for this.

For example,

(4) “2 + 2 = 4” is true if, and only if, 2 + 2 = 4

Here, “2 + 2 = 4” belongs to the object language of Peano arithmetic, while the metalanguage asserts its truth. Unlike the correspondence theory, which ties truth to an external reality, STT allows for truth to be determined within a formal system based on interpretation and satisfaction conditions.

Coherence Theory — Truth is that which coheres with a system of beliefs or proposition

A coherent theory of truth defines the truth of a proposition based on whether it coheres (fits consistently) within a system of beliefs or propositions. Truth is determined by the logical structure of propositions rather than by correspondence to an external reality.

It is important to note that this theory is offered as an analysis of the nature of truth and not just a way to test the truth of a set of propositions.

Pragmatic Theory — Truth is that which is useful

A pragmatic theory of truth defines truth in terms of utility—a statement or proposition is true if it leads to successful practical outcomes or is useful in achieving goals. Another perspective of a pragmatic theory of truth is that truth is the end of inquiry (such that it is satisfactory to believe)

Deflationary Theory — Truth is a linguistic device

Unlike theories that attempt to define truth in terms of correspondence, coherence, or utility, the deflationary theory of truth states that saying a statement or proposition is true does not add any substantive meaning beyond asserting it.

Is Truth objective or subjective?

To properly answer the question of “Is truth objective or subjective”, it is essential to clarify the underlying concepts and what the question is really asking.

Clarifying the question

Truth

Above, we have laid out that we would adopt the correspondence theory of truth where a proposition is true if it accurately represents reality. Truth, here, thus means the judgement or evaluation of the truth value of the proposition.

Objective and Subjective

There are two primary ways in which the concepts of objectivity and subjectivity are typically understood:

(1) Fact Not Affected by a Subject’s Feelings, Biases, or Interpretations

Objective truth in this sense refers to facts that are not influenced by personal feelings or perspectives.

(2) Statement independent of a subject

Objective truth in this sense refers to statements or facts that hold true regardless of any subject’s consciousness or perception.

A statement like “Alan likes chocolate” would be objectively true under the first conception—this can be verified by observing Alan’s reaction to chocolate and so on. However, the same statement would be not be objectively true under the second conception because it is dependent on Alan existing.

For the purpose of this question, we will adopt the first definition. Putting it together, the question of “Is truth objective or subjective” would be asking whether the evaluation of the truth-value of a proposition is affected by a subject’s perspective or interpretation. Can the same proposition be true for someone but false for another?

Reality is mind-independent

Most philosophers (>78% from 2020 PhilPapers survey²) accept or lean towards realism as an account for the nature of reality which posits that reality exists independently of human perception or consciousness. On the other hand, idealism posits that the external world exists only when it is perceived or experienced by conscious minds.

The conversation between idealism and realism deserves another entry on its own. For the purposes of this article, we will assume realism.

Truth is objective

With the assumption of realism*, it can be said that truth would be objective—a proposition is either true for everyone or false for everyone. This applies even to subjective statements, which can give rise to distinct propositions.

For example, if Alan tells Betty and Amy, “You will smile after eating what I cooked,” two propositions are embedded in that statement: “Betty will smile after eating what Alan cooked” and “Amy will smile after eating what Alan cooked.” Saying that the statement is subjectively true for Betty and false for Amy is consistent with saying that truth—which is concerned about proposition—being objective.

*Without the assumption of realism, different subjects could experience different reality. Building on the example above, the same proposition “Betty will smile after eating what Alan cooked” could be true for Alan but false for Betty.

References

1
Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, s.v. “truth,” accessed March 4, 2025, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/truth.
2
Bourget, D. & Chalmers, D. J. (2023) Philosophers on Philosophy: The 2020 PhilPapers Survey. Philosophers’ Imprint 23 (11).
3
Glanzberg, Michael, “Truth”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2023 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2023/entries/truth/>.
4
Bradley, Dowden, and Swartz Norman. “Truth | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.” Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed March 4, 2025. https://iep.utm.edu/truth.