- You probably realized that some theories assume that truth is absolute (such as

the Correspondence theory), others see truth more from a relative or subjective
view point (Pragmatic theory). What is your view on this issue? Are you more an
absolutist or a relativist? Explain and justify with some personal example. Also,
try to understand the other perspective on truth: why do you think some people are
more absolutists/subjectivists? What would lead them to one or the other?
I believe that I am more of a relativist than an absolutist. It is because I think that
pragmatic theory is the most reliable theory among the three theories; and I want to
know different sides of beliefs, and use my own beliefs to apply to both sides, and
find out whether either of the sides corresponds with reality. For example, I started
martial arts. When it comes to punching, a punch is a punch, but hooks and upper
cut are different types of punches. When you are in a hand-to-hand combat with
another person, you have to improvise on your punch attacks, because one
punching technique is no use and not enough, and if you use only one technique of
punching to your opponent rapidly, your opponent will figure out how to
counterattack your punch, thus gaining the upper hand and advantage in combat.
Some people are more subjectivists, because they are suspicious of the world, and
they want to explore what is real, and whats not. An example would be God exists.
A Christian says that God exists, thus s/he is an absolutist. A relativist would oppose
that statement, saying that s/he didnt see God before his/her whole life.
- Does the coherence theory view truth more from an absolute or more from a
relative view point? Explain and justify.
The coherence theory views truth more from an absolute view point. In coherence
theory, you use your belief to apply to the topic/statement you are applying it to, to
see whether it is true or false. But it also depends on what kind of beliefs you are
applying to. For example, it is not cheating if you dont get caught. It is an absolute
view point because relative theory states that there are no absolute truth or
validity, and if something is true and not true at the same time, then our beliefs will
not exist because absolute relies on all beliefs, unless proven wrong, so in that
sense, the coherence theory views truth more from an absolute view point.
- How are the theories of truth similar or different from scientific theories? To give
you a hint, are the truth theories experimentally falsifiable? Why are they called
theories? Do you consider this an appropriate term? Could this be a language
issue?
Theory, very similar to hypothesis or prediction, is a statement that is intended to
be proven right or wrong, true or false. The difference between scientific theory and
truth theory is that scientific theory uses observation, measurements, and data;
truth theory is to explore, understand, and evaluate truth. In scientific theory, small

cases like gravity can easily be proven, but in big cases, like how big the universe is,
it is beyond our comprehension, so it is neither true nor false. Truth theory is a
language issue, but if the language is very developed, like English or Chinese, then
there isnt a problem about it.
- Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it (Andre Gide).
Whats so good about seeking truth? Whats so bad about fighting it? An Ethics
question!
The great benefit of seeking truth is that it acquires us knowledge. People seeking
truths have doubts of the truth, therefore explore, and discover the inside of the
box, feeding them knowledge and information that can be useful in the future.
Fighting truth, is denying truth and without the decency to find the real truth. This is
an issue when it comes to cooperation with other people and move forward
together.
I think Gides message is that truth is hard to find. Those who seek truth are
courageous, and those who find it are being lazy.