Philosophy 62 (240):237 - 243 (1987)

In her paper ‘Is it True What They Say About Tarski?’, Susan Haack argues that Popper is wrong to regard Tarski's theory of truth as a correspondence theory of truth. For, she says: … Tarksi does not present his theory as a correspondence theory. In fact Tarski explicitly comments that the correspondence theory cannot be considered a satisfactory definition of truth. And later he observes that he was ‘by no means surprised’ to learn that, in a survey carried out by Naess, only 15 per cent agreed that truth is correspondence with reality, while 90 per cent agreed that ‘It is snowing’ is true if and only if it is snowing
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/s003181910006407x
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,979
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Tarski and Primitivism About Truth.Jamin Asay - 2013 - Philosophers' Imprint 13:1-18.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

More on Putnam and Tarski.Panu Raatikainen - 2003 - Synthese 135 (1):37 - 47.
Tarski's Physicalism.Richard L. Kirkham - 1993 - Erkenntnis 38 (3):289-302.
Tarski - a Dilemma.Richard C. Jennings - 1987 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 30 (1 & 2):155 – 172.
Was Tarski's Theory of Truth Motivated by Physicalism?Greg Frost-Arnold - 2004 - History and Philosophy of Logic 25 (4):265-280.
On Tarski on Models.Timothy Bays - 2001 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 66 (4):1701-1726.
Is It True What They Say About Tarski?Susan Haack - 1976 - Philosophy 51 (197):323 - 336.


Added to PP index

Total views
27 ( #422,873 of 2,505,144 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,587 of 2,505,144 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes