Reality In David Hume's Analysis

Deeply rooted in philosophy, the correspondence view of reality and truth is the typical way of thinking in society. Reality in this model may look like the following thought process: Reality is the correspondence between what is in the outside world and what is in the viewer’s head. Reality is independent of the subject, but the experience of reality is dependent on the subject. It is independent because objects in reality exist as they are without the experience of observers. This ontology emphasizes a subject-object divide. For example, if a boy thought he saw a bracelet on the ground, but it was really a snake, the snake would be seen as in “reality,” and as more real than the bracelet. The boy’s perception would be seen as outside reality …show more content…
For Descartes, this meant the amount the physical world corresponds to the spiritual world. Locke reworded this by saying truth is the amount the objective corresponds to the subjective. In other words, the boy’s experience of the bracelet would be untrue since his perception was not accurate. David Hume found a flaw in this thinking by pointing out that reality and truth are considered such because of the agreement of multiple subjective beings. Hume did not think that society should readily accept a view that says an objective realm causes a subjective realm. He also pointed out that in correspondence thinking, an external reality can only be an assumption. Hume’s argument is termed “radical skepticism.” Correspondence thinkers respond to radical skepticism by placing the world in a bigger reality. Descartes responds to this view by saying God would not trick us. Another philosopher named Bishop Berkeley placed reality into God’s mind. The only thing cognitive scientists added to the mix, is they used non-spiritual terms, like physicalism, to describe essentially the same ideas as the philosophers. Today, correspondence thinkers place reality into evolutionary theory. While they tried, no one can give a sound argument for why there is an external reality in the correspondence …show more content…
Coherence theory tests to see if your experience contradict each other. The lack of contradictions signifies “coherence.” In correspondence theory, truth could be established by taking the subjective experience out and theoretically only leaving objective reality, which supposedly gives you truth. In coherence theory, truth is vindicated by establishing a lack of contradictions. Jumping back to the snake and bracelet story, the boy’s perception of the bracelet was true because he had the experience. Moment to moment, this perception was not contradicted, until he realized it was actually a snake. When the snake experienced, contradicted the bracelet experience, then there was a lack of coherence. There are different modes of deriving truth, for example science and daily practice are two different modes because they establish truth different. The quantitative tests used to develop truth in science cannot be transferred to daily practices, such as politics, because truth is politics includes opinions. They both look for coherence in what they are trying to accomplish. Science looks for coherence in describing a phenomenon, while politics seeks coherence in expected outcomes given a system. Science could not measure political truths, and vice versa. Having different modes of truth gives experiences and feelings a place to be valued. Coherence realizes that every being is a coherent being that has its own