Condition of Correspondence Theory Towards Metaphysical Propositions: An Examination Through Two Examples and al- Ism wa al-musammā Discussions

Abstract

The correspondence theory of truth is briefly defined as “the correspondence of knowledge to its object”, that is, the correspondence of an expression, proposition, belief, or statement of situation to a truth. According to that, it’s accuracy takes shape as a two-way correspondence relation between a proposition and a fact (or situation) in the world. Therefore, the correspondence theory makes it possible to make a characterization of truth or falsity about things in the world that are currently observable, known as subject-independent facts. That is, a proposition is true if and only if there is a situation corresponding to it in reality. This means that truth is an objective reality established by the connection between propositions and facts, and also contrasts with theories of truth that say truth depends on one's point of view or what one believes. Correspondence theory provides the basis for all theories of truth. It can be said that Aristotle's statement, “to say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true” is the most cited place regarding the theory of correspondence. As can be said based on this definition the correspondence theory is an approach to reality, defined as the conformity of true knowledge to its object, that keeps the possibility of true knowledge registered only with the experienceable, observable world. This approach to reality does not have a separate form, and throughout history, with various interpretations, it has sometimes focused on a subject independent reality and sometimes on a subject-centered reality. Historically, most of the proponents of correspondence theory have been metaphysical realists. Despite this, it is not a necessity to establish a correspondence theory on the basis of metaphysical realism. It is possible, for example, to accept that facts in the external world will determine which propositions are true or false, and at the same time that the world (and its facts) is nothing more than a collection of ideas in the mind of a supreme being. When we look at the historical voyage of the theory, it can be seen that philosophers who consider truth as the conformity of knowledge to its object generally base their equations on a metaphysical principle. In its historical transformation, for Aristotle the correspondence theory appeared as a compatibility between the knowledge in the mind and what actually appears in reality, for Aquinas as the compatibility of the knowledge of the object with that in the design of a higher and more comprehensive truth -God- in and as a mathematical certainty for Descartes. In the process that started with Kant, the criteria of truth began to be questioned. Al-ism wa al musammā discussions in the Kalam tradition can also find a place in the historical voyage of the theory, in the transition from Aristotle to Aquinas. Considering that in Aquinas, the correspondence between God's knowledge and what exists constitutes truth, al-ism wa al-musammā discussions can be considered as an intermediate form of correspondence theory that is both subject-based and object-based. From this point of view it seems that determining the epistemological values of propositions expressing a metaphysical belief or a moral judgment cannot be achieved with the correspondence theory. In this article, firstly, what the theory of correspondence is and its historical voyage will be discussed, and then the expression “the image of the invisible god” in the Bible in Colossians 1:15 will be analyzed. Following this, the connection of the correspondence theory with the isim – müsemma discussions in the kalam tradition, its historical inclusion in the development of the correspondence theory, and Yunus Emre's statements “I took shape in flesh and bones and appeared as Yunus” will be examined in the context of this discussion. Let us point out here that al-ism wa al-musammā discussions are an extension of the mutakallims’ discussions about adjectives. Kalam scholars (mutakallims) have discussed the issue of al-ism wa al-musammā, specifically the relationship between noun and adjective, person and adjective, since some of Allah's attributes are also His names. It is thought that Muslim mutakallims tended to investigate the relationship between the divine attributes and the essence of God, based on the Christians' explanation of the understanding of God as “three separate entities of a single body”. Based on all this and what we mentioned above ultimately, a judgment will be made as to whether the correspondence theory can confirm the metaphysical statements we will discuss here.