Talk:On Truth

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Philosophy: Literature Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature

Fair use rationale for Image:Frankfurt ontruth.gif

Image:Frankfurt ontruth.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added some copy.

I added copy to the page describing the argument presented since I had recently read it and a friend pointed out that there was really nothing on it here. I tried to give a good summary of his strategy and conclusion sufficient for a reader to approach the book and have an easier time seeing where Frankfurt is going with his argument (not that it is difficult). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.116.241.175 (talk) 06:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correspondence theory of truth bias?

The lede currently reads:

Frankfurt explicitly avoids a definition of "truth" beyond the idea of the commonsense concept of truth people commonly hold, i.e., that which corresponds to reality."

I am concerned that there might be editor bias toward the correspondence theory of truth, as Frankfurt undoubtedly knows of the controversies regarding it and its alternatives and if he is truly trying to not take a stance in that debate, it seems unlikely he would grant correspondence theory the position of "commonsense", as that would be taking a stance on it. But then, having not read this book yet, I can't say for certain whether or not Frankfurt has that bias himself. Can anyone who has it please confirm whether this bias toward correspondence theory is Frankfurt's or an editors? If it is Frankfurt's we should make that clear and cite a passage, if not then that "i.e." phrase should be struck as against NPOV. --Pfhorrest (talk) 05:16, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]