What Should a Correspondence Theory Be and Do?

Abstract

Correspondence theories are frequently either too vaguely expressed – ‘‘true statements correspond to the way things are in the world,’’ or implausible – ‘‘true statements mirror raw, mind-independent reality.’’ I address this problem by developing features and roles that ought to characterize what I call ‘‘modest’’ correspondence theories. Of special importance is the role of correspondence in directing our responses to cases of suspected non-factuality; lack of straightforward correspondence shows the need for, and guides us in our choice of, various kinds of reconstrual projects. This, I argue, is in contrast to the approaches suggested by deflationism and coherence, and thus modest correspondence theories are appropriately distinct from rivals.