# Correspondence theory of truth and analyticity

The correspondence theory of truth states that truth is essentially correspondence to a fact or state of affairs. How does this theory handle analytic truths - that is, 'true by definition' type statements that merely involve unfolding concepts? For example, what fact corresponds to the true sentence "a bachelor is an unmarried man"? Imagine a world where everyone dies except a married couple. Then there are no bachelors - but is still (presumably) true that a bachelor is an unmarried man. Then how can it be the case that this statement is true because of correspondence to reality?

• The solution would probably be to advert to a distinction between general and particular facts, and have analytic truths be true propositions that correspond to at least a subset of the general facts, with general states of affairs able to obtain even if particular instances of them do not. Having said that, I appreciate that it is not the most persuasive-sounding account of how this might work. Commented Jun 22, 2021 at 1:07
• Another option would be to convert categorical definition sentences into conditionals, such as, "If anything is a bachelor, it is an unmarried man." Commented Jun 22, 2021 at 2:33
• The term analytical means that it is not sense verifiable to know. We know something analytic because it is impossible to be something else. Correspondence theory is basically dependent upon us using the so called five senses. That is if my sense tell me there is an orange on the top left corner of my desk then that object is a fruit as well. Without my senses I would have no idea if something was placed or sitting on the top left corner of my desk. So you are comparing apples to oranges here. Nothing about your senses let's you know bachelors must be men --that is a language convention. Commented Jun 22, 2021 at 4:58
• @Logikal It sounds like you're saying that the correspondence theory of truth isn't even meant to touch upon analytic truths. But how could a good theory of truth just not even address a sizeable chunk of the kinds of statements we take to be true?
– Joa
Commented Jun 22, 2021 at 6:14
• @logikal, I don't think the correspondence theory of truth is limited to empirical truth. Some versions of the correspondence theory of truth even have truthmakers as abstract objects, so the allow for abstract objects, and presumably for truths about those abstract objects. Commented Jun 22, 2021 at 23:01