If you accept the coherence theory of truth over?

In coherence, we have to assign meanings to real things, so it is rigorous as a logical model. In the statement, "The sun sets in the West," the sun is an object that moves from east to west daily, the West is the termination point, and setting means terminating, so the statement is coherent and does not argue against any other statement about any world that has meaning to us.

The same statement is 'correspondent' to perceptual reality, and therefore seems to support the correspondence theory equally, however the correspondence theory.of truth requires positing a special particular relationship between reality ('the sun', 'west') and mind (our need to observe and report) which is not only an unnecessary complication, but also circular, since the implicit claim of correspondence of mind and reality eventually needs to be defended and expressed in some circular relationship, usually either language 'proving itself', or a 'theory of sense data' capable of "unfailingly" uniting subject and object, which is less than scientific.

In the coherence theory, there is no, "premise on which all", other truths, "rest", since any belief may be dependent on an entire set of facts. However there may still be a flaw in the theory based on the fact that some beliefs may lead to contradictions. A coherentist, however, might say here that he is only willing to selectively consider the set of beliefs which are not contradictory.

If it is categorized as "theory" how could it be a fact and truth??

What Is The True Nature of Humankind?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPodvGwHnKY&feature...

Exactly!

Fer Sur ................................