Coherentism holds that the truth of a proposition is determined by its coherence with other propositions that are already known to be true. This means that a proposition is true if it fits well with the rest of our knowledge and beliefs.

Coherentism has a number of advantages over other theories of truth. First, it allows for the possibility of new knowledge. This is because new propositions can be added to our existing body of knowledge without having to be verified against an external reality. Second, coherentism is not dependent on any particular external authority. This means that it is not subject to the biases or errors of any particular individual or group. Third, coherentism is a flexible and adaptable theory. This means that it can be used to account for a wide variety of different types of knowledge.

Coherentism has been criticized on a number of grounds. First, it has been argued that coherentism is too subjective. This is because the truth of a proposition is determined by its coherence with other propositions that are already known to be true, and these propositions are themselves subject to change. Second, it has been argued that coherentism is not able to account for the existence of necessary truths. This is because necessary truths are true in all possible worlds, and there is no way to determine the coherence of a proposition with all possible worlds. Third, it has been argued that coherentism is not able to account for the existence of synthetic truths. This is because synthetic truths are not true simply because they are coherent with other propositions, but rather because they correspond to some external reality.

Coherentism is more similar to pragmatism than to correspondence theory. This is because both coherentism and pragmatism emphasize the importance of the consequences of beliefs. However, coherentism differs from pragmatism in that it emphasizes the importance of coherence, while pragmatism emphasizes the importance of utility.

Coherentism has a number of implications for our understanding of knowledge. First, it implies that knowledge is always provisional and subject to revision. This is because new propositions can be added to our existing body of knowledge, and this can lead to changes in our beliefs about what is true. Second, coherentism implies that knowledge is only possible within a community of knowers. This is because our beliefs about what is true are shaped by our interactions with others. Third, coherentism implies that knowledge is always perspectival and limited. This is because our beliefs about what is true are always limited by our own experiences and perspectives.