Peacocke argues that truth is a property of propositions, not of beliefs, facts, or reality. He defines a proposition as a linguistic expression that can be either true or false.

Peacocke argues that truth is a necessary condition for knowledge, but not a sufficient condition. In other words, in order to know something, it must be true, but knowing something does not guarantee that it is true.

Peacocke argues that truth and belief are independent of each other. In other words, something can be true even if no one believes it, and something can be believed even if it is not true.

Peacocke argues that truth and reality are independent of each other. In other words, something can be true even if it does not correspond to reality, and something can correspond to reality even if it is not true.

One of the main criticisms of Peacocke's theory of truth is that it is too abstract. Critics argue that it is difficult to apply the theory to real-world situations and that it does not provide a clear account of how truth can be known.