This paper deals with the recent debate on cognitive function of trials, starting from a criticism to veriphobic theses. After recognizing the indispensability of a correspondentist notion of truth for human theory and praxis, the paper notices the preference of Italian jurists for Tarski’s semantic theory of correspondence. However, it is remarked that, because of his specifically intralinguistic nature, semantic theory can’t be applied in the context of trial. In this context, because we can’t set aside the reality, it seems rather expedient to have recourse to a metaphysical concept of correspondence, such as that supporting the thomistic doctrine of truth as adaequatio rei et intellectus.
