Annen discusses a different way to approach truthfulness by playing a game that forces players to be truthful by requiring that the game is played with a whole community, and each person is held responsible for telling the truth, or the community will punish the person that does not tell the truth. The paper comes to the conclusion that this type of enforcement does work. All players are forced to be truthful and if someone is not there are consequences that they must face.
This paper will provide rhetoricians with a broader range of theories about truth. In the quest to find what is, a rhetorician will want to include some new ideas about truth and look at a genre beside philosophy.The truth game I found very interesting because it is an “incentives for cooperation and the players rely on the entire community to punish a player who failed to cooperate” (Ammen).

The author Calechman, gives several examples of falsities. He also presents myths and the truth to those myths. Overtime people have accepted the truth as it is originally presented. This has been passed down from generation to generation, without question. He uncovers several well known myths and uses reason and logic to debunk them. This article, which may seem a bit awkward at first for a scholarly audience, gives several examples of myths (lies) that have been handed down from generation to generation, and by providing several examples and logical explanations, he debunks the myths. The question that I will pose here, are we brainwashed to believe everything that is written or spoken? And by providing this article as evidence, we can clearly say *yes*, unless you know how to analyze the content and put it in a format of reason and logic. I especially enjoyed his historical myth “if truth is questioned we will eventually “accept the truth, if told by persistent, reasonable voices, etc.” (Calechman).

In Hershfield philosophical investigation about Austin and truth, he raises the question about the merits of Austin’s theory of truth. Hershfield explains that Austin’s approach and ideas is because he is a contemporary thinker, but his approach is very unusual. He does not follow a standard theory. Instead he questions how we relate in the world and find falsity or truth. Truth is based on facts but facts are not based on truth, so are facts are not necessarily the truth. We fit truth into the situation at hand and use words, sometimes a lot of words, to explain ourselves.
A rhetorician will find this article useful since it covers a more contemporary thinkers point of view. Hershfield does a good job explaining Austin theory on truth, he backs up his claims by providing plenty of quotes and ideas.

Schall addresses how important knowing the truth is, and finding that information in books. Truth is a living entity when spoken, heard, or read. Truth is the foundation of language and foundation of what a man is. Students who sit in class are told a version of truth. Do we know what the truth is? When we read any type of text, we are reading it to ourselves, but when we speak the words they become part of the conversation. Books as so many other things are available in different genres, which each tell the story of their truth. We all seek truth and are uneasy or do not rest until we find truth.This article is important to rhetoricians whose discourse community is philosophy. Schall discusses a different approach than what I have provided, he discusses the importance of books, written and spoken words and how we make truth through conversation. When we think about truth as a living entity when it is spoken, heard, or read, it makes a compelling argument, one that embodies all of us as one whole universe. Truth can be viewed a living breathing entity, which it very well is, since we are all seekers of truth and long to find the true definition of truth.

Vardy explains that we find truth through religion, media, and propaganda. He researches different religious affiliations and attempts to explain truth as a theologian. He notes that we can associate truth with virtue, humility, morals, and correspondence. There are seekers of truth who feel their mission is impose their version of the truth on to others, while he also looks at the great philosophers of ancient times and talks about their religious beliefs. Vardy feels that education needs to add truth back into the curriculum for it to be understood, and in order for it to be understood, it must be discussed. The author also explains that there is no difference between someone telling the truth or not telling the truth, unless a distinction is made between the two. Rhetoricians will appreciate Vardy’s view and explanation about truth from a religious background. The association with telling the truth has large implications in the person that you are, we can associate truth with virtue, humility,and morals. When we seek truth, and do not find it, we look at the source for justification. The title alone is intriguing “What is Truth?”. And Vardy intrigues us with this title, and shines as he draws in his theology and philosophy background. the book is well rounded and provides an abundance of information and examples. He also provides strong supporting evidence from some of the great ancient and modern thinkers of philosophy.