One of the theories defining the truth says that: “(…) truth is whatever is agreed upon, or in some versions, might come to be agreed upon, by some specified group. Such a group might include all human beings, or a subset thereof consisting of more than one person. (…) be agreed upon in an ideal speech situation.” [1] “In an ideal speech situation, participants would be able to evaluate each other’s assertions solely on the basis of reason and evidence in an atmosphere completely free of any nonrational “coercive” influences, including both physical and psychological coercion. Furthermore, all participants would be motivated solely by the desire to obtain a rational consensus.” [2]
One of the theories defining the truth says that: “(…) truth is whatever is agreed upon, or in some versions, might come to be agreed upon, by some specified group. Such a group might include all human beings, or a subset thereof consisting of more than one person. (…) be agreed upon in an ideal speech situation.” [1]
“In an ideal speech situation, participants would be able to evaluate each other’s assertions solely on the basis of reason and evidence in an atmosphere completely free of any nonrational “coercive” influences, including both physical and psychological coercion. Furthermore, all participants would be motivated solely by the desire to obtain a rational consensus.” [2]
It seems that the method of evaluating correctness of information proposed in the post Knowledge Base 2: The structure and the method of building is close to this definition of truth.
[1] Wikipedia: Truth – Consensus theory
[2] Wikipedia: Ideal speech situation