This text critically examines the traditional correspondence theory of truth, defined as adequacy between thought and reality. The author argues that interpreting truth as adequacy is insufficient because the concept of correspondence itself requires an external measure or criterion to judge such agreement. To compare a thought with an external object, an observer would have to stand outside both spheres, which is logically and practically impossible. Furthermore, thoughts do not inherently resemble the objects they refer to, and our access to things is limited to our external perspective. Without an independent standard that is separate from both the thinking process and external reality, correspondence cannot be objectively verified. Consequently, the text concludes that the adequacy theory of truth, despite its historical persistence and stubbornness, fails to explain the nature of truth because it cannot account for the mechanism of comparing disparate entities without an external standard.