“We need not fear that we have lost our world when we acknowledge the theory-impregnated nature of our understanding,” writes Mark Johnson ( The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason 
What we don’t need is a theory, such as what Johnson calls “Objectivism.” Like idealism, Objectivism assumes that “the organism and its environment are two wholly separate things,” about which we can ask ” how the two are related, and which one is responsible for the structure of the world” (207). The basic false assumption is that organisms are independent of environments. Once we dispense with that, we have all the realism we need in insisting that there is a world and that we have contact with it (which is a naive experience, without much need for theorization).
Johnson argues, “Contrary to idealism, we do not impose arbitrary concepts and structure upon an undifferntiated, indefinitely malleable reality - we do not simply construct reality according to our desires and whims. Contrary to Objectivism, we are not merely mirror of a nature that determines our concepts in one and only one way. Instead our structured experience is an organism-environment interaction in which both poles are altered and transformed through an ongoing historical process” (207).
There is given structure in the world, and that limits our categories; but that structure doesn’t simple determine our experience or understanding of the world. Experience is “bodily experience in all of its richness, and all that goes to make it up - the organism and its nature, the environment and its nature, and our understanding (our way of grasping) their ongoing interaction.”
An accurate theory of truth depends on the insight that we are in the world and the world in us.
