Access to the full content is only available to members of institutions that have purchased access. If you belong to such an institution, please log in or find out more about how to order.


Print

Contents

DOI
10.4324/9780415249126-N021-1
DOI: 10.4324/9780415249126-N021-1
Version: v1,  Published online: 1998
Retrieved April 24, 2018, from https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/facts/v-1

Article Summary

The existence and nature of facts is disputed. In ordinary language we often speak of facts (‘that’s a fact’) but it is hard to take such talk seriously since it can be paraphrased away. It is better to argue for the existence of facts on the basis of three connected theoretical roles for facts. First, facts as the referents of true sentences: ‘the cat sat on the mat’, if true, refers to the fact that the cat sat on the mat. Second, facts as the truth-makers of true sentences: the fact that the cat sat on the mat is what makes ‘the cat sat on the mat’ true. Third, facts as causal relata, related in such sentences as ‘Caesar died because Brutus stabbed him’. The so-called ‘slingshot’ argument aims to show that these roles are misconceived.

Print
Citing this article:
Oliver, Alex. Facts, 1998, doi:10.4324/9780415249126-N021-1. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis, https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/thematic/facts/v-1.
Copyright © 1998-2018 Routledge.

Related Searches

Topics

Related Articles