There are almost no just-plain-true (or false) facts in the macroscopic natural world. We’ve engineered our environment to support deductive reasoning, which doesn’t work in nature. Text from Elijah Millgram’s _Hard Truths_pic.twitter.com/e6HLMSjpb3
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Offhand, nature doesn't seem that deficient in flat truths. The sun rises in the west, coyotes eat meat, fire melts ice...
These are only more-or-less true. I’m sure someone has a pet coyote they feed on vegetarian dog food. Saw a coyote go by my house just an hour ago, btw. First one this year!https://www.petco.com/shop/en/petcostore/product/natural-balance-vegetarian-formula-dog-food …
Flatly true facts are true by definition, which implies a definer, I suppose?
Well, supposedly there are flatly-true facts that are true not by definition, but contingently true in our world, due to physics or something.
The idea of "social facts" is old hat. John Searle was writing about this 25 years ago. Money for example is an institutional fact, it is ontologically subjective, but epistemically objective.
It’s a great deal older than Searle!
I must be missing something here. Hasn't "horses have 4 legs" been a fact for quite some?
Not all horses have four legs. (Birth defects, accidents, etc.) And, there are things about which it is ambiguous whether they are horses. (Dead horses; horses of extinct species; toy horses, …)
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.