Lexicon of Arguments

 

Rorty I 217
Fact/Quine/Rorty: "Dog" is the English word for "dog", and "Robinson believes in God": that is not a truth type that expresses a "fact", something "factual".
Quine thus offers a distinction between truth by virtue of convergence and truth by virtue of correspondence instead of the positivist distinction between conventional and empirically confirmed truth.
Davidson:... Quinesian resolution of the distinction between questions of meaning and questions of fact.
Quine I 426f
Facts/Quine: are not something mediating according to the image of our sentences (VsSellars, VsWittgenstein?) - better: are true sentences or true propositions - facts are not required, especially not in addition to propositions.
>Propositions/Quine.
II 37
Another term I want to save from the abyss of the transcendental is the term factual which proves to be relevant in the theory of radical translation. In this case, none of the facts decides which of the two manuals is right. And this term of the factual is neither transcendental nor epistemological to such an extent ((s) no fact can decide - requires facts that are just not fit to do so.)
II 37
Actual: is the radical translation: no fact decides which of the manuals is right. Actual things are ontological, naturalistic but neither transcendental nor epistemological. They are physical conditions and not empirical skills. Reinterpretation is only done with others, not with ourselves. - Factuality as gravity is inherent in our nature.
VI 113
Fact/Quine: we can erase that. "It is a fact" does not contribute anything. It is only seemingly founded in correspondence theory. A true sentence as a whole corresponds to a fact. "It is true that" is necessary for sentences that do not exist.