Affiliation:
1. Department of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY, USA, john.capps@rit.edu
Abstract
Abstract
Truth-makers are the dark matter of metaphysics. On the one hand, truth-makers seem obvious and necessary: if there are truths then there must be something that makes these truths true. On the other hand, it’s proven difficult to say exactly what these truth-makers are. Even defenders disagree about what sort of entity truth-makers are or whether all truths have truth-makers. Skeptics have questioned whether truth-makers are actually so obvious and necessary, or even whether they exist at all. Here I offer an account of this unhappy state of affairs and a modest proposal. First, I argue that not only are there no good arguments for truth-makers but it’s unlikely that there ever will be. Second I point to how much can be done without resorting to truth-makers in the first place: they are not as essential as often assumed. Finally, I conclude that we needn’t jettison the concept of truth-makers entirely. Understood in a modest and pragmatic spirit we can hold on to truth-makers while recognizing their inherent limitations.
Reference53 articles.
1. The epistemology of democracy;Anderson, E.,2006
2. Universals: An opinionated introduction;Armstrong, D. M.,1989
3. Truth and truthmakers;Armstrong, D.M.,2004
4. Truth(making) by convention;Asay, Jamin,2020a
5. Truthmakers against correspondence;Asay, Jamin,2020b