Talk:Truthmaker theory

Break into sections
This article isn't bad, but we could make it more thorough and more detailed, and break it down into sections covering the main issues.


 * basic statement of the principles of the theory (i.e. propositions being true in virtue of what there is and how it is; primacy of metaphysics to semantics);
 * proper account of historical basis (if you want, but the gesturing in the article is not especially illuminating);
 * philosophical issues and possible solutions (e.g. do all truths need truthmakers: modal, logical, mathematical, universal generalisations (and any domain so long as the proponent takes the propositions to be assertoric and for its terms to successfully refer, e.g. ethics, science, aesthetics...); and what happens if we reject this claim? does it hurt the purposes of the theory to create an apartheid of truths that do and don't have truthmakers? reasons for/against...)
 * truthmaking relation (e.g. necessitation? satisfaction? logical truthmaking vs. metaphysical truthmaking etc.);
 * relationship between truthmakers and theories of truth (i.e. obvious connection to correspondence theories, but why it assumes no particular metaphysical position);
 * what things are truthmakers? (tropes, facts, objects considered under accessibility relations...);
 * bibliography of key articles/books.

— zenpea 05:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Changed a number of "propositions" to "truthbearers." Truthmakers apply to propositions within specific theories, and propositions are merely a kind of truthbearer. Other truthmaker theories claim different kinds of truthbearers.

wolftrappe 17:50, 19 October 2007 (EST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.152.75.6 (talk) 17:50, October 19, 2007 (UTC)