structure for 'Truth'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

3. Truth / B. Truthmakers / 4. Truthmaker Necessitarianism

[makers that ground truths also force them to be true]

11 ideas
Truth-making can't be entailment, because truthmakers are portions of reality [Armstrong]
     Full Idea: Truth-making cannot be any form of entailment. Both terms of an entailment relation must be propositions, but the truth-making term of the truth-making relation is a portion of reality, and, in general at least, portions of reality are not propositions.
     From: David M. Armstrong (Truth and Truthmakers [2004], 02.3)
     A reaction: Along with Idea 18466, that seems to firmly demolish the idea that truth-making is a logical entailment.
Armstrong says truthmakers necessitate their truth, where 'necessitate' is a primitive relation [Armstrong, by MacBride]
     Full Idea: In a bold manouevre Armstrong posited a metaphysically primitive relation of necessitation, and then defined truth-makers in terms of this bridging relation, as a thing that necessitates something being true.
     From: report of David M. Armstrong (Truth and Truthmakers [2004], 02.3) by Fraser MacBride - Truthmakers 1.2
     A reaction: [Not sure of page reference] Spelled out so clearly by MacBride, this sounds dubious. How many truths are necessitated by the City of London? Do truthmakers necessitate the existence of their truths? MacBride says it's a circular theory.
Something can only have a place in a preferred account of things if it is entailed by the account [Jackson]
     Full Idea: The one and only way of having a place in an account told in some set of preferred terms is by being entailed by that account - a view I will refer to as the entry by entailment thesis.
     From: Frank Jackson (From Metaphysics to Ethics [1998], Ch.1)
     A reaction: How do we distinguish between the original account, which seems to be just accepted, and the additions which accrue because they are entailed by it? Why does this club distinguish members from guests?
God might necessitate that something happen, but He is not the truth-maker for it [Smith,B]
     Full Idea: Suppose that God wills that John kiss Mary now. God's willing thereby necessitates the truth of 'John is kissing Mary'. But God's act is not a truth-maker for this judgement.
     From: Barry Smith (Truth-maker Realism [1999], p.6), quoted by Fraser MacBride - Truthmakers 1.2
     A reaction: The point is that truth-making relates to the fact that it happened, not what necessitated it to happen. But Armstrong might reply that his truth-maker 'necessitation' primitive is not the kind of necessitation found in worldly relations.
The view that truth making is entailment is misguided and misleading [Heil]
     Full Idea: I argue that the widely held view that truth making is to be understood as entailment is misguided in principle and potentially misleading.
     From: John Heil (From an Ontological Point of View [2003], Intro)
     A reaction: If reality was just one particle, what would entail the truths about it? Suppose something appears to be self-evident true about reality, but no one can think of any entailments to derive it? Do we assume a priori that they are possible?
It is assumed that a proposition is necessarily true if its truth-maker exists [David]
     Full Idea: Friends of the truth-maker principle usually hold that the following states a crucial necessary condition on truth-making: if x makes y true, then, necessarily, if x exists then y is true.
     From: Marian David (Truth-making and Correspondence [2009], 2)
     A reaction: My objection is that the proposition y is taken to pre-exist, primly awaiting the facts that will award it 'truth'. An ontology that contains an infinity of propositions, most of which so far lack a truth-value, is incoherent. You can have x, but no y!
Give up objects necessitating truths, and say their natures cause the truths? [Cameron]
     Full Idea: We could abandon the view that truthmakers necessitate the truth of that which makes them true, and say that an object makes a truth when its intrinsic nature suffices for that truth. The object would have a different intrinsic nature if the truth failed.
     From: Ross P. Cameron (Intrinsic and Extrinsic Properties [2009], 'Truthmakers')
     A reaction: [He cites Josh Parsons 1999, 2005 for this] This approach seems closely related to Kit Fine's proposal that necessities arise from the natures of things. It sounds to me as if an object with that intrinsic nature would necessitate that truth.
Orthodox Truthmaker applies to all propositions, and necessitates their truth [Cameron]
     Full Idea: Orthodox truthmaker theory (Armstrong's) entails Maximalism (that every true proposition has at least one truthmaker), and Necessitarianism (that the existence of a truthmaker necessitates the truth of its proposition).
     From: Ross P. Cameron (Truthmakers, Realism and Ontology [2008], 'Max and Nec')
     A reaction: I think I accept both of these. If you say only some truths have truthmakers, the other truths are then baffling. And how could a truthmaker fail in its job? But that doesn't necessitate the existence of the proposition.
God fixes all the truths of the world by fixing what exists [Cameron]
     Full Idea: The truthmaker thought is that explanation only bottoms out at existence facts; for God to give a complete plan of the world He needs only make an inventory of what is to exist.
     From: Ross P. Cameron (Truthmakers, Realism and Ontology [2008], 'Max and Nec')
     A reaction: He is defending Necessitarianism about truthmaking. I'm struggling with this. An inventory of the contents of my house doesn't begin to fix all the truths that arise from them. Why is Cameron so resistent to 'how' things are being part of the truthmaking?
Determinate truths don't need extra truthmakers, just truthmakers that are themselves determinate [Cameron]
     Full Idea: I reject saying there must be an additional truthmaker for 'Determinately, p': rather, I say that the truthmaker for p must simply be a determinate existent rather than a mere existent.
     From: Ross P. Cameron (Truthmaking for Presentists [2011], 6)
     A reaction: As he puts it (quite persuasively), God doesn't need to add an extra truthmaker for a determinate truth. Cameron rejects Necessitarianism. He uses 'determinate' fairly uncritically. What makes the truth of the truthmaker's determinacy?
Most theorists say that truth-makers necessitate their truths [Rami]
     Full Idea: Most truth-maker theorists regard the necessitation of a truth by a truth-maker as a necessary condition of truth-making.
     From: Adolph Rami (Introduction: Truth and Truth-Making [2009], 07)
     A reaction: It seems to me that reality is crammed full of potential truth-makers, but not crammed full of truths. If there is no thinking in the universe, then there are no truths. If that is false, then what sort of weird beast is a 'truth'?