Can all facts be proven?


Historical Facts - (Ie. Lincoln's assasination)

Mathematical Facts

Scientific Facts


What does your question have to do with 'grammar and sentence structure'?

Julian Ng-Thow-HingMathematical Facts

Read this:


Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Julian Ng-Thow-HingScientific Facts

Read this:


Julian Ng-Thow-HingHistorical Facts - (Ie. Lincoln's assasination)

Read this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_method Which has a link to this:


Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.

Hi Alphecca, thank you for the links. They really helped me(is this considered a fact)? It really helped me understand the process of math proofs, what scientifc methods are used, and more.

I know this is not the place for philosophy, which is why I'm grateful that you provided me those links.

There's one last "fact' situation that I'm having a little trouble understanding, which is everyday facts.

Everyday, we speak facts. Though, I pondered about this, and came to the realization that when someone is talking about a fact, it requires less proof, and sometimes no proof at all to convince someone that it is, a fact.

For example, let's take this situation:

Person A went on a walk with their dog yesterday. Person B asks, what did he do yesterday night.

Person A: "I took my dog on a walk." This is considered a fact, as it actually happened, but Person B, who didn't know he did go on a walk, in most situations (not in court cases, and questioning), would accept that it is a fact without any proof.

Is it true that in everyday communication, excluding court hearings, questioning, etc... People usually just assume what people say to be fact as there is no reason to think that they're lying (I know it all depends on contexts), but usually what happens.

Perhaps, there's a link where I can research this?


Julian Ng-Thow-HingPerson A: "I took my dog on a walk.

I think you need to expand your range of vocabulary.

That is not a fact; it is his assertion or claim. Person B might evaluate it and accept this assertion as true or not. Person B would apply some logic to determine the truth value of the claim. Generally, without even thinking, we apply these criteria:

1. Reasonableness. If it is reasonable (e.g. Person A has a dog, and Person A can walk, and there was not some adverse weather condition...)
2. Trustworthiness. If Person B trusts Person A as generally truthful.
3. Consequential: The assertion's truth value has no material affect on B's life.
4. Verifiable: If Person B actually saw the event, or is confident that it can be verified independently.
5. Falsification: If Person B cannot falsify the claim. (e.g. If he knows that Person A was in jail at the time of his dog walk, he will reject it as false.)

The vocabulary words that operate in this space are: assertion, claim, fact, opinion, belief, theory, proposition, and truth. Truth is fundamental. How do we know if X (a statement or proposition) is True? It has been the subject of tomes and musings from the beginnings of philosophy.


Bertrand Russell treated this subject in his "Problems of Philosophy", especially chapters 12 and 13.

There are good recordings and on-line sources.



And here is a recent good lecture on truth: