Return to Answer

If you want to know how the word "fact" is used in English, that is quite different from what philosophers or mathematicians consider "fact". So I don't know why this whole thread got filled with intellectual reasoning and rhetoric to demonstrate what really is and isn't fact. Fact is related to truth, and truth is enough of a confusing subject of debate. But that's not what you're asking as far as I can see. Here are some more definitions like the one you provided which seemed to prompt you to ask this question:

c. Something believed to be true or real:
American Heritage Dictionary

2:a piece of information presented as having objective reality
("presented as having" does not refer to "real" fact - whatever that means)
Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Other definitions are along the lines of:

"information known to be true".

Would you admit that I can "know" something and be wrong? If that's true, then all other dictionaries allow for "fact" to mean something which is NOT true scientifically/objectively/verifiably.

So if you are interested in how the word "fact" is used in the language itself, forgetting the rigorous definitions of truth and fact that have to do with verification, and leaving apart the special study of epistemology and all the philosophical stuff, it's clear to me that when used in our language "fact" does not always mean something that is true.

Let's say the basis of whether something is fact is a definition, like the IAU's definition of a planet. Pluto is no longer a planet, but a dwarf planet, making the statement "Pluto is not a planet" a fact. Suppose the IAU change the definition tomorrow. Has the fact changed?

If you want to know how the word "fact" is used in English, that is quite different from what philosophers or mathematicians consider "fact". Here are some more definitions like the one you provided which seemed to prompt you to ask this question:

c. Something believed to be true or real:
American Heritage Dictionary

2:a piece of information presented as having objective reality
("presented as having" does not refer to "real" fact - whatever that means)
Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Other definitions are along the lines of:

"information known to be true".

Would you admit that I can "know" something and be wrong? If that's true, then all other dictionaries allow for "fact" to mean something which is NOT true scientifically/objectively/verifiably.

So if you are interested in how the word "fact" is used in the language itself, forgetting the rigorous definitions of truth and fact that have to do with verification, and leaving apart the special study of epistemology and all the philosophical stuff, it's clear to me that when used in our language "fact" does not always mean something that is true.

Let's say the basis of whether something is fact is a definition, like the IAU's definition of a planet. Pluto is no longer a planet, but a dwarf planet, making the statement "Pluto is not a planet" a fact. Suppose the IAU change the definition tomorrow. Has the fact changed?

If you want to know how the word "fact" is used in English, that is quite different from what philosophers or mathematicians consider "fact". So I don't know why this whole thread got filled with intellectual reasoning and rhetoric to demonstrate what really is and isn't fact. Fact is related to truth, and truth is enough of a confusing subject of debate. But that's not what you're asking as far as I can see. Here are some more definitions like the one you provided which seemed to prompt you to ask this question:

c. Something believed to be true or real:
American Heritage Dictionary

2:a piece of information presented as having objective reality
("presented as having" does not refer to "real" fact - whatever that means)
Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Other definitions are along the lines of:

"information known to be true".

Would you admit that I can "know" something and be wrong? If that's true, then all other dictionaries allow for "fact" to mean something which is NOT true scientifically/objectively/verifiably.

So if you are interested in how the word "fact" is used in the language itself, forgetting the rigorous definitions of truth and fact that have to do with verification, and leaving apart the special study of epistemology and all the philosophical stuff, it's clear to me that when used in our language "fact" does not always mean something that is true.

That's my answer.

However, since this became one massive discussion of what "fact" is from a philosophical/epistemological/metaphysical perspective, I want to point out some things I read which I disagree with:

A fact is something which all available evidence supports to be true", and NOT "A fact is something which is believed to be true by someone (eg. UFOs)".

All available evidence supported that Newtonian mechanics governed the motion of all things. That didn't even make it "true" back then (using the strict meaning of true).

The same is true of "fact". Facts do not change over time, as you want to argue.

Let's say the basis of whether something is fact is a definition, like the IAU's definition of a planet. Pluto is no longer a planet, but a dwarf planet, making the statement "Pluto is not a planet" a fact. Suppose the IAU change the definition tomorrow. Has the fact changed?

If you want to know how the word "fact" is used in English, that is quite different from what philosophers or mathematicians consider "fact". So I don't know why this whole thread got filled with intellectual reasoning and rhetoric to demonstrate what really is and isn't fact. Fact is related to truth, and truth is enough of a confusing subject of debate. But that's not what you're asking as far as I can see. Here are some more definitions like the one you provided which seemed to prompt you to ask this question:

c. Something believed to be true or real:
American Heritage Dictionary

2:a piece of information presented as having objective reality
("presented as having" does not refer to "real" fact - whatever that means)
Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Other definitions are along the lines of:

"information known to be true".

Would you admit that I can "know" something and be wrong? If that's true, then all other dictionaries allow for "fact" to mean something which is NOT true scientifically/objectively/verifiably.

So if you are interested in how the word "fact" is used in the language itself, forgetting the rigorous definitions of truth and fact that have to do with verification, and leaving apart the special study of epistemology and all the philosophical stuff, it's clear to me that when used in our language "fact" does not always mean something that is true.

Let's say the basis of whether something is fact is a definition, like the IAU's definition of a planet. Pluto is no longer a planet, but a dwarf planet, making the statement "Pluto is not a planet" a fact. Suppose the IAU change the definition tomorrow. Has the fact changed?

If you want to know how the word "fact" is used in English, that is quite different from what philosophers or mathematicians consider "fact". So I don't know why this whole thread got filled with intellectual reasoning and rhetoric to demonstrate what really is and isn't fact. Fact is related to truth, and truth is enough of a confusing subject of debate. But that's not what you're asking as far as I can see. Here are some more definitions like the one you provided which seemed to prompt you to ask this question:

c. Something believed to be true or real:
American Heritage Dictionary

2:a piece of information presented as having objective reality
("presented as having" does not refer to "real" fact - whatever that means)
Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Other definitions are along the lines of:

"information known to be true".

Would you admit that I can "know" something and be wrong? If that's true, then all other dictionaries allow for "fact" to mean something which is NOT true scientifically/objectively/verifiably.

So if you are interested in how the word "fact" is used in the language itself, forgetting the rigorous definitions of truth and fact that have to do with verification, and leaving apart the special study of epistemology and all the philosophical stuff, it's clear to me that when used in our language "fact" does not always mean something that is true.

That's my answer.

However, since this became one massive discussion of what "fact" is from a philosophical/epistemological/metaphysical perspective, I want to point out some things I read which I disagree with:

A fact is something which all available evidence supports to be true", and NOT "A fact is something which is believed to be true by someone (eg. UFOs)".

All available evidence supported that Newtonian mechanics governed the motion of all things. That didn't even make it "true" back then (using the strict meaning of true).

The same is true of "fact". Facts do not change over time, as you want to argue.

Let's say the basis of whether something is fact is a definition, like the IAU's definition of a planet. Pluto is no longer a planet, but a dwarf planet, making the statement "Pluto is not a planet" a fact. Suppose the IAU change the definition tomorrow. Has the fact changed?

fact |fakt| noun a thing that is indisputably the case

This may be a nitpick. But I'm pretty sure I can dispute anything, "The current year is 2019". I can make a disputation against that. They'd be some pretty wild arguments though.

If you want to know how the word "fact" is used in English, that is quite different from what philosophers or mathematicians consider "fact". So I don't know why this whole thread got filled with intellectual reasoning and rhetoric to demonstrate what really is and isn't fact. Fact is related to truth, and truth is enough of a confusing subject of debate. But that's not what you're asking as far as I can see. Here are some more definitions like the one you provided which seemed to prompt you to ask this question:

c. Something believed to be true or real:
American Heritage Dictionary

2:a piece of information presented as having objective reality
("presented as having" does not refer to "real" fact - whatever that means)
Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Other definitions are along the lines of:

"information known to be true".

Would you admit that I can "know" something and be wrong? If that's true, then all other dictionaries allow for "fact" to mean something which is NOT true scientifically/objectively/verifiably.

So if you are interested in how the word "fact" is used in the language itself, forgetting the rigorous definitions of truth and fact that have to do with verification, and leaving apart the special study of epistemology and all the philosophical stuff, it's clear to me that when used in our language "fact" does not always mean something that is true.

That's my answer.

However, since this became one massive discussion of what "fact" is from a philosophical/epistemological/metaphysical perspective, I want to point out some things I read which I disagree with:

A fact is something which all available evidence supports to be true", and NOT "A fact is something which is believed to be true by someone (eg. UFOs)".

All available evidence supported that Newtonian mechanics governed the motion of all things. That didn't even make it "true" back then (using the strict meaning of true).

The same is true of "fact". Facts do not change over time, as you want to argue.

Let's say the basis of whether something is fact is a definition, like the IAU's definition of a planet. Pluto is no longer a planet, but a dwarf planet, making the statement "Pluto is not a planet" a fact. Suppose the IAU change the definition tomorrow. Has the fact changed?