But you're using a limited definition of fact which limits it to anything that is within human knowledge (knowledge itself being a very sticky term). And that's a completely acceptable definition of fact; except that FoL was using 'fact' as a subset of 'truth'-- a fact is anything that is true. So ignore the word 'fact' for a moment. Now, do you think that truth is limited to the realm of human knowledge, or can truths exist independent of humanity?
I find so much of epistemology to be obsessed with word games, playing with the definition of 'sound', for example, to try and provoke interesting results.
|