Abstract

According to the correspondence theory of truth, a statement is true just in case it corresponds to the facts.The slingshot argument demonstrating that there can be only one fact is understood by some philosophers todeliver a coup de grâce to the correspondence theory. Others, however, seek to deflect the slingshot byappealling to Russell’s non-referential theory of definite descriptions. I argue that the slingshot argument isimmune to semantical considerations concerning definite descriptions. The slingshot argument is valid.However, I also argue that this fails to demonstrate the untenability of the correspondence theory of truth