No. Facts are there regardless of what you believe.

Facts are not the sort of thing that can be true or false; truth and false are predications of statements, not facts. — Banno

Truths are also not the sort of thing that can be true or false. From the SEP Facts:

2.4. Facts and Propositions

As we pointed out above, one view about facts is that to be a fact is to be a true proposition. On another, incompatible view, facts are what make true propositions true, or more generally, account for their truth.

Then who decides what is a fact?

Facts are not usually the sort of thing that is decided. (I think i already said that).

Yes. And?

Then I'm really confused. Without divine intervention, how do facts come into being?

So what? I don't see an analogy here. — John

The meaning of a word is given by conventional usage, — John

In colloquial conventions, which are far more popular than any philosophical usage of terms, "metaphysics" refers to paranormal/parapsychological content--ghosts, pyramid power, telekinesis, etc. — Terrapin Station

They all display a conflation of use and mention in their conclusions. — John

Conclusions? There weren't any arguments there, just 9 separate statements (which I broke up into three groupings). Sorry if that wasn't clear.

I had thought that you were weighing in on the side of the debate that claims that facts are unequivocally actualities rather than truths. If I misinterpreted your position, then forget it.

Choose an example.

What can be equivocated are statements.

Any fact that I utter. I made the decision or others made the decision and I just agree. July 4th is Independence Day. Someone decided it. I was taught to believe it. I repeat it. I get this belief from my memory.

The two uses of 'metaphysics' both refer to what is understood to be 'beyond the physical' in some sense understood by the user, so still no contradictions, inconsistencies or ambiguities to be seen.

And still no answer to my question, which doesn't surprise me at all.

To explain again, the two notions of fact, as outlined in the passage from the SEP article Facts, the notion of 'fact as actuality' is incompatible with the notion of 'fact as truth', and this is because 'actuality' and 'truth' are ( mostly) not understood to be equivalent since truths are generally thought be of or about actualities. Facts, on the other hand, can either be thought to be of actualities (facts about the weather, for example) or actualities (the bad weather is a fact, for example).

First, one use of "fact" is as a synonym for "statement". You are doing this when you say:

Any fact that I utter. — Rich

. Another use of 'fact' is as a state of affairs. You cannot utter a state of affairs.

Second, the date of independence is a cultural agreement. That salt is composed of chlorine and sodium isn't.

Third, that we express the fact that salt is composed of chlorine and sodium in English as "salt is composed of chlorine and sodium" is a cultural fact about English.

Sure, you can have the statement that facts are actualities and the incompatible statement that facts are truths. I'm not seeing your point, though.

The two uses of 'metaphysics' both refer to what is understood to be 'beyond the physical' — John

Actually, that's not at all the philosophical usage.

Agreed. So facts are just beliefs since there is no way to decide what is a fact without decisions. — Rich

That's not the way I have proposed talking at all and seems very confused and confusing. If I believe that the cat is on the mat, then I believe that "the cat is on the mat" is a true statement. I might be wrong, and the statement might be false, in which case my belief is false. Whether is is a true or false belief, and a true or false statement depends, not on any decision of mine, but on the whereabouts of the cat.

I take it that the cat is somewhere or other, and we might be able to locate it. If this is not ever the case, then there is no world, no state of affairs, no fact, and no truth. Nothing left to talk about.

OK, no worries, my mistake; it looked to me as if the 'c' statements were being offered as conclusions to the 'a' and 'b' statements in each case. In any case I don't think the statements are all consistent with one another because of the use/mention conflations.

If you can't utter it then it is some idea in someone's memory and therefore as yet had not become a fact but rather a potential fact - I guess. Of course, someone may be satisfied with potential facts forever in one's memory never to be uttered.

Once it is uttered, then it is a belief - one that may be shared by some or many others, subject to change. The primary difference between a fact and a brief is the weight that one wishes to imbue into the statement. But that is a matter of public discourse.

Really, what is the philosophical usage then?

My point is that the answer to the question in the OP is that the question itself is grammatically erroneous; with the corollary that facts are not the sort of thing that can be true or false.

Are you objecting to my point? If so, how?

Whether is is a true or false belief, and a true or false statement depends, not on any decision of mine, but on the whereabouts of the cat. — unenlightened

Then who decides is the whereabouts of the cat? I cannot see how a fact can be divorced from the uttered fact.

The bulk of metaphysics is ontology. It also traditionally refers to "first principles" and philosophy of religion (in combination with ontology). Weird that you wouldn't know this. Don't you have some general education in philosophy?

There is only one philosophical use?

Then who decides is the whereabouts of the cat? — Rich

Presumably, the cat.

There's only one standard philosophical usage, yes.

No, I agree with you that facts are not the sort of things that can be true or false, as is evinced by my pointing out that truths are not either.

Truths are not the sorts of things that can be true?

Then who decides is the whereabouts of the cat? I cannot see how a fact can be divorced from the uttered fact. — Rich

My experience is that cats decide for themselves to the extent that they are at liberty to, and that they do this without uttering.

I hope the cat is a good observer and shares his position accurately without uttering.