>>>Logically, though, we make no definition of the term 'line' in the rigorous development of geometry, but instead, we use the term as a noun in statements which we take as axioms to form the basis of geometry. That is, we make statements about 'lines' without ever defining them, or needing to know what they are.>H: What is a logical fact? P: We simply do not know. Just as we don't know what a 'line' is in geometry. We certainly have some practical and vernacular ideas about what 'logical facts' are that we use every day, but Dick is admonishing us to put those ideas out of our minds for the moment and just consider 'logical facts' to be completely unknown, unconstrained data of some kind or other. He wants us to leave the concept of 'logical fact' to be completely undefined, just as a primitive concept is undefined in mathematics.>H: Facts are drawn from inferencing from axioms (aka beliefs). How can you have a logical fact without first having a belief? D: There are a couple of carts and horses here that need to be sorted out. In our normal pragmatic life, which seems to be the perspective you are coming from, Harv, we get perceptions from the world (facts in Dick's sense), our subconscious interprets sets of these and provides our conscious mind with inferences (aka beliefs), and then we declare that facts are drawn from these inferences (facts in Harv's sense).