ABSTRACT
Truthmaker theory is false. The most significant motivation for being a truthmaker theorist comes from the idea that the truth of a proposition - any proposition - requires an explanation. Supervenience itself is not an explanatory relation. It is not a "deep" metaphysical relation; rather, it is a "surface" relation that reports a pattern of property covariation, suggesting the presence of an interesting dependency relation that might explain it. Explanation is propositional in form. This point is really quite banal. An explanation is roughly linguistic. An explanation often takes the form of constructing a deductive argument, the conclusion of which is a statement of the fact needing explanation: but, unlike what happens in a suasive argument, in an explanatory argument the epistemic direction may run counter to the direction of logical consequence. Liggins begins by noting that Horwich's deflationism has four tenets.
