ABSTRACT
A favourite point with those who insist on the separation of logic and metalogic is that only by means of such a separation can one distinguish between using and talking about symbols; and to fall in line with this, one must take “true” and “false”, as referring to propositions in the nth language, to be themselves words in the (n+1)th language. Broad’s thesis is that any statement can be analysed exclusively in terms of facts and sentences. One might, of course, deny the existence of propositions even in this sense, which would amount to the opinion that the word “fact” must be used in its other sense only, as a designation of an event or a process of actuality. The logic of propositions solves the difficulty of the logic of judgments without falling back upon the doctrine of atomic terms.
