>A fact is ALWAYS the truth Yes, a fact (once it's recognized as such) is always the truth, but not the other way around. Brown is a color, but not all colors are brown. A fact is a truth, but not all truths are facts. >It is erroneous to say that people might rely on truth instead of facts. I never said that, and I'm not really sure what you're trying to say. How is it wrong to say that people might rely on truth (beliefs) instead of facts? >They are analogous. That's just your belief. If something can't be proven, it can't be regarded as a fact, yet it can still be regarded as a truth (to the believer). Truths are reliant on one's belief and their worldview. Facts aren't. >They cannot be separated. Ever. Of course they can. I just separated them by defining them and pointing out their differences. You just choose to equate truth with fact, but that's just your belief that they're the same thing. A deeper understanding will show that they're not. >we can believe in something that is not true, not factual, not real, but the act of believing does not change a lie into the truth, or an error into fact, or an illusion into reality. You're just choosing to define the meaning of 'truth' as 'fact'. Some things can never be proven, so they can't be regarded as facts. They can only be regarded as beliefs. Those who choose to believe them can only claim them to be truths, not facts. >Conversely, the act of believing does not -CANNOT - change the truth into a lie Now you appear to be misconstruing what a lie is. To be wrong about something doesn't make it a lie. Nor does believing something make it into a fact. >, a fact into an error, or reality into an illusion . The rest of what you said is just meaningless wordplay.