 J. C. Beall (2000) attempts to dissolve this problem on the identity theorist’s behalf by invoking the principle of the indiscernibility of identicals. His proposal works as follows. If we ask, in respect of (11), what the “right” fact is, it seems that we can answer that the “right” fact must at least have the property of being identical with the proposition that p, and the indiscernibility principle then guarantees that there is only one such fact. This proposal is open to an obvious retort. Suppose that the proposition that p is false. That proposition will still be identical with itself, and if we are saying (in Wittgensteinian spirit) that propositions are facts, then that proposition will be identical with at least one fact, namely itself. So it will satisfy the right-hand side of (11), its falsity notwithstanding. But reflection on this retort suggests a patch-up to Beall’s proposal: why not say that the right fact is the fact that p? We would then be able to gloss (11) with