Thanks to all of you, too, who provide the ongoing material for our paralogy . Oops, I see that another post came in from Shaffer. No, that is not the way Searles defines brute facts. They have nothing to do with what we agree on. If they depend on our agreements, they are social constructions.
Brute facts are what are independent of our agreements.
You may think there are no brute facts in that sense. Sounds to me like Shaffer is asking someone if she believes everything is imaginary, a dream. I think we have gone this route before. But if you are a botanist and define flowers more technically, you will not. And there are no flowers if people don't agree to call them that.