That being said, Anscombe does argue that under normal circumstance, such a fact "is" actually entailed. That is, if it is true that a customer requested potatoes, etc., then "under normal circumstances" the customer would indeed owe the grocer money. However, because such entailment is conditional on such a set of facts holding true under a particular set of circumstances, the fact entailed is still fundamentally brute relative to such facts, just that in such a case the leap in inference occurs at the level of the circumstances, not that of the facts themselves.