Debates in science seem to depend on referential language-games, but in other senses they do not. This article addresses non-representational theory. It is a branch of newer approaches to cultural geography that strive to get a handle on spatial relationships not by representing them, but rather by presenting them. In this case, present connotes spatial and temporal proximity and availability. In non-representational theories, there are no longer signs or symbols that represent concepts or realities. Furthermore, non-representational theories also dissolve distinctions between the speakable and the unspeakable, and they erase distinctions among pictures, models, displays or depictions and reality. The article outlines briefly the stance of the historian Ankersmit, who distinguishes presentation from representation in history and the consequences for the truth-value of what is argued for. Finally, insights from representational and non-representational positions are offered as they relate generally to educational research.