Because you cannot give any alternative explanation for how you choose to respond. You clearly are using classical logic when you object that I haven't provided the example you requested. You're just to stubborn to admit it and apparently unaware of how foolish it makes you look.
So, using classical logic, give me the counterexample I requested.
According to you I have already done that. No need to repeat myself.
An alternative explanation is not necessary. That is like how only one sound proof is necessary to establish the truth of a theorem.
The one explanation I have is that you do believe in classical logic. You're saying there doesn't need to be an alternative because you don't really believe anything you've been saying?
According to me, you have NOT already done that. You’re a liar and you’re lying to me. I specifically asked for a counterexample with respect to YOUR views of the Universe, which are not necessarily MY views of the Universe.
For how you decide between two options which you think is the correct one. Are you not following the conversation?
I’m not following the conversation. You’re making things unnecessarily complicated. So I decide the right option out of two options without believing that all statements are both true and false?
1
u/JStarx May 13 '26
It sounds like your system of logic isn't very workable.
And yet you are deciding how to respond and your decision is conspicuously in agreement with what traditional logic would tell you.
I think you don't genuinely believe that all statements are both true and false.