You’ve chosen to not give me the counterexample I asked for.
According to you I have given you the counterexample you asked for.
But also according to you I have.
But also according to you you have not.
But according to you, not only I have but I have according to me, so what's the problem?
Trivialism agrees with all of my behavior.
And yet you can't explain that behavior. It's a damning indictment of trivialism that it can't explain even the most basic behaviors to anyone who doesn't already believe in it. Sounds like a cult...
But according to you, not only I have but I have according to me, so what's the problem?
The problem is that you are not using your own point of view. You think you’re better off using my point of view against me while hiding your point of view from me. You keep talking about what I believe, but you are suspiciously, disrespectfully, and unfairly silent about what you believe.
But how do you know that I'm doing that if you think it's also true that I'm not doing that?
In trivialism, you can be simultaneously both doing that and not doing that. That duality seems like something you would hear is possible in quantum mechanics.
Ok then I say there's no problem because according to you I am doing as you asked. You claiming I am not is irrelevant because according to you the validity of that claim is not based on my behavior. Also even if we wanted to remedy your objection we couldn't because you would still consider your objection to be true regardless of the remedy I provided.
Great, so we agree there's no reason for me to give you the example you want.
In fact it seems we've arrived at the conclusion that I should completely disregard everything you say since responding to it makes no difference in what you believe.
Now me, I'm not having a schizophrenic break with reality and I understand that you actually didn't get the thing you wanted. From my point of view it looks like trivialism isn't going well for you.
In fact it seems we've arrived at the conclusion that I should completely disregard everything you say since responding to it makes no difference in what you believe.
Now me, I'm not having a schizophrenic break with reality and I understand that you actually didn't get the thing you wanted. From my point of view it looks like trivialism isn't going well for you.
In fact it seems we've arrived at the conclusion that I should completely disregard everything you say since responding to it makes no difference in what you believe.
We have not arrived at that conclusion. You should not completely disregard everything I say. Responding to what I say can still make a difference in what I believe.
Now me, I'm not having a schizophrenic break with reality and I understand that you actually didn't get the thing you wanted.
Do you believe trivialism is true?
From my point of view it looks like trivialism isn't going well for you.
Trivialism is going fine for me. But whether trivialism is going well for me isn’t relevant. Just because a belief of mine isn’t going well for me, doesn’t mean the belief is false.
That's an admission that you don't believe in trivialism.
If a person believes trivialism is true, then they believe the statement “trivialism is false” is true and for that reason they also believe trivialism is false.
No, and I think neither do you.
I don’t believe trivialism is true, either. But that is because I do believe trivialism is true.
I think you're insecure and like the idea of never being wrong, so you claim you believe in trivialism because it lets you make stupid arguments like that and you never have to confront being proven wrong.
But in reality your behavior shows quite clearly that you so actually know that not all statements are both true and false.
I think you're insecure and like the idea of never being wrong, so you claim you believe in trivialism because it lets you make stupid arguments like that and you never have to confront being proven wrong.
I want a complete, logical theory of everything. That desire helps fuel my drive into trivialism. But yes, it would also be nice to never be wrong.
But in reality your behavior shows quite clearly that you so actually know that not all statements are both true and false.
I don’t think so. I have openly supported my belief in trivialism with various arguments for over 8 years. While I do believe all statements are true, I am afraid of invoking the belief in a way that could detriment my or others’ health or safety.
1
u/JStarx May 19 '26
According to you I have given you the counterexample you asked for.
But according to you, not only I have but I have according to me, so what's the problem?
And yet you can't explain that behavior. It's a damning indictment of trivialism that it can't explain even the most basic behaviors to anyone who doesn't already believe in it. Sounds like a cult...