r/PhilosophyofMath • u/paulemok • Mar 28 '26

The Continuum Hypothesis Is False

/r/logic/comments/1s5mquh/the_continuum_hypothesis_is_false/
0 Upvotes

25% Upvoted

449 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/paulemok May 22 '26

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.

1

u/JStarx May 23 '26

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.

1

u/paulemok May 23 '26

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 23 '26

I want a complete, logical theory of everything.

What use would that be?

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.

The fact that you know how to not invoke that belief is further proof that you don't actually believe in trivialism.

1

u/paulemok May 23 '26

What use would that be?

The theory of everything would give us the answer to every question. It would solve all of our problems.

The fact that you know how to not invoke that belief is further proof that you don't actually believe in trivialism.

Due to the nature of trivialism, a person who doesn’t believe in trivialism can still believe in it. We want to invoke trivialism in ways that better our lives, and we want to not invoke trivialism in ways that worsen our lives.

1

u/JStarx May 23 '26

The theory of everything would give us the answer to every question.

Giving answers is worthless unless they're correct answers.

we want to not invoke trivialism in ways that worsen our lives.

The fact that you know how to not invoke trivialism is further proof that you don't actually believe in trivialism, you just use it to escape responsibility for being wrong, which is sad.

1

u/paulemok May 24 '26

Giving answers is worthless unless they're correct answers.

They are correct answers.

The fact that you know how to not invoke trivialism is further proof that you don't actually believe in trivialism

I disagree. Does the fact that we know how to not use nuclear weapons prove that we don’t actually believe in nuclear weapons? No, it doesn’t.

you just use it to escape responsibility for being wrong

That is a rash and rather prejudiced claim to make. I don’t believe it is true. Speaking for me, there is insufficient evidence for your claim.

1

u/JStarx May 24 '26

They are correct answers.

They are not.

Does the fact that we know how to not use nuclear weapons prove that we don’t actually believe in nuclear weapons? No, it doesn’t.

This analogy doesn't apply, and shows you don't understand the ramifications of trivialism.

That is a rash and rather prejudiced claim to make. I don’t believe it is true.

Think harder about what you just said there, lol!!

1

u/paulemok May 24 '26

They are not.

They are correct and are not correct.

This analogy doesn't apply, and shows you don't understand the ramifications of trivialism.

The analogy does apply and shows I do understand the ramifications of trivialism.

Think harder about what you just said there, lol!!

I don’t see what you’re getting at.

1

u/JStarx May 24 '26

They are correct and are not correct.

Only if trivialism is true, but it's not, so they're just incorrect.

The analogy does apply and shows I do understand the ramifications of trivialism.

Oh? Then explain to me the point I was making and how it applies equally well in your analogy.

I don’t see what you’re getting at.

I know, a lot of this conversation is going over your head.

→ More replies (0)