Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis ---

On 11/4/2024 1:55 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sun, 03 Nov 2024 16:34:12 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 11/3/2024 4:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/3/24 4:27 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/3/2024 3:14 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/3/24 1:40 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/3/2024 12:22 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 11/3/24 12:58 PM, olcott wrote:

On 11/3/2024 11:53 AM, Mike Terry wrote:

On 03/11/2024 13:19, olcott wrote:

On 11/3/2024 3:19 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-11-02 10:21:09 +0000, Andy Walker said:

>

The term "lie" is to only be applied to intentionally deceitful
statements. To apply the term "lie" to statements not having
intentional deceit <is> itself intentional deceit.
>

Not if the person making that claim sincerely believes it. :)
You are being inconsistent here...

hehe :)
>

Richard has said that he does not mean intentional deceit when he
calls me a liar, yet uses the term "liar" anyway knowing that
others will take this to mean intentional deceit. So Richard is a
liar for calling me a liar.
>

Because the word doesn't just mean intential deciet.
And you are an intentional liar to say it only means that, as you
have been shown the definition.
>

Unless you always qualify you use of the term "liar" as
{unintentional falsity} it is the kind of defamation suit that you
will lose because the communication process always assumes the
primary meaning of a term unless otherwise specified.

>
Nope, I guess you learned your law just as good as your logic,
Since a "reasonable" person will undetstand that statements that are
clearly false under the standard mean can be considered to be lies.

>
*That not the way it works bro. Don't bet your house on that*

>
Would YOU bet your savings on it?
>

Yes. I don't have much life left so yes.

Liar.

 My cancer is getting worse. Treatment has
been postponed too long. Is that funny?
 

*This is my official cease-and-desist notification*
STOP CALLING ME A LIAR !!!

>