3 ms·
A gossiper reports rumors without doing any checking for accuracy. That seems rather indifferent to the truth? Phrasing it as a technically true statement by ad
by skybrian 4y ago
A gossiper reports rumors without doing any checking for accuracy. That seems rather indifferent to the truth? Phrasing it as a technically true statement by adding “some say” in front is still rather indifferent to the truth of the rumor, as normally understood.
Similarly, statements of the form “if X were true then Y would be true” are independent of the actual truth value of X, which is often unknown. If you care whether X is true or not, it’s entirely unhelpful. It’s indifferent to the truth of X because it’s an independent statement.
These can be seen as forms of bullshitting that avoids being technically incorrect.
It’s sort of like we’re doing now. We’re not discussing the ground truth of anything concrete.
- mdp2021 4y agoYou seem to be referring to linguistic contexts in which the purpose is not aletic (or in the direction of aletic) but emotional (etc). (For what the hypotetical are concerned, they are T/F statements... They do not access a truth in the set of instanced facts, but one in the logical realm - still not BSing.) The dimensions can be relatively independent - so you could plot the instances on a Cartesian graph, one axis describing the "adherence to Truth", the other other practical intents. You may be comforting, you may be selling, etc.: you can do all of that without lying. Here we are discussing: it is not impossible that somebody came just to pass the time (purpose), with utter disregard to any truth, and that may facilitate drifting towards bullshitting - but it a more fitting idea to regard exchangers as investigators over some matter, which is still an aletic activity, and the opposite of BSing.