>That's bullshit. Things are either true or false.
How do you respond?
"I don't know"
>>2565864
I respond "only in a certain context"
*ignite lightsaber*
>>2565864
*Possibly teleports 180° outside of your visual point of reference*
Heh, nothing objective, kid.
'You sure are a gnomish looking freak, Sam."
True or false?
Okay, then, God's existence is TRUE.
>>2565864
So what you're saying every question can be answered with yes or no?
Have you stopped beating your mother?
t. Protagoras
>>2565864
"This statement is false."
>>2567158
this
>>2565864
Is this painting true or false? Is the notion of beauty, or repugnance true or false? Boxing the world into binary sets like that is retarded.
>>2565864
>tfw a question touching on Epistemology, Ethics, Aesthetics and Metaphysics will be answered by one line pseudo-profundities versus a well reasoned, formal and dialectical discussion
>>2565864
That's correct.
>>2565864
Not wrong either.
The worst philosophy is one that is overly complex.
>>2567170
I can't decide who's worse, you or the anal avenger.
>>2565864
Thank you Mister. Big-Eared-Athiestman,
>>2565864
Reality is beyond human understanding, every system we create to explain it is flawed and so it's inevitable that something is both right and wrong.
>>2565864
>>2565864
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_(negative)
>>2565864
What is then the answer to the continuum hypothesis
>>2565864
>Things are either true or false
in what context?
>>2565998
underated
>>2565864
this guy looks like he didn't get punched enough during his school years
>>2567951
A hypothesis isn't a question.
>>2565864
I post a link to a Wikipedia article about multivalued logic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-valued_logic