Every truth must be true

1. Every truth is necessarily not false.
2. Being not false is necessarily being true.
3. Every truth is necessarily true.

2) It is you that must prove my logic is ill, ?)

1) Of course I know exactly what your rhetoric means, what I cannot find is your argumentation.
2) It is you that must prove my logic is ill, and you won't do it with such rhetoric posts (by the way, you are misspelling the word rhetoric as well - perhaps this is a habit of yours).
3) What seems to me to lack rationality is this post of yours, since it presents no single argument regarding my reasoning - just... rhetoric (without the misspelling). Are you incapable of arguing? (does that "disease" have a name?)

K-A as usual all these equations lacks severly in rationallity.

A scitzo dude who thinks the TV sends him subliminal messages, is his truth, but not ours.

Most politicians will lie, but the populus will think the words are true, when they only contain some truth.

Sometimes people will jump to conclusions and make a wrong statemen they think are true.

...thus truth isn't always truth.

K-A as usual all these equations lacks severly in rationallity.

A scitzo dude who thinks the TV sends him subliminal messages, is his truth, but not ours.

Most politicians will lie, but the populus will think the words are true, when they only contain some truth.

Sometimes people will jump to conclusions and make a wrong statemen they think are true.

...thus truth isn't always truth.

HexHammer wrote:

K-A as usual all these equations lacks severly in rationallity.

A scitzo dude who thinks the TV sends him subliminal messages, is his truth, but not ours.

Most politicians will lie, but the populus will think the words are true, when they only contain some truth.

Sometimes people will jump to conclusions and make a wrong statemen they think are true.

...thus truth isn't always truth.

What you mean is that what is sometimes believed true is not true. Not that what is true isn't true. You are confusing what is believed true with what is true.

kennethamy wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

K-A as usual all these equations lacks severly in rationallity.

A scitzo dude who thinks the TV sends him subliminal messages, is his truth, but not ours.

Most politicians will lie, but the populus will think the words are true, when they only contain some truth.

Sometimes people will jump to conclusions and make a wrong statemen they think are true.

...thus truth isn't always truth.

What you mean is that what is sometimes believed true is not true. Not that what is true isn't true. You are confusing what is believed true with what is true.

What you mean is that truth is subjective. Truth can be manipulated, truth can be misunderstood.

How could you say? Do you know what truth is?

guigus wrote:

How could you say? Do you know what truth is?

Yes, it's for naive rainbowchasers, people who lack rationallity. Those who are easy to manipulate, truth is but a demagogues weapon.

HexHammer wrote:

guigus wrote:

How could you say? Do you know what truth is?

Yes, it's for naive rainbowchasers, people who lack rationallity. Those who are easy to manipulate, truth is but a demagogues weapon.

Is this true? I hope not, since I don't want you to manipulate me.

guigus wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

guigus wrote:

How could you say? Do you know what truth is?

Yes, it's for naive rainbowchasers, people who lack rationallity. Those who are easy to manipulate, truth is but a demagogues weapon.

Is this true? I hope not, since I don't want you to manipulate me.

You just need to be enlighten.

Do you mean enlightened? And if so, do you mean enlightened by you?

guigus wrote:

Do you mean enlightened? And if so, do you mean enlightened by you?

The sad thing, you need very simple things spelled out. Just a few posts before, I presented all there is to the matter, and you missed it, you need your head dragged to it and rubbed against it, so is it with people who usually gets their knowledge through books.

OK, let us go for a language you appear to understand: the most basic principle of Aristotelian logic, the principle of identity, "A is A." Or, which is the same: "A must be A" (otherwise, A would not be A, which would violate the principle of identity). Would you say that "A must be A" has a different meaning than "it must be that A is A"? Or that "necessarily if A then A" does not mean "if A then necessarily A"? I hope not. Well, since A is whatever I wish, it can be a truth, right? So a truth must be a truth. Finally, since being a truth is the same as being true (for whatever is untrue is not a truth), then we have: every truth must be true.

guigus wrote:

OK, let us go for a language you appear to understand: the most basic principle of Aristotelian logic, the principle of identity, "A is A." Or, which is the same: "A must be A" (otherwise, A would not be A, which would violate the principle of identity). Would you say that "A must be A" has a different meaning than "it must be that A is A"? Or that "necessarily if A then A" does not mean "if A then necessarily A"? I hope not. Well, since A is whatever I wish, it can be a truth, right? So a truth must be a truth. Finally, since being a truth is the same as being true (for whatever is untrue is not a truth), then we have: every truth must be true.

Because you guys doesn't inclue the "uncertainty" factor into your equation, thus only by logic you can't discovery lies, uncertainty, misunderstanding, multiple truth ..etc.
..it should be very simle, formal logic is for idiots by idiot, why people only using logic often fails utterly with simple jobs.

Formal logic is only what I call "liniar", but if you do indeed posess greater logic, then solve this challged http://able2know.org/topic/152868-1

I am also not exactly a fan of formal logic, as you can testify by reading the almost totality of my previous posts. But it is not calling logicians "idiots" that you will transcend it: by doing that you just make yourself look an idiot.

guigus wrote:

I am also not exactly a fan of formal logic, as you can testify by reading the almost totality of my previous posts. But it is not calling logicians "idiots" that you will transcend it: by doing that you just make yourself look an idiot.

I don't try solve great mysteries of life with logic, unlike so many others, and it pains me so that they can't realize their folly.