Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a
 new basis ---
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2024 13:22:22 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <6d8148432a7183c5f16c2f5b3b549fb6b3edc390@i2pn2.org>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vflue8$3nvp8$2@i2pn2.org>
 <vfmd8m$k2m7$1@dont-email.me>
 <bcd82d9f8a987d3884220c0df7b8f7204cb9de3e@i2pn2.org>
 <vfmueh$mqn9$1@dont-email.me>
 <ff039b922cabbb6d44f90aa71a52d8c2f446b6ab@i2pn2.org>
 <vfo95k$11qs1$1@dont-email.me> <vfp8c0$3tobi$2@i2pn2.org>
 <vfpbtq$1837o$2@dont-email.me> <vfq4h9$1fo1n$1@dont-email.me>
 <vfqpi3$1iaob$4@dont-email.me> <vfqsng$1gikg$1@dont-email.me>
 <vfsadf$1urkc$1@dont-email.me> <vft4kp$23a0h$1@dont-email.me>
 <vfvo2o$2ln20$1@dont-email.me> <vg09p2$2kq69$1@dont-email.me>
 <vg0a9h$2op6r$1@dont-email.me>
 <fd8bf90393a5bcb10f7913da9081421637262590@i2pn2.org>
 <vg14nd$2t4b1$1@dont-email.me> <SGUUO.312650$kxD8.126005@fx11.iad>
 <vg16dl$2th77$1@dont-email.me> <vg2b6j$374jn$1@dont-email.me>
 <vg2gg1$37lpn$5@dont-email.me> <vg4onc$3ngof$1@dont-email.me>
 <vg4uem$3o3ca$1@dont-email.me> <vg7f7l$a1jf$1@dont-email.me>
 <vg7t8h$c823$4@dont-email.me>
 <psydnYHRoboAJbr6nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <vg8djc$fg4n$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2024 18:22:22 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="786503"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <vg8djc$fg4n$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3785
Lines: 45

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:
>>>>
>>>>> On 02/11/2024 08:43, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> A false assertion is a lie even if nobody asserts it.
>>>>> [PO:]
>>>>>>> Not at all. The base meaning of {lie} requires intentional
>>>>>>> deception.
>>>>>> That may be its base meaning but the full meaning includes
>>>>>> all false statements. The statement itself does not change
>>>>>> when someone states it so there is no clear advantage in
>>>>>> saying that the statement was not a lie until someone stated
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>>     Disagree.  There is a clear advantage in distinguishing those
>>>>> who make [honest] mistakes from those who wilfully mislead.
>>>>
>>>> That is not a disagreement.
>>>>
>>>
>>> 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...
> 
> 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.

IF you won't accept the truth, then you become the classical case of the 
pathological liar that lies because he can not tell the difference 
between truth and lies, and speaks with a reckless disreguard for the truth.