(04-03-2025, 04:25 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote:

(04-03-2025, 10:29 AM)mikesez Wrote: He was lying, or being unethical. I don't know which of those two it was, but I know it was one of those two. It's just logic. 
Imagine you told me that there are three points out in the universe, and I said, "those three points either form a line or a triangle." Then you argued, "how can you know that? I didn't tell you where the three points are. How can you tell me that I am wrong when you are ignorant?"
That's the corner you've backed yourself into. How's the view?

You do love your false choices.

---

(04-03-2025, 04:13 PM)mikesez Wrote: You're right! That's why all along I've allowed for a second possibility, which is, it's true, but he's unethical if it's true.

No, no, no. You don't get to declare that only two options exist.

It's a free country I can declare what I want.
Just like you can declare I'm wrong.
Yawn.
Now if you actually wanted to do something interesting, you could propose a hypothetical scenario that doesn't fit in the "he's lying" or "he's unethical" categories I've laid out.  If you were able to do that, you'd actually *prove* I'm wrong, which sounds more fun and interesting than merely declaring it.

---