It's pretty easy... depends on how bored you are though
T-scheme is a tautology, everything that is and exists is true
In some possible world, instead of using a T-schema (or the moniker/property of true), they use F-schema

And declare everything that is true, false.
So you merely invert T/F value

A la: Everything is false

```Chapter 2: Arguments for Trivialism 1.Introductory Comments 48 2.The Explosive Liar 49 3.The Curry Paradox 54 4.The Argument from the Characterization Principle 56 5.The Argument from Possibilism 63 6.A Cosmological Argument for a Trivial Entity 68 ``` There are the arguments

```2.The Explosive Liar Take the following argument for trivialism 73 :
(1)L is true
(2)It is not the case that L is true
(3)Therefore, trivialism is true

Here L is simply the self-referential liar sentence: ‘L is false’. Note that one could substitute for L any so called dialetheia (i.e. sentence that is both true and false). The most obvious alternative is the Russell paradox generated by the naïve conception of set (i.e. the set of all sets that fail to have self-membership). One then could have as premise (1), ‘R is a member of itself’, and for (2), ‘It is not the case that R is a member of itself’. I will not examine R as an alternative to L, as much of what I have to say about the latter applies to the former. The inference from (1) and (2) to (3) is traditionally known as ex contradictione quodlibet, and it takes the general form of p, ¬p├ q. More recently it has come to be referred to as explosion.
74 ```

Shit formatting since it's pasting from a paper

```3.The Curry Paradox
Recently it has become an industry to take some of the most intractable paradoxes and reinterpret them as sound arguments to controversial conclusions. The most well known example of this is the liar paradox, which is reinterpreted as a sound argument for dialetheism.
Another is the Curry Paradox 82, which I interpret here as a sound argument for trivialism. Take the following sentence, δ: If δ is true, then trivialism.
(1) If δ is true , then if δ is true, then trivialism [by T-schema]
(2) If δ is true, then trivialism [(1) by contraction]
(3) δ is true [(2) by T-schema]
(4) trivialism [(2), (4) by modus ponens]

This is prima facie a sound argument for trivialism – the view that every sentence is true. Indeed, one can modify the argument to prove the truth of any proposition, p, by applying it to the sentence, δ: If δ is true, then p. This would provide the trivialist with independent evidence for each and every one of her beliefs. ```

The characterization principle doesn't have a syllogism

```635.The Argument from Possibilism The next argument for trivialism I wish to spell out can perhaps be dubbed a modal argument for trivialism and can be expressed as follows:
(1)Possibilism is true [prem.]
(2)If possibilism is true, then there is a world (either possible or impossible or both)99, w, in which trivialism is true [prem.] (3)w is a possible world [prem.]
(4)It is true in w that w is identical to the actual world, A [(2)]
(5)If it is true that there is a world, w, and w is a possible world, and it is true in wthat w is identical to A, then trivialism is true [prem.] (6)Trivialism is true [(1)-(5)].

Is premise 1 true? Possibilism is the view that every proposition is possible and is to be contrasted with the view known as necessitarianism: the view that there is at least one impossible proposition. Possibilism has been seriously advocated by a number of philosophers in the last forty years or so.```

```6. A Cosmological Argument for a Trivial Entity Let us define a trivial entity as an entity that instantiates every predicate, i.e. an entity of which everything is true. One of the things true of a trivial entity is that it exists in a reality in which trivialism is true. Hence, if a trivial entity exists, then trivialism is true. But is it true that there exists a trivial entity? Here is an argument for thinking that it is true:

1)Every being (or entity or object) is either trivial or nontrivial
2)It is not the case that every being is nontrivial
3)Hence, there exists a trivial being 107

By a nontrivial being I mean a being which instantiates some but not all predicates. Premise 1) exhausts the logical possibilities. But why think that premise 2) is true? ```

@Sasha There, I even formatted these for your shit

But reading the full essay, while long, is a much more interesting read... because he speaks about why one should not reject trivialism

As it entails every position you already believe as true, and as false

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6714/93693da32d0b9c38aad857672021a950486a.pdf

So the importance becomes what you can justify and why

@Deleted User Methode cannot utter gibberish
Methode has uttered gibberish
Conclusion: <:Smug:643129431434461194>

Literally uttered "gibberish"

Or in the most literal senses:
Methode cannot utter gibberish
Method has uttered "Methode cannot utter gibberish"

Human entails agency
But fetus must be human
And if you take potentiality as your angle, then you also have to respect everything that can potentially become a human, at which point, you explode your own system. As your food becomes a human

So you effectively have to become a Jainist by logical consequence

Fetus != human
If fetus = human, just bite the bullet and say you don't give a shit about humans <:Smug:643129431434461194>

Yeah, I think agency could be a presupposition failure...
But if I'm willing to play the game... I don't really care about agency in itself.
It's how you justify lots of things

Nations deny people agency for security purposes:
Surveillance, Japanese internment, can't refuse vaccinations, blah blah
So I accept agency (liberty) if there's no other extenuating circumstance, but in the abortion argument, you're always denying agency to the women (and somewhat the man) when you prioritize the baby/infants potential autonomy

So you basically already have a contradiction in valuing agency:
Valuing the mother or the infant

And I just claim that fetuses are non-identities

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nonidentity-problem/

```A third objection focuses more narrowly on the rights-based approach. According to that objection, if the child has the right not to be brought into an existence of a certain sort, it is plausible that the child’s parents have various rights as well. Thus, the couple who opts to produce a child with Huntington’s disease or hereditary deafness in place of a relatively unimpaired child may be simply exercising their right of procreative liberty. They may, that is, be using their gametes and their labor, as a matter of right, in a way that suits them. We quickly see that the offspring’s rights and the couple’s rights cannot both be respected – a fact that raises the concern that the underlying account of rights may be inconsistent (Persson 2009).``` This one is strongly biased in favor of not giving birth...
But I think, in general, no person can consent to their own conception

So you can make a deontological argument for anti-natalism

and yet... you posted 🤔

summer isn't doing gomad smdh

you were talking about not drinking milk

u r all...
children of da lie

I'm going to confirm or deny <:pepeLMAO:644901342216847388>

the bat signal is a dog whistle

Also the fact cummie boy responded to a dm

The skulls just make the game super silly

Playing through the game on Legendary in H2 was pretty obnoxious because basically only BR/PP is what you do 90% of the game

wtf is LASO

I don't generally use slurs in general and shit

the R word I use normally

Because people like AusFox <:Smug:643129431434461194>

FF7 is AnPrim's wet dream... THEY'RE COOMIN

I forget the whole plot, but I feel like it's effectively an AnPrim narrative of humans exploiting materia

<:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776>

It's Bernie Sandlers

bernard sandler

<:PEPELAUGH:643817011117424708>

Adam Sandler <:pepeLMAO:644901342216847388>

Holy fuck '63

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/220700560859463680/654095923047170049/ytzikrihis341.png

https://tenor.com/view/hex_maniac-pokemon-gif-9466116

Hex Maniac = Tomoko

Milo being in *massive debt* is the funniest story I've got to laugh at in a long while

> be right wing
> talk about how poor people should stop being poor
> grift; become poor

<:pepeLMAO:644901342216847388> good at names

Methode is the joker IRL

I mean... if you're going to keep your ID as Methode ... you can call it "The Method" with Methode or some stupid shit

Modus Operandi if you want to sound smarter, like all philosophy shits do as well

disgusting philosophers

I mean, there's a billion ways you could alter the word "Method"... methodology, methodical (adjective form)

Methodological Discourse with Methode

Discourse on the Methode

By Rene Defartes

> Mod abuse
> I'm entitled by the US constitution to be here
> I'm a sovereign citizen
😞

https://discordapp.com/channels/628013859776626708/628013859776626711/654221846925017123 <-------- HAS THE WORD IN IT TOO

FUCKIN BLIND

reeeeeeeeeee

I don't care about the word but

Use your fuckin eyeballs

They called this a train back in the day

I only know Nagatoro... the left one seems familiar though

yall gonna be some coomers smdh

<:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776> <:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776> <:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776> <:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776> <:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776> <:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776> <:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776> <:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776> <:Feelsweirdman:644895953064820776>

It's time to stop

No more human centipede

Domestic Kanojo 😂

It truly was garbage

<:pepeLMAO:644901342216847388>

And I ate that garbage up

You Died

https://tenor.com/view/dark-souls-you-died-gif-9128431

wtf... Slime Tensei is slice of life garbage

<:REEE:644893026165981184>

It's like... ok

But only ok

IT IS **THE GENERIC ISEKAI**

Saga of Tanya / Youjo Senki

There's a lot of good Isekais

JUST SAY YOU LIKE MOE SHIT

MOE TRASH <:REEE:644893026165981184>

There's some camping anime that you'd probably like recently that I dropped instantly

Knowing it was Moe feels good shit <:REEE:644893026165981184>

I refuse

all of them

I personally only think 5-6 look youngish.. but

We're going over aesthetics of lolis 😰

Knowing what people look like doesn't stop them from shitting on the server like what happens in all of these servers <:pepeLMAO:644901342216847388>

Not to throw shade, but I am the shade thrower

@Hagar Weird statement. Charizard is hardest mode, **but only if you devote your game to sticking with charmander**

I only played Red/Blue/Yellow