When you talk about things, you're speaking fictionally and in error

Everything I say is false

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fictionalism/
```Fictionalism about a region of discourse can provisionally be characterized as the view that claims made within that discourse are not best seen as aiming at literal truth but are better regarded as a sort of ‘fiction’. As we will see, this first characterization of fictionalism is in several ways rough. But it is a useful point of departure.```

Anime is for children

This is women for you

Ban them

```2.1 Language and ontology

A first crucial distinction is between a linguistic and an ontological thesis. The linguistic thesis is, roughly, that already expressed above, according to which utterances of sentences of the discourse are best seen not as efforts to say what is literally true, but as useful fictions of some sort. The ontological thesis, by contrast, is the thesis that the entities characteristic of the discourse do not exist, or have the ontological status of fictional entities. One can in principle embrace the linguistic thesis without embracing the ontological thesis, and vice versa.

Often the theses are run together. Nolan, Restall and West (2005) say, when introducing fictionalism, “The simplest fictionalist approach to a discourse takes certain claims in that discourse to be literally false, but nevertheless worth uttering in certain contexts, since the pretence that such claims are true is worthwhile for various theoretical purposes”. (The complication that they introduce is that some fictionalists may simply be agnostic about the relevant claims.) Zoltán Szabó (2001) says, “To be a fictionalist about Fs is to think that our naïve attitude toward F-discourse is only halfway correct: we are right in thinking that we use genuine singular terms that purport to refer to Fs, but wrong in thinking that they actually succeed in referring. In engaging in F-discourse we inadvertently slip into fictional talk”. One reason that the linguistic and ontological theses are often run together is that the linguistic thesis is often motivated by ontological concerns. For example, someone who is a nominalist might on that ground find herself attracted to fictionalism about mathematical discourse. ``` I love this bit personally

<:pepeLMAO:644901342216847388>

Imagine not being a linguistic trivialist

@Marcdoof You're doing an undergrad of philo, yes?

no

@Marcdoof are you in college?

Ye

You seem like you're somewhat educated in philo

minor, random courses, personal interest?

Undeclared going into computer and probably taking a philo minor cause it's cool. It's all personal interest @sydtko

I see

yeyey

you?

I dropped out like 12 years ago... was doing STEM... ecology, chem, stats

So it's all ... personal interest. Motivated interest and anger at shit can philosophers

And their nonsense

I can get that

have any of you read zhuang zi?

no

Fucking hell tradcons are idiots

oh yea

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/attachments/summaries/GT-summary.pdf

@Methode https://twitter.com/SocDoneLeft/status/1216021729031659525 like my tweet you cunt

No

@actual_communist_boi i'll like your tweets mysta OwO

@Federico you're hot

OwO am hawt

@LustrousMandrill where you at

Lol

@LustrousMandrill vc

.skip