Freedom From Atheism

I'll guarantee you he'd apply the same "You're stupid...you're brainwashed....your refusal to believe in my conspiracy theory is a 'religion" Standard...

to those who don't buy into 9/11 Trutherism as to those who are not Theists.

 

Exactly correct.

 

I was wondering what makes that guy tick.

 

No Actually you haven't made a single one. Guess next will have to supply you with a definition of a proposition since have already demonstrated you haven't supplied a premise or conclusion. Or did you not read the definitions?

 

No but you could certainly quote what you are trying to claim.

(everyone knows he wont be able to quote me to support his claims because they are false as usual.)

 

Certainly we agree that it is possible to believe that something is false.

That is not the different I was trying to point out. The answer to whether your position counts as belief only relies on the question "do you accept that there is an odd number of leaves" (or whatever), to which Person C's answer would be "no". He would not answer "neither" because the question doesn't specify a second statement (and "neither" only applies to two statements at a time). There certainly are other statements that follow from the statement "there is an odd number of leaves" but the definition follow only from the question if he accepts the original statement.

That is exactly what I'm saying. Judging from how vehemently we both hold our positions, I'm guessing we mean different things by the words. If you can go through the following and point out at what point you disagree, we can figure out where.

Consider person C. Does he disbelieve odds? By definition, disbelieve means "not believe", so does he not believe odds? By the virtue of the not operator, if belief is yes, then disbelief is no and vice versa. We consider the definition of belief, i.e. accept as true, does he accept odds as true? No. So he answers "disbelieving odds" with yes.

At the same time, consider your other wording, "does he believe [not odds]?". Not odds is evens, so does he believe evens? The definition of believe means does he accept it as true? He does not, so his answer to "believes not odds" is no.

Since the two propositions have different truth values, they cannot be the same thing. Consequentially, it seems to me having two variables is a more accurate boolean logic than trying to cram a variable with a middle ground "neither" into the boolean logic.