Depends on your epistemological framing, doesn't it? Wikipedia is open source. If you have a more reliable method, you're free to host and publish.
"We can then save ourselves trouble of testing and debating" Here you are implying that because there is no truth, that testing and debating are necessary. That if truth exists and can be proven to exist that those are no longer necessary. I respond to that. What is the strawman?
-
-
Ran out of room, you do it again here: "Guess we'll have to continue to argue about stuff" Again, where is the strawman? I'm just responding to claims you made.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The part where you're saying I'm implying there is no truth. That's the straw man.
-
Why am I supposed to think otherwise? What is the point of this whole tweet then? "Your presumption is that there is a truth. Demonstrate it, and we can then save ourselves the trouble of testing and debating. You'll be humanity's greatest champion, forever remembered."
-
The point is you can't demonstrate the truth of a proposition without examining it. Part of examination is testing and debate. The notion that one can reliably and demonstrably arrive at truth without examination is codswallop.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.