creativesoul wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 8:59 am
If that is the case, then it must also be the case that either not all thought/belief is existentially dependent upon processing truth
Yes, that's what I've been saying all along (at least based on how I interpret these word). Although I'm not quite sure what you mean by existentially dependent.
or no creature without the anterior parts of the neocortex thinks and/or believes anything at all.
No, I can only even make some sense of this if we use some really twisted definition of thinking / belief.
In order to know that most people who process truth have something in common - such as having no idea that some people don't - one must first know all people who process truth. You don't.
Gratuitous assertions aren't acceptable.
How do you think the entire field of psychology works for example, do they examine EVERY SINGLE PERSON on the planet first, or do they make observations based on some sample size?
Bullshit. He vehemently argues for his own innocence on whatever he is charged with. People who have no concept of truth do not do that.
He vehemently argues for his own innocence BECAUSE he thinks he is innocent. He doesn't actually understand truth and lies, so when people call him a liar, he really doesn't know what they are talking about. All he sees is that these people are trying to do him harm, even though in his mind he IS innocent.
People who do not process truth do not know when and how to use words to affect change.
Quite the opposite. They usually know better how to use words to affect change, than most people. Many of them are adept at using them as tools, weapons etc. And they tend to assume that everyone else does this too, they think most people simply suck at it.
People who do not understand truth/falsity do not call things "fake".
Of course they do. It's an excellent tool/weapon.
Ignorance is bliss. Ok I'm done here.