http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trivialism
"Trivialism is the theory that every proposition is true. A consequence of trivialism is that all statements, including all contradictions of the form "p and not p" (that something both 'is' and 'isn't' at the same time), are true."
Quote:Ra, 80.8: ...The adept, then, is working with the power of hidden things illuminated by that which can be false or true. To embrace falsity, to know it, to seek it, and to use it gives a power that is most great. This is the nature of the power of your visitor and may shed some light upon the power of one who seeks in order to serve others as well, for the missteps in the night are oh! so easy.
Quote:Why be worried? Because of the misfortune that befalls you? You regret not having taken a different course of action? But necessarily all things obtain – including everything that is bad for you. There was nothing you could have done to prevent this. So why regret your past actions? Instead, be happy and relaxed. And besides, everything good obtains too – you have missed out on nothing. The conditions for a peaceful, tranquil, and meaningful life are here to enjoy. And there is nothing you need to do in order to ensure that this remains so. Stop your worry, and be happy – and do whatever pleases you.
- Paul Kabay, A defense of trivialism, Page 196; http://repository.unimelb.edu.au/10187/5734
If you seek enlightenment seeker, it is clear.
Edit: actually, nevermind
I like your second quote, Adonai One.
Quote:...It is noteworthy that many of Aristotle’s arguments in Metaphysics Γ in favor of the principle of non contradiction are rather arguments against trivialism. In particular, there is a family of arguments between 1008 a 26 and 1007 b 12 of the form “If trivialism is right, then X is the case, but if X is the case then all things are one. But it is impossible that all things are one, so trivialism is impossible.” Seemingly, these Aristotelian considerations are the seeds of virtually all subsequent suspicions against trivialism: Trivialism has to be rejected because it identifies what should not be identified, and is undesirable from a logical point of view because it identifies what is not identical, namely, truth and falsehood...
Models of Possibilism and Trivialism, Luis Estrada-González, Page 193
http://wydawnictwoumk.pl/czasopisma/inde...e/view/791
I found it directly mentioned, yay!
Pretty trivial as far as philosophy goes
(05-22-2014, 02:57 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]*ba dum tish*
lol.
sure you two guys aren't umbilical twins?
Found the negative polarity's stages. When something is completely falsified, it no longer has a value.
Quote:Luis Estrada-González in "Models of Possiblism and Trivialism" lists eight types of non-trivialism or anti-trivialism through the use of possible worlds:
(AT0) Actualist minimal anti-trivialism: In the actual world, some propositions do not have a value of true or false.
(AT1) Actualist absolute anti-trivialism: In the actual world, all propositions do not have a value of true or false.
(AT2) Minimal anti-trivialism: In some worlds, some propositions do not have a value of true or false.
(AT3) Pointed anti-trivialism (or minimal logical nihilism): In some worlds, every proposition does not have a value of true or false.
(AT4) Distributed anti-trivialism: In every world, some propositions do not have a value of true or false.
(AT5) Strong anti-trivialism: Some propositions do not have a value of true or false in every world.
(AT6) Super anti-trivialism (or moderate logical nihilism): Every proposition does not have a value of true or false at some world.
(AT7) Absolute anti-trivialism (or maximal logical nihilism): All propositions do not have a value of true or false in every world.
http://wydawnictwoumk.pl/czasopisma/inde...e/view/791