Yet your answer rebranded "true vs false" into "yes vs no"...a dualistic conflict chosen by oneself. A self inflicted contradiction of self.
Question and answer implies suggestion and consent...giving consent to any suggestion establishes a dualistic conflict of reason. It puts ONEs consent together with another ONEs suggestion, hence 1+1=2. That's math-o-magic...a trick.
There can be only one...
So very true
Can there be "true" without a dualistic conflict against "false"?
Yes! Or there could have been at least, but that's a moot point and my answer is still yes.
Yet your answer rebranded "true vs false" into "yes vs no"...a dualistic conflict chosen by oneself. A self inflicted contradiction of self.
Question and answer implies suggestion and consent...giving consent to any suggestion establishes a dualistic conflict of reason. It puts ONEs consent together with another ONEs suggestion, hence 1+1=2. That's math-o-magic...a trick.
Moot/mod - "to meet; assemble"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/moot
Nature disassembles sentences (life) by setting each one apart from one another, before point of death assembles each partial back into whole.
The points we (pluralism) suggest each other are tempting consenting ones (singular) together...hence making ones sentence/sentire - "sense" moot.
Look at the two bots creating an imaginary conversation...
That should be interesting to follow.
ZzzzzZzzzzz
Beeep boop boop beep