Two ways to agree #

If you talk with someone and you want to express agreement you can say:

• it is not false
• it is true

But it seems saying one or another does not amount to the same thing. If you say, agreeing to someone saying for instance ‘it is good to think before acting’. Now if you concede to this point, saying ‘it is true’, you agree with the point without distinguishing any nuance. For example, if you walk in nature and you see a charging bull, it might be a good idea to quickly jump on a nearby tree and think after the fact, not before. You basically run on survival instincts and there is no time to think, it’s too slow and would cost you your life. This works well in primitive environment where dangers are acute and well visible. So saying it is good to think before acting is not always true, since the difference between life and death is seconds.

Or it is not false

On the other hand if you say ‘it is not false’, you can mean that you don’t detect falsity in this statement, but it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist, but you are not aware of it. It is just you are conscious enough to be aware that you might be wrong, which ultimately leads you to making a better decision, since we cannot be sure of many things in life. Responding to a conversation in a similar fashion by a hypothetical conversation:

• John - It is good to think before acting
• Mary - It is not false
• John - It is always true
• Mary - You cannot know how much you know since you cannot possibly know how much you don’t know, you are essentially like an insect with antennas sensing his environment 1 cm ahead, not even aware that you observe him since his complex eyes cannot detect well immovable objects.
• John - That is a good point, it is not false
• Mary - Exactly what I mean to say, if you agree to some theory that is not false, means that some part of it doesn’t look to you false at a given moment, but that itself can be false. You agree but are aware of the conjectural type of the statement.