Everything Bob says is false. How does he get people to trust him?Everything Joe says is true. How can he get around it?Everything Joe says will become true. Can anybody notice?Everything Joe says is true. How can he most help humanity?Everything Joe says is true. How can he get around it?Everything Joe says is true. How can he most help humanity?Turns out spider man is real. How long until people accept it?How does the UK government react to a worldwide supernatural event?Everything Joe says will become true. Can anybody notice?How to stop someone who can create strong illusions. (without killing him)How it make him able to fight metahumans while not making him a metahumanHow does a super-power salesman not get shut down for legal reasons?What society/government would be stable if people get superpowers randomly?If everyone has telekinesis, how would people fight? (1v1, wars, etc)
Are there any thematic similarities between Shostakovichs' Symphony 5th and Beethovens' 7th symphony?
How will losing mobility of one hand affect my career as a programmer?
How to be diplomatic in refusing to write code that breaches the privacy of our users
Time travel short story where a man arrives in the late 19th century in a time machine and then sends the machine back into the past
How can I get through very long and very dry, but also very useful technical documents when learing a new tool?
Is exact Kanji stroke length important?
The baby cries all morning
What would be the benefits of having both a state and local currencies?
What are the ramifications of creating a homebrew world without an Astral Plane?
Is it correct to write "is not focus on"?
when is out of tune ok?
Go Pregnant or Go Home
What will be the benefits of Brexit?
Bash method for viewing beginning and end of file
Using parameter substitution on a Bash array
Is a roofing delivery truck likely to crack my driveway slab?
Can somebody explain Brexit in a few child-proof sentences?
Will it be accepted, if there is no ''Main Character" stereotype?
Hostile work environment after whistle-blowing on coworker and our boss. What do I do?
Is there a measurement for the vocal speed of a song?
How do I rename a LINUX host without needing to reboot for the rename to take effect?
How to avoid InDesign adding pages automatically?
Star/Wye electrical connection math symbol
Personal Teleportation as a Weapon
Everything Bob says is false. How does he get people to trust him?
Everything Joe says is true. How can he get around it?Everything Joe says will become true. Can anybody notice?Everything Joe says is true. How can he most help humanity?Everything Joe says is true. How can he get around it?Everything Joe says is true. How can he most help humanity?Turns out spider man is real. How long until people accept it?How does the UK government react to a worldwide supernatural event?Everything Joe says will become true. Can anybody notice?How to stop someone who can create strong illusions. (without killing him)How it make him able to fight metahumans while not making him a metahumanHow does a super-power salesman not get shut down for legal reasons?What society/government would be stable if people get superpowers randomly?If everyone has telekinesis, how would people fight? (1v1, wars, etc)
$begingroup$
I was looking at the questions where Everything Joe says is true and I thought it would be interesting to explore the inverse superpower.
Bob isn't just a pathological liar, but if he says a true statement, the fabric of reality will be altered to make his statement false in some way. This takes the path of least resistance and will alter as little as possible to make his statements observably false, so for instance if he states that you scored 99/100 on a test (and you did), your score would suddenly become 98 or 100. If Bob states a paradox, nothing happens. People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes. In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist. As an additional limitation, any statement that, if false, would harm himself or another human is nullified. He also cannot affect his own memory, personality, or desires through a falsified statement.
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
The problem is that it's hard to get anyone to trust you when you have a track record of only saying lies and nobody ever believes you. How does Bob build any sort of meaningful relationship of trust with anyone?
super-powers
asked 3 hours ago
BeefsterBeefster
447312
$endgroup$
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
I was looking at the questions where Everything Joe says is true and I thought it would be interesting to explore the inverse superpower.
Bob isn't just a pathological liar, but if he says a true statement, the fabric of reality will be altered to make his statement false in some way. This takes the path of least resistance and will alter as little as possible to make his statements observably false, so for instance if he states that you scored 99/100 on a test (and you did), your score would suddenly become 98 or 100. If Bob states a paradox, nothing happens. People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes. In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist. As an additional limitation, any statement that, if false, would harm himself or another human is nullified. He also cannot affect his own memory, personality, or desires through a falsified statement.
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
The problem is that it's hard to get anyone to trust you when you have a track record of only saying lies and nobody ever believes you. How does Bob build any sort of meaningful relationship of trust with anyone?
super-powers
asked 3 hours ago
BeefsterBeefster
447312
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
This Bob better stay "Silent Bob", because saying trivial things like "Good day" would have unintended consequences.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
My paycheck will be less than one million dollars next week.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@Dylan Pretty sure he would simply not get a paycheck at all.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
What if he says "2+2=4"? There is little the universe can change without violating a lot of itself. I guess such statements are impossible as that's the smallest change the universe needs to handle such a statement.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@ Demigan Then you would have a paradox and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
43 mins ago
|
show 8 more comments
$begingroup$
I was looking at the questions where Everything Joe says is true and I thought it would be interesting to explore the inverse superpower.
Bob isn't just a pathological liar, but if he says a true statement, the fabric of reality will be altered to make his statement false in some way. This takes the path of least resistance and will alter as little as possible to make his statements observably false, so for instance if he states that you scored 99/100 on a test (and you did), your score would suddenly become 98 or 100. If Bob states a paradox, nothing happens. People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes. In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist. As an additional limitation, any statement that, if false, would harm himself or another human is nullified. He also cannot affect his own memory, personality, or desires through a falsified statement.
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
The problem is that it's hard to get anyone to trust you when you have a track record of only saying lies and nobody ever believes you. How does Bob build any sort of meaningful relationship of trust with anyone?
super-powers
asked 3 hours ago
BeefsterBeefster
447312
$endgroup$
I was looking at the questions where Everything Joe says is true and I thought it would be interesting to explore the inverse superpower.
Bob isn't just a pathological liar, but if he says a true statement, the fabric of reality will be altered to make his statement false in some way. This takes the path of least resistance and will alter as little as possible to make his statements observably false, so for instance if he states that you scored 99/100 on a test (and you did), your score would suddenly become 98 or 100. If Bob states a paradox, nothing happens. People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes. In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist. As an additional limitation, any statement that, if false, would harm himself or another human is nullified. He also cannot affect his own memory, personality, or desires through a falsified statement.
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
The problem is that it's hard to get anyone to trust you when you have a track record of only saying lies and nobody ever believes you. How does Bob build any sort of meaningful relationship of trust with anyone?
super-powers
super-powers
asked 3 hours ago
BeefsterBeefster
447312
asked 3 hours ago
BeefsterBeefster
447312
asked 3 hours ago
BeefsterBeefster
447312
asked 3 hours ago
BeefsterBeefster
447312
asked 3 hours ago
BeefsterBeefster
447312
447312
3
$begingroup$
This Bob better stay "Silent Bob", because saying trivial things like "Good day" would have unintended consequences.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
My paycheck will be less than one million dollars next week.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@Dylan Pretty sure he would simply not get a paycheck at all.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
What if he says "2+2=4"? There is little the universe can change without violating a lot of itself. I guess such statements are impossible as that's the smallest change the universe needs to handle such a statement.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@ Demigan Then you would have a paradox and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
43 mins ago
|
show 8 more comments
3
$begingroup$
This Bob better stay "Silent Bob", because saying trivial things like "Good day" would have unintended consequences.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
My paycheck will be less than one million dollars next week.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@Dylan Pretty sure he would simply not get a paycheck at all.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
What if he says "2+2=4"? There is little the universe can change without violating a lot of itself. I guess such statements are impossible as that's the smallest change the universe needs to handle such a statement.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@ Demigan Then you would have a paradox and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
43 mins ago
3
3
$begingroup$
This Bob better stay "Silent Bob", because saying trivial things like "Good day" would have unintended consequences.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
This Bob better stay "Silent Bob", because saying trivial things like "Good day" would have unintended consequences.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
1 hour ago
2
2
$begingroup$
My paycheck will be less than one million dollars next week.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
My paycheck will be less than one million dollars next week.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Dylan Pretty sure he would simply not get a paycheck at all.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@Dylan Pretty sure he would simply not get a paycheck at all.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
1 hour ago
2
2
$begingroup$
What if he says "2+2=4"? There is little the universe can change without violating a lot of itself. I guess such statements are impossible as that's the smallest change the universe needs to handle such a statement.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
What if he says "2+2=4"? There is little the universe can change without violating a lot of itself. I guess such statements are impossible as that's the smallest change the universe needs to handle such a statement.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
1 hour ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@ Demigan Then you would have a paradox and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
43 mins ago
$begingroup$
@ Demigan Then you would have a paradox and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
43 mins ago
|
show 8 more comments
12 Answers
12
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
answered 3 hours ago
Kasper van den BergKasper van den Berg
38128
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's not really answering the question. That's more just a proof that Bob can force things to be true.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@David question is about how does he make people to trust him. If fabrics of reality makes what he says false then this statement is simplest, sure solution — there will not be a second someone does not trust him, so this person will trust him, problem solved.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, I didn't think about that.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
This is rough though.. because due to the path of least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I added my own twist on this one, to compensate for least resistance.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
Bob wants actually to state things not as simply as possible, since as you mentioned, this leads to several possible outcomes. He wants to state things as precise as possible.
"My net worth is at most 10 dollars", has the logical (and only possible) opposite "My net worth is more than 10 dollars" (and Bob will have net worth of 10.01 dollars if taking the path least resistance).
"The set of people who distrusts me is non empty" has opposite "The set of people who distrusts me is empty", i.e. no one distrusts Bob...
answered 2 hours ago
maria_cmaria_c
612
New contributor
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Aye, but the rub is not the 'ten dollars' part, nut the 'net worth' part. Net worth' can be very subtly changed, for instance, by increasing debt.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
23 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You kind of answered your own question, he can't remove this superpower by stating he has it so he can go up to anyone, explain the way the power works and then demonstrate it using some easy cases. People will be skeptical at first but will believe him after enough convincing examples.
answered 2 hours ago
MuuskiMuuski
42727
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes.Even though as you observed he can directly and truthfully explain his power, if he does, nobody will believe him.
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
46 mins ago
2
$begingroup$
@Unrelated String That statement lacks a reason. Do people distrust him because the power forces them not to, as you seem to assume, or do they distrust him from experience? Since the question is asking how to overcome distrust we're assuming that it's possible and thus that it's not caused by the superpower. Otherwise the question becomes "How can we make the impossible possible?"
$endgroup$
– Muuski
42 mins ago
$begingroup$
Valid point. However, disbelief is not equivalent to distrust, so ideally Bob would be able to get people to trust that everything he says is false without it reflecting on his moral character. Of course, that brings up the question of how intent factors in...
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
39 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How linguistically savvy is this superpower? How linguistically savvy is Bob?
I'm assuming here that Bob wants to communicate the truth and wants to be trusted. I'm also going to be treating the superpower as an antagonist to this goal.
If the superpower can recognize the intent of his statements and will change the truth of the part he intends to communicate, he's kind of stuck (although maria_c's answer is a good one for getting as close as possible to the truth).
If, however, the superpower only analyzes his statements in terms of syntax and semantics, Bob can work around the limitation in various ways.
First, he can use questions instead of statements. While declarative sentences have a truth value (as long as they aren't paradoxes), interrogative sentences do not. So if he wanted to tell you that Madrid is the capital of Spain, he could ask you "Did you know that Madrid is the capital of Spain?"
Second, he could always tell you what he wants you to know in a content clause. This will still involve a declarative sentence, but by selecting the main clause carefully he can make a sentence that is already false (and therefore exempt from the power), but that nevertheless has a true content clause. For example: "No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain." People already know that Madrid is the capital of Spain, therefore the statement is false. It can't be further falsified and the superpower won't touch it.
answered 1 hour ago
MacAMacA
1296
New contributor
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
"No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain" can easily be made false by by exactly one person knowing that Madrid is the capital of Spain. In fact, it's already false because many people do, in fact, know that. If instead he phrased it as "There are some people who do not know that Madrid is the capital of Spain", the smallest possible change that could make that false is every (existing) person knowing it. (Though whether the knowledge is added to everyone's heads or those who don't know simply cease existing, or Spain's capital moves to Barcelona is hard to say...)
$endgroup$
– Darrel Hoffman
49 mins ago
$begingroup$
That was my point. The sentence is already false, so it can't be falsified and is exempt. I will edit my answer for better clarity.
$endgroup$
– MacA
33 mins ago
$begingroup$
The smallest possible change is that just one person changes their knowledge, as 'some people' still relates to a definite pool of identified people, and only one of them needs to exit the pool for the statement to be false. It would become 'some people minus one' or, looked at another way, 'one less than some people'.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
30 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Justin Thyme. My interpretation of the power, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it does nothing when Bob makes a false statement. So my example is a false statement with a true statement embedded in a content clause. The smallest change to make this statement false is no change at all.
$endgroup$
– MacA
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
@MacA Now that you mention it, the question does not really address what happens if Bob makes a false statement, just what happens if he makes a true statement. If his statement is already false, then it is already 'not true' and no action is necessary.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
NOTE: This answer assumes Bob cannot make people trust him simply by saying "You don't trust me".
It's very easy to get people to trust him. Simply announce in a loud voice the opposite of what you want and soon people will pick up that the opposite will happen. If you want people to notice faster do it in a casino.
It will take some time to fine-tune what to say, but this is essentially a wish granting power. You just have to phrase it a little weird.
Your friends will all want you to say things like
My company's value will go down
Or
It'll land on black
Or
Your marriage won't last
Several economic indicators are like this. Things like more stocks being issued (IPOs) and more credit being available happens before a stock market crash. People watch these and try to time the market (but rarely succeed).
The real curse is to say the truth but have no one believe you like Cassandra
answered 3 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
4795
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist."
$endgroup$
– Rob Watts
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
But if the change is absolutely so subtle that no one can tell it is a change? Bob can not control how subtle the change IS, as i understand it.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
26 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is really simple.
Don't try to make them believe you. Always tell the lie that they won't believe to get them to realize the truth.
If your friend asks if you want to head out to dinner and you do, actually want to, say "no." Your friend will know that you can't tell the truth and know what you are saying.
Once enough people know about the power, everyone will know that he has to speak that way.
Also, he would be in high demand for anything that requires safety.
Any time he gets on an airplane, all he has to say is "this plane will not land safely."
He can be the benevolent doomsayer.
answered 1 hour ago
ShadoCatShadoCat
15.5k2053
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
But suppose Bob wanted to go out to dinner but not with that person? Or that he didn't want to go out to diner with that person, but did want to go out to dinner with someone else?
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
28 mins ago
$begingroup$
@JustinThyme, "I want to go out to dinner with you." All it takes is a bit of creative logic.
$endgroup$
– ShadoCat
16 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In @KaspervandenBerg 's answer:
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
due to least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
I propose this:
You trust me less than you trust everyone else.
answered 1 hour ago
DylanDylan
2114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Path of least resistance: that person has a crisis of faith and becomes paranoid.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
44 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Wildcard Why would it be less resistance to alter this person's entire outlook on the world than to simply alter their opinion of one person?
$endgroup$
– Admiral Jota
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AdmiralJota is it easier for you to make people trust you or not trust you? (A: not trust you.) Why do think the fabric of reality could establish trust any more easily? Just food for thought.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
37 mins ago
$begingroup$
This becomes a paradox, and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Simple, there's a class of people that do similar all the time: Be a denialist speaker.
Many people will believe what's most convenient if it's said with authority and minimal requirement for thinking or action on their part. Just look at flat earthers, climate deniers, anti-vaxxers, and similar.
Just support wrong things with momentum, and everything suppporting that wrong thing will believe him.
answered 1 hour ago
liljoshuliljoshu
1,607311
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
My answer assumes that Bob can not predict HOW things will change, just that they will change, in subtle ways. Also, I am assuming that Bob can and will voluntarily answer your questions. I am also assuming that this works for any PREDICTIONS Bob makes. That is, any prediction that he makes will never be true. I am also assuming that Bob, in god faith, can tell the truth as it was at the time of him saying it.
I am not sure if the issue is in not being able to trust that the answer Bob gives you is the truth, but in being able to absolutely trust that the answer Bob gives you is NOT the truth.
If a betting man knew that Bob's answer could always be trusted to ultimately NOT be true, then a betting man could make a lot of money.
'Bob, what team will win the Series?' Then bet AGAINST the team he says. 'I will bet you that your favorite team x will NOT win the Series'. 'Oh, come ON, they are sure to win the series. You're ON, man, you're ON'.
Of course, a person with criminal intent would WANT him to tell the truth, so that it would become the UNtruth.
'Bob, try that door and tell me if it is locked?' In which case, you WANT him to tell the truth, that it is locked, so that it then becomes the UNtruth.
'Bob, is that watchman who is looking at us paying attention to us?'
'Bob, is that merchant charging for his goods?'
'Bob, will you tell the judge the truth about my guilt?' It doesn't matter if the judge believes him or not, but as soon as Bob says I am guilty, I am no longer guilty.
It would seem to me, that the utility and the advantage of having Bob as a friend would not be in what Bob says is the truth, but what HAPPENS in response to his telling the truth. That it reliably and immediately becomes the UNtruth in some way.
In day to day conversations as a friend, one could easily accommodate his eccentricities, if one knew absolutely that whatever he said, even if said in good faith, would be wrong.
'Bob, how much money do you have?' Bob: 'I have ten dollars'. So, if Bob answered truthfully in good faith, you know he has approximately ten dollars, but not exactly ten dollars.
'Bob, what time is it?' Bob: 'It is ten o'clock'. So again, if Bob is answering truthfully in good faith, and tells you the correct time, then you know it is AROUND ten o'clock but not exactly ten o'clock.
If he always answers with an approximate answer, that is close to the truth, you of course can always accommodate. The trick is to learn to ask Bob the question in the right way.
So those who perhaps find utility in Bob, and want to capitalize on his powers, but also want to have a good relationship with him on good faith, would have no problems as long as they always knew his good-faith answers were APPROXIMATE answers, and his devious faith answers were always the truth as he knew it at the time of his response. You and Bob would know the answer would be immediately incorrect as soon as he gave the response.
And, of course, there is the situations along the lines of: Bob: 'I need to go to the bathroom right now' means that, if it were the truth, Bob NO LONGER has to go to the bathroom right now, but he WILL have to go to the bathroom AGAIN (is that the right term) shortly.
in such a way, as long as the other person wanted to have a relationship with Bob, and Bob always responded in good faith with the truth, but both of you knew it was no longer the truth but approximately the truth, the relationship would work out.
So, really, it is about how much the OTHER person wants to have a good relationship with Bob, and is willing to accommodate, provided Bob enters the relationship in good faith.
answered 46 mins ago
Justin ThymeJustin Thyme
8,86311044
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Easy. Bob can gain people's trust through his actions. If he acts to help people, that will show he's trustworthy.
answered 33 mins ago
HS-nebulaHS-nebula
1112
New contributor
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bob can be a superhero and become rich really easy.
All he needs to do is to spread conspiracy theories.
Bob says the Earth is flat. The Earth assumes a spherical geometry. Had Bob not used his power, we would eventually be suffocated by the giant elephants' magical freezing farts which keep the frozen barrier st the rim in place, or we would eventually be smashed by the cosmic turtle's sexual partner.
Bob says aliens are abducting people and probing their cavities. Now the aliens can't do that - Bob is a one man X-com!
Bob says planes leave out chemtrails that are used for mind control. Now they don't anymore! Take that, Illuminatti!
And so on. The only conspiracy theories he can't defeat are vaccine and GMO related ones, because those can actually cause direct harm to people.
So most everyone from the average Joe to the eggheads of our time will not trust Bob, but that's not a problem. He will have the undisputed and unwavering trust and loyalty of basically every Infowars follower. He can even take over Alex Jones's place and make huge loads of cash that way.
Heck, Bob could even easily become the next republican president, and he would save the world from climate change by claiming that coal is cleaner than solar and wind power.
answered 2 hours ago
RenanRenan
51.1k14118255
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Republicans don't have a corner on the hot air market lol
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Couldn't Bob simply tell someone he meets like some girl he likes very much and after many different machinations and presumed falsehoods he'd say something like "You simply do not understand me" by accident? In that way someone actually WOULD understand Bob's superpower without being harmed? Then communication could be carried out albeit in a very curiously and perhaps very humorous way. Just a thought.
It would be interesting to have a scene of an argument between Joe and Bob perhaps... I don't know how you'd do it but it could amount to a superpower Abbot and Costello routine.
answered 49 mins ago
KodiakMFLKodiakMFL
11
New contributor
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Not necessarily. It would just make someone "not-so-simply" don't understand Bob.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
47 mins ago
$begingroup$
The trick is he WANTS her to understand him, and him saying 'You don't understand me' would result in her understanding him, but her understanding of him does not necessarily have to conform to what he really is. It becomes cyclic. A non sequitur.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
38 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f142465%2feverything-bob-says-is-false-how-does-he-get-people-to-trust-him%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
12 Answers
12
active
oldest
votes
12 Answers
12
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
answered 3 hours ago
Kasper van den BergKasper van den Berg
38128
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's not really answering the question. That's more just a proof that Bob can force things to be true.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@David question is about how does he make people to trust him. If fabrics of reality makes what he says false then this statement is simplest, sure solution — there will not be a second someone does not trust him, so this person will trust him, problem solved.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, I didn't think about that.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
This is rough though.. because due to the path of least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I added my own twist on this one, to compensate for least resistance.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
answered 3 hours ago
Kasper van den BergKasper van den Berg
38128
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's not really answering the question. That's more just a proof that Bob can force things to be true.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@David question is about how does he make people to trust him. If fabrics of reality makes what he says false then this statement is simplest, sure solution — there will not be a second someone does not trust him, so this person will trust him, problem solved.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, I didn't think about that.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
This is rough though.. because due to the path of least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I added my own twist on this one, to compensate for least resistance.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
answered 3 hours ago
Kasper van den BergKasper van den Berg
38128
$endgroup$
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
answered 3 hours ago
Kasper van den BergKasper van den Berg
38128
answered 3 hours ago
Kasper van den BergKasper van den Berg
38128
answered 3 hours ago
Kasper van den BergKasper van den Berg
38128
answered 3 hours ago
Kasper van den BergKasper van den Berg
38128
38128
$begingroup$
That's not really answering the question. That's more just a proof that Bob can force things to be true.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@David question is about how does he make people to trust him. If fabrics of reality makes what he says false then this statement is simplest, sure solution — there will not be a second someone does not trust him, so this person will trust him, problem solved.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, I didn't think about that.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
This is rough though.. because due to the path of least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I added my own twist on this one, to compensate for least resistance.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
That's not really answering the question. That's more just a proof that Bob can force things to be true.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@David question is about how does he make people to trust him. If fabrics of reality makes what he says false then this statement is simplest, sure solution — there will not be a second someone does not trust him, so this person will trust him, problem solved.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, I didn't think about that.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
This is rough though.. because due to the path of least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I added my own twist on this one, to compensate for least resistance.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
That's not really answering the question. That's more just a proof that Bob can force things to be true.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's not really answering the question. That's more just a proof that Bob can force things to be true.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@David question is about how does he make people to trust him. If fabrics of reality makes what he says false then this statement is simplest, sure solution — there will not be a second someone does not trust him, so this person will trust him, problem solved.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@David question is about how does he make people to trust him. If fabrics of reality makes what he says false then this statement is simplest, sure solution — there will not be a second someone does not trust him, so this person will trust him, problem solved.
$endgroup$
– Mołot
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, I didn't think about that.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Fair enough, I didn't think about that.
$endgroup$
– David
3 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
This is rough though.. because due to the path of least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
This is rough though.. because due to the path of least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I added my own twist on this one, to compensate for least resistance.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
I added my own twist on this one, to compensate for least resistance.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
Bob wants actually to state things not as simply as possible, since as you mentioned, this leads to several possible outcomes. He wants to state things as precise as possible.
"My net worth is at most 10 dollars", has the logical (and only possible) opposite "My net worth is more than 10 dollars" (and Bob will have net worth of 10.01 dollars if taking the path least resistance).
"The set of people who distrusts me is non empty" has opposite "The set of people who distrusts me is empty", i.e. no one distrusts Bob...
answered 2 hours ago
maria_cmaria_c
612
New contributor
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Aye, but the rub is not the 'ten dollars' part, nut the 'net worth' part. Net worth' can be very subtly changed, for instance, by increasing debt.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
23 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
Bob wants actually to state things not as simply as possible, since as you mentioned, this leads to several possible outcomes. He wants to state things as precise as possible.
"My net worth is at most 10 dollars", has the logical (and only possible) opposite "My net worth is more than 10 dollars" (and Bob will have net worth of 10.01 dollars if taking the path least resistance).
"The set of people who distrusts me is non empty" has opposite "The set of people who distrusts me is empty", i.e. no one distrusts Bob...
answered 2 hours ago
maria_cmaria_c
612
New contributor
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Aye, but the rub is not the 'ten dollars' part, nut the 'net worth' part. Net worth' can be very subtly changed, for instance, by increasing debt.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
23 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
Bob wants actually to state things not as simply as possible, since as you mentioned, this leads to several possible outcomes. He wants to state things as precise as possible.
"My net worth is at most 10 dollars", has the logical (and only possible) opposite "My net worth is more than 10 dollars" (and Bob will have net worth of 10.01 dollars if taking the path least resistance).
"The set of people who distrusts me is non empty" has opposite "The set of people who distrusts me is empty", i.e. no one distrusts Bob...
answered 2 hours ago
maria_cmaria_c
612
New contributor
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
There are ways to manipulate this in his favor, such as stating the opposite of what he wants in the simplest way possible, but because as little as possible is changed, this can be tricky in some cases since only one detail of his statement must be false in order to render the entire statement technically false.
Bob wants actually to state things not as simply as possible, since as you mentioned, this leads to several possible outcomes. He wants to state things as precise as possible.
"My net worth is at most 10 dollars", has the logical (and only possible) opposite "My net worth is more than 10 dollars" (and Bob will have net worth of 10.01 dollars if taking the path least resistance).
"The set of people who distrusts me is non empty" has opposite "The set of people who distrusts me is empty", i.e. no one distrusts Bob...
answered 2 hours ago
maria_cmaria_c
612
New contributor
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 hours ago
maria_cmaria_c
612
New contributor
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 hours ago
maria_cmaria_c
612
answered 2 hours ago
maria_cmaria_c
612
612
New contributor
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
maria_c is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
$begingroup$
Aye, but the rub is not the 'ten dollars' part, nut the 'net worth' part. Net worth' can be very subtly changed, for instance, by increasing debt.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
23 mins ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Aye, but the rub is not the 'ten dollars' part, nut the 'net worth' part. Net worth' can be very subtly changed, for instance, by increasing debt.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
23 mins ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Aye, but the rub is not the 'ten dollars' part, nut the 'net worth' part. Net worth' can be very subtly changed, for instance, by increasing debt.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
23 mins ago
$begingroup$
Aye, but the rub is not the 'ten dollars' part, nut the 'net worth' part. Net worth' can be very subtly changed, for instance, by increasing debt.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
23 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You kind of answered your own question, he can't remove this superpower by stating he has it so he can go up to anyone, explain the way the power works and then demonstrate it using some easy cases. People will be skeptical at first but will believe him after enough convincing examples.
answered 2 hours ago
MuuskiMuuski
42727
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes.Even though as you observed he can directly and truthfully explain his power, if he does, nobody will believe him.
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
46 mins ago
2
$begingroup$
@Unrelated String That statement lacks a reason. Do people distrust him because the power forces them not to, as you seem to assume, or do they distrust him from experience? Since the question is asking how to overcome distrust we're assuming that it's possible and thus that it's not caused by the superpower. Otherwise the question becomes "How can we make the impossible possible?"
$endgroup$
– Muuski
42 mins ago
$begingroup$
Valid point. However, disbelief is not equivalent to distrust, so ideally Bob would be able to get people to trust that everything he says is false without it reflecting on his moral character. Of course, that brings up the question of how intent factors in...
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
39 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You kind of answered your own question, he can't remove this superpower by stating he has it so he can go up to anyone, explain the way the power works and then demonstrate it using some easy cases. People will be skeptical at first but will believe him after enough convincing examples.
answered 2 hours ago
MuuskiMuuski
42727
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes.Even though as you observed he can directly and truthfully explain his power, if he does, nobody will believe him.
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
46 mins ago
2
$begingroup$
@Unrelated String That statement lacks a reason. Do people distrust him because the power forces them not to, as you seem to assume, or do they distrust him from experience? Since the question is asking how to overcome distrust we're assuming that it's possible and thus that it's not caused by the superpower. Otherwise the question becomes "How can we make the impossible possible?"
$endgroup$
– Muuski
42 mins ago
$begingroup$
Valid point. However, disbelief is not equivalent to distrust, so ideally Bob would be able to get people to trust that everything he says is false without it reflecting on his moral character. Of course, that brings up the question of how intent factors in...
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
39 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You kind of answered your own question, he can't remove this superpower by stating he has it so he can go up to anyone, explain the way the power works and then demonstrate it using some easy cases. People will be skeptical at first but will believe him after enough convincing examples.
answered 2 hours ago
MuuskiMuuski
42727
$endgroup$
You kind of answered your own question, he can't remove this superpower by stating he has it so he can go up to anyone, explain the way the power works and then demonstrate it using some easy cases. People will be skeptical at first but will believe him after enough convincing examples.
answered 2 hours ago
MuuskiMuuski
42727
answered 2 hours ago
MuuskiMuuski
42727
answered 2 hours ago
MuuskiMuuski
42727
answered 2 hours ago
MuuskiMuuski
42727
42727
$begingroup$
People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes.Even though as you observed he can directly and truthfully explain his power, if he does, nobody will believe him.
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
46 mins ago
2
$begingroup$
@Unrelated String That statement lacks a reason. Do people distrust him because the power forces them not to, as you seem to assume, or do they distrust him from experience? Since the question is asking how to overcome distrust we're assuming that it's possible and thus that it's not caused by the superpower. Otherwise the question becomes "How can we make the impossible possible?"
$endgroup$
– Muuski
42 mins ago
$begingroup$
Valid point. However, disbelief is not equivalent to distrust, so ideally Bob would be able to get people to trust that everything he says is false without it reflecting on his moral character. Of course, that brings up the question of how intent factors in...
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
39 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes.Even though as you observed he can directly and truthfully explain his power, if he does, nobody will believe him.
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
46 mins ago
2
$begingroup$
@Unrelated String That statement lacks a reason. Do people distrust him because the power forces them not to, as you seem to assume, or do they distrust him from experience? Since the question is asking how to overcome distrust we're assuming that it's possible and thus that it's not caused by the superpower. Otherwise the question becomes "How can we make the impossible possible?"
$endgroup$
– Muuski
42 mins ago
$begingroup$
Valid point. However, disbelief is not equivalent to distrust, so ideally Bob would be able to get people to trust that everything he says is false without it reflecting on his moral character. Of course, that brings up the question of how intent factors in...
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
39 mins ago
$begingroup$
People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes. Even though as you observed he can directly and truthfully explain his power, if he does, nobody will believe him.$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
46 mins ago
$begingroup$
People automatically disbelieve any statements he makes. Even though as you observed he can directly and truthfully explain his power, if he does, nobody will believe him.$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
46 mins ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@Unrelated String That statement lacks a reason. Do people distrust him because the power forces them not to, as you seem to assume, or do they distrust him from experience? Since the question is asking how to overcome distrust we're assuming that it's possible and thus that it's not caused by the superpower. Otherwise the question becomes "How can we make the impossible possible?"
$endgroup$
– Muuski
42 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Unrelated String That statement lacks a reason. Do people distrust him because the power forces them not to, as you seem to assume, or do they distrust him from experience? Since the question is asking how to overcome distrust we're assuming that it's possible and thus that it's not caused by the superpower. Otherwise the question becomes "How can we make the impossible possible?"
$endgroup$
– Muuski
42 mins ago
$begingroup$
Valid point. However, disbelief is not equivalent to distrust, so ideally Bob would be able to get people to trust that everything he says is false without it reflecting on his moral character. Of course, that brings up the question of how intent factors in...
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
39 mins ago
$begingroup$
Valid point. However, disbelief is not equivalent to distrust, so ideally Bob would be able to get people to trust that everything he says is false without it reflecting on his moral character. Of course, that brings up the question of how intent factors in...
$endgroup$
– Unrelated String
39 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How linguistically savvy is this superpower? How linguistically savvy is Bob?
I'm assuming here that Bob wants to communicate the truth and wants to be trusted. I'm also going to be treating the superpower as an antagonist to this goal.
If the superpower can recognize the intent of his statements and will change the truth of the part he intends to communicate, he's kind of stuck (although maria_c's answer is a good one for getting as close as possible to the truth).
If, however, the superpower only analyzes his statements in terms of syntax and semantics, Bob can work around the limitation in various ways.
First, he can use questions instead of statements. While declarative sentences have a truth value (as long as they aren't paradoxes), interrogative sentences do not. So if he wanted to tell you that Madrid is the capital of Spain, he could ask you "Did you know that Madrid is the capital of Spain?"
Second, he could always tell you what he wants you to know in a content clause. This will still involve a declarative sentence, but by selecting the main clause carefully he can make a sentence that is already false (and therefore exempt from the power), but that nevertheless has a true content clause. For example: "No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain." People already know that Madrid is the capital of Spain, therefore the statement is false. It can't be further falsified and the superpower won't touch it.
answered 1 hour ago
MacAMacA
1296
New contributor
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
"No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain" can easily be made false by by exactly one person knowing that Madrid is the capital of Spain. In fact, it's already false because many people do, in fact, know that. If instead he phrased it as "There are some people who do not know that Madrid is the capital of Spain", the smallest possible change that could make that false is every (existing) person knowing it. (Though whether the knowledge is added to everyone's heads or those who don't know simply cease existing, or Spain's capital moves to Barcelona is hard to say...)
$endgroup$
– Darrel Hoffman
49 mins ago
$begingroup$
That was my point. The sentence is already false, so it can't be falsified and is exempt. I will edit my answer for better clarity.
$endgroup$
– MacA
33 mins ago
$begingroup$
The smallest possible change is that just one person changes their knowledge, as 'some people' still relates to a definite pool of identified people, and only one of them needs to exit the pool for the statement to be false. It would become 'some people minus one' or, looked at another way, 'one less than some people'.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
30 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Justin Thyme. My interpretation of the power, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it does nothing when Bob makes a false statement. So my example is a false statement with a true statement embedded in a content clause. The smallest change to make this statement false is no change at all.
$endgroup$
– MacA
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
@MacA Now that you mention it, the question does not really address what happens if Bob makes a false statement, just what happens if he makes a true statement. If his statement is already false, then it is already 'not true' and no action is necessary.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How linguistically savvy is this superpower? How linguistically savvy is Bob?
I'm assuming here that Bob wants to communicate the truth and wants to be trusted. I'm also going to be treating the superpower as an antagonist to this goal.
If the superpower can recognize the intent of his statements and will change the truth of the part he intends to communicate, he's kind of stuck (although maria_c's answer is a good one for getting as close as possible to the truth).
If, however, the superpower only analyzes his statements in terms of syntax and semantics, Bob can work around the limitation in various ways.
First, he can use questions instead of statements. While declarative sentences have a truth value (as long as they aren't paradoxes), interrogative sentences do not. So if he wanted to tell you that Madrid is the capital of Spain, he could ask you "Did you know that Madrid is the capital of Spain?"
Second, he could always tell you what he wants you to know in a content clause. This will still involve a declarative sentence, but by selecting the main clause carefully he can make a sentence that is already false (and therefore exempt from the power), but that nevertheless has a true content clause. For example: "No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain." People already know that Madrid is the capital of Spain, therefore the statement is false. It can't be further falsified and the superpower won't touch it.
answered 1 hour ago
MacAMacA
1296
New contributor
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
"No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain" can easily be made false by by exactly one person knowing that Madrid is the capital of Spain. In fact, it's already false because many people do, in fact, know that. If instead he phrased it as "There are some people who do not know that Madrid is the capital of Spain", the smallest possible change that could make that false is every (existing) person knowing it. (Though whether the knowledge is added to everyone's heads or those who don't know simply cease existing, or Spain's capital moves to Barcelona is hard to say...)
$endgroup$
– Darrel Hoffman
49 mins ago
$begingroup$
That was my point. The sentence is already false, so it can't be falsified and is exempt. I will edit my answer for better clarity.
$endgroup$
– MacA
33 mins ago
$begingroup$
The smallest possible change is that just one person changes their knowledge, as 'some people' still relates to a definite pool of identified people, and only one of them needs to exit the pool for the statement to be false. It would become 'some people minus one' or, looked at another way, 'one less than some people'.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
30 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Justin Thyme. My interpretation of the power, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it does nothing when Bob makes a false statement. So my example is a false statement with a true statement embedded in a content clause. The smallest change to make this statement false is no change at all.
$endgroup$
– MacA
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
@MacA Now that you mention it, the question does not really address what happens if Bob makes a false statement, just what happens if he makes a true statement. If his statement is already false, then it is already 'not true' and no action is necessary.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
How linguistically savvy is this superpower? How linguistically savvy is Bob?
I'm assuming here that Bob wants to communicate the truth and wants to be trusted. I'm also going to be treating the superpower as an antagonist to this goal.
If the superpower can recognize the intent of his statements and will change the truth of the part he intends to communicate, he's kind of stuck (although maria_c's answer is a good one for getting as close as possible to the truth).
If, however, the superpower only analyzes his statements in terms of syntax and semantics, Bob can work around the limitation in various ways.
First, he can use questions instead of statements. While declarative sentences have a truth value (as long as they aren't paradoxes), interrogative sentences do not. So if he wanted to tell you that Madrid is the capital of Spain, he could ask you "Did you know that Madrid is the capital of Spain?"
Second, he could always tell you what he wants you to know in a content clause. This will still involve a declarative sentence, but by selecting the main clause carefully he can make a sentence that is already false (and therefore exempt from the power), but that nevertheless has a true content clause. For example: "No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain." People already know that Madrid is the capital of Spain, therefore the statement is false. It can't be further falsified and the superpower won't touch it.
answered 1 hour ago
MacAMacA
1296
New contributor
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
How linguistically savvy is this superpower? How linguistically savvy is Bob?
I'm assuming here that Bob wants to communicate the truth and wants to be trusted. I'm also going to be treating the superpower as an antagonist to this goal.
If the superpower can recognize the intent of his statements and will change the truth of the part he intends to communicate, he's kind of stuck (although maria_c's answer is a good one for getting as close as possible to the truth).
If, however, the superpower only analyzes his statements in terms of syntax and semantics, Bob can work around the limitation in various ways.
First, he can use questions instead of statements. While declarative sentences have a truth value (as long as they aren't paradoxes), interrogative sentences do not. So if he wanted to tell you that Madrid is the capital of Spain, he could ask you "Did you know that Madrid is the capital of Spain?"
Second, he could always tell you what he wants you to know in a content clause. This will still involve a declarative sentence, but by selecting the main clause carefully he can make a sentence that is already false (and therefore exempt from the power), but that nevertheless has a true content clause. For example: "No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain." People already know that Madrid is the capital of Spain, therefore the statement is false. It can't be further falsified and the superpower won't touch it.
answered 1 hour ago
MacAMacA
1296
New contributor
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 30 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
MacAMacA
1296
New contributor
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 1 hour ago
MacAMacA
1296
answered 1 hour ago
MacAMacA
1296
1296
New contributor
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
MacA is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
1
$begingroup$
"No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain" can easily be made false by by exactly one person knowing that Madrid is the capital of Spain. In fact, it's already false because many people do, in fact, know that. If instead he phrased it as "There are some people who do not know that Madrid is the capital of Spain", the smallest possible change that could make that false is every (existing) person knowing it. (Though whether the knowledge is added to everyone's heads or those who don't know simply cease existing, or Spain's capital moves to Barcelona is hard to say...)
$endgroup$
– Darrel Hoffman
49 mins ago
$begingroup$
That was my point. The sentence is already false, so it can't be falsified and is exempt. I will edit my answer for better clarity.
$endgroup$
– MacA
33 mins ago
$begingroup$
The smallest possible change is that just one person changes their knowledge, as 'some people' still relates to a definite pool of identified people, and only one of them needs to exit the pool for the statement to be false. It would become 'some people minus one' or, looked at another way, 'one less than some people'.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
30 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Justin Thyme. My interpretation of the power, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it does nothing when Bob makes a false statement. So my example is a false statement with a true statement embedded in a content clause. The smallest change to make this statement false is no change at all.
$endgroup$
– MacA
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
@MacA Now that you mention it, the question does not really address what happens if Bob makes a false statement, just what happens if he makes a true statement. If his statement is already false, then it is already 'not true' and no action is necessary.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
18 mins ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
"No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain" can easily be made false by by exactly one person knowing that Madrid is the capital of Spain. In fact, it's already false because many people do, in fact, know that. If instead he phrased it as "There are some people who do not know that Madrid is the capital of Spain", the smallest possible change that could make that false is every (existing) person knowing it. (Though whether the knowledge is added to everyone's heads or those who don't know simply cease existing, or Spain's capital moves to Barcelona is hard to say...)
$endgroup$
– Darrel Hoffman
49 mins ago
$begingroup$
That was my point. The sentence is already false, so it can't be falsified and is exempt. I will edit my answer for better clarity.
$endgroup$
– MacA
33 mins ago
$begingroup$
The smallest possible change is that just one person changes their knowledge, as 'some people' still relates to a definite pool of identified people, and only one of them needs to exit the pool for the statement to be false. It would become 'some people minus one' or, looked at another way, 'one less than some people'.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
30 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Justin Thyme. My interpretation of the power, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it does nothing when Bob makes a false statement. So my example is a false statement with a true statement embedded in a content clause. The smallest change to make this statement false is no change at all.
$endgroup$
– MacA
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
@MacA Now that you mention it, the question does not really address what happens if Bob makes a false statement, just what happens if he makes a true statement. If his statement is already false, then it is already 'not true' and no action is necessary.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
18 mins ago
1
1
$begingroup$
"No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain" can easily be made false by by exactly one person knowing that Madrid is the capital of Spain. In fact, it's already false because many people do, in fact, know that. If instead he phrased it as "There are some people who do not know that Madrid is the capital of Spain", the smallest possible change that could make that false is every (existing) person knowing it. (Though whether the knowledge is added to everyone's heads or those who don't know simply cease existing, or Spain's capital moves to Barcelona is hard to say...)
$endgroup$
– Darrel Hoffman
49 mins ago
$begingroup$
"No one knows that Madrid is the capital of Spain" can easily be made false by by exactly one person knowing that Madrid is the capital of Spain. In fact, it's already false because many people do, in fact, know that. If instead he phrased it as "There are some people who do not know that Madrid is the capital of Spain", the smallest possible change that could make that false is every (existing) person knowing it. (Though whether the knowledge is added to everyone's heads or those who don't know simply cease existing, or Spain's capital moves to Barcelona is hard to say...)
$endgroup$
– Darrel Hoffman
49 mins ago
$begingroup$
That was my point. The sentence is already false, so it can't be falsified and is exempt. I will edit my answer for better clarity.
$endgroup$
– MacA
33 mins ago
$begingroup$
That was my point. The sentence is already false, so it can't be falsified and is exempt. I will edit my answer for better clarity.
$endgroup$
– MacA
33 mins ago
$begingroup$
The smallest possible change is that just one person changes their knowledge, as 'some people' still relates to a definite pool of identified people, and only one of them needs to exit the pool for the statement to be false. It would become 'some people minus one' or, looked at another way, 'one less than some people'.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
30 mins ago
$begingroup$
The smallest possible change is that just one person changes their knowledge, as 'some people' still relates to a definite pool of identified people, and only one of them needs to exit the pool for the statement to be false. It would become 'some people minus one' or, looked at another way, 'one less than some people'.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
30 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Justin Thyme. My interpretation of the power, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it does nothing when Bob makes a false statement. So my example is a false statement with a true statement embedded in a content clause. The smallest change to make this statement false is no change at all.
$endgroup$
– MacA
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Justin Thyme. My interpretation of the power, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it does nothing when Bob makes a false statement. So my example is a false statement with a true statement embedded in a content clause. The smallest change to make this statement false is no change at all.
$endgroup$
– MacA
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
@MacA Now that you mention it, the question does not really address what happens if Bob makes a false statement, just what happens if he makes a true statement. If his statement is already false, then it is already 'not true' and no action is necessary.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
18 mins ago
$begingroup$
@MacA Now that you mention it, the question does not really address what happens if Bob makes a false statement, just what happens if he makes a true statement. If his statement is already false, then it is already 'not true' and no action is necessary.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
18 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
NOTE: This answer assumes Bob cannot make people trust him simply by saying "You don't trust me".
It's very easy to get people to trust him. Simply announce in a loud voice the opposite of what you want and soon people will pick up that the opposite will happen. If you want people to notice faster do it in a casino.
It will take some time to fine-tune what to say, but this is essentially a wish granting power. You just have to phrase it a little weird.
Your friends will all want you to say things like
My company's value will go down
Or
It'll land on black
Or
Your marriage won't last
Several economic indicators are like this. Things like more stocks being issued (IPOs) and more credit being available happens before a stock market crash. People watch these and try to time the market (but rarely succeed).
The real curse is to say the truth but have no one believe you like Cassandra
answered 3 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
4795
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist."
$endgroup$
– Rob Watts
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
But if the change is absolutely so subtle that no one can tell it is a change? Bob can not control how subtle the change IS, as i understand it.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
26 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
NOTE: This answer assumes Bob cannot make people trust him simply by saying "You don't trust me".
It's very easy to get people to trust him. Simply announce in a loud voice the opposite of what you want and soon people will pick up that the opposite will happen. If you want people to notice faster do it in a casino.
It will take some time to fine-tune what to say, but this is essentially a wish granting power. You just have to phrase it a little weird.
Your friends will all want you to say things like
My company's value will go down
Or
It'll land on black
Or
Your marriage won't last
Several economic indicators are like this. Things like more stocks being issued (IPOs) and more credit being available happens before a stock market crash. People watch these and try to time the market (but rarely succeed).
The real curse is to say the truth but have no one believe you like Cassandra
answered 3 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
4795
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
"In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist."
$endgroup$
– Rob Watts
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
But if the change is absolutely so subtle that no one can tell it is a change? Bob can not control how subtle the change IS, as i understand it.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
26 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
NOTE: This answer assumes Bob cannot make people trust him simply by saying "You don't trust me".
It's very easy to get people to trust him. Simply announce in a loud voice the opposite of what you want and soon people will pick up that the opposite will happen. If you want people to notice faster do it in a casino.
It will take some time to fine-tune what to say, but this is essentially a wish granting power. You just have to phrase it a little weird.
Your friends will all want you to say things like
My company's value will go down
Or
It'll land on black
Or
Your marriage won't last
Several economic indicators are like this. Things like more stocks being issued (IPOs) and more credit being available happens before a stock market crash. People watch these and try to time the market (but rarely succeed).
The real curse is to say the truth but have no one believe you like Cassandra
answered 3 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
4795
$endgroup$
NOTE: This answer assumes Bob cannot make people trust him simply by saying "You don't trust me".
It's very easy to get people to trust him. Simply announce in a loud voice the opposite of what you want and soon people will pick up that the opposite will happen. If you want people to notice faster do it in a casino.
It will take some time to fine-tune what to say, but this is essentially a wish granting power. You just have to phrase it a little weird.
Your friends will all want you to say things like
My company's value will go down
Or
It'll land on black
Or
Your marriage won't last
Several economic indicators are like this. Things like more stocks being issued (IPOs) and more credit being available happens before a stock market crash. People watch these and try to time the market (but rarely succeed).
The real curse is to say the truth but have no one believe you like Cassandra
answered 3 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
4795
edited 1 hour ago
answered 3 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
4795
answered 3 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
4795
answered 3 hours ago
sevensevenssevensevens
4795
4795
$begingroup$
"In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist."
$endgroup$
– Rob Watts
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
But if the change is absolutely so subtle that no one can tell it is a change? Bob can not control how subtle the change IS, as i understand it.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
26 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
"In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist."
$endgroup$
– Rob Watts
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
But if the change is absolutely so subtle that no one can tell it is a change? Bob can not control how subtle the change IS, as i understand it.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
"In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist."
$endgroup$
– Rob Watts
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
"In addition, this superpower is permanent and cannot be removed through anything he might say or any interaction with other superpowers that might exist."
$endgroup$
– Rob Watts
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
But if the change is absolutely so subtle that no one can tell it is a change? Bob can not control how subtle the change IS, as i understand it.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
26 mins ago
$begingroup$
But if the change is absolutely so subtle that no one can tell it is a change? Bob can not control how subtle the change IS, as i understand it.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
26 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is really simple.
Don't try to make them believe you. Always tell the lie that they won't believe to get them to realize the truth.
If your friend asks if you want to head out to dinner and you do, actually want to, say "no." Your friend will know that you can't tell the truth and know what you are saying.
Once enough people know about the power, everyone will know that he has to speak that way.
Also, he would be in high demand for anything that requires safety.
Any time he gets on an airplane, all he has to say is "this plane will not land safely."
He can be the benevolent doomsayer.
answered 1 hour ago
ShadoCatShadoCat
15.5k2053
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
But suppose Bob wanted to go out to dinner but not with that person? Or that he didn't want to go out to diner with that person, but did want to go out to dinner with someone else?
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
28 mins ago
$begingroup$
@JustinThyme, "I want to go out to dinner with you." All it takes is a bit of creative logic.
$endgroup$
– ShadoCat
16 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is really simple.
Don't try to make them believe you. Always tell the lie that they won't believe to get them to realize the truth.
If your friend asks if you want to head out to dinner and you do, actually want to, say "no." Your friend will know that you can't tell the truth and know what you are saying.
Once enough people know about the power, everyone will know that he has to speak that way.
Also, he would be in high demand for anything that requires safety.
Any time he gets on an airplane, all he has to say is "this plane will not land safely."
He can be the benevolent doomsayer.
answered 1 hour ago
ShadoCatShadoCat
15.5k2053
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
But suppose Bob wanted to go out to dinner but not with that person? Or that he didn't want to go out to diner with that person, but did want to go out to dinner with someone else?
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
28 mins ago
$begingroup$
@JustinThyme, "I want to go out to dinner with you." All it takes is a bit of creative logic.
$endgroup$
– ShadoCat
16 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is really simple.
Don't try to make them believe you. Always tell the lie that they won't believe to get them to realize the truth.
If your friend asks if you want to head out to dinner and you do, actually want to, say "no." Your friend will know that you can't tell the truth and know what you are saying.
Once enough people know about the power, everyone will know that he has to speak that way.
Also, he would be in high demand for anything that requires safety.
Any time he gets on an airplane, all he has to say is "this plane will not land safely."
He can be the benevolent doomsayer.
answered 1 hour ago
ShadoCatShadoCat
15.5k2053
$endgroup$
It is really simple.
Don't try to make them believe you. Always tell the lie that they won't believe to get them to realize the truth.
If your friend asks if you want to head out to dinner and you do, actually want to, say "no." Your friend will know that you can't tell the truth and know what you are saying.
Once enough people know about the power, everyone will know that he has to speak that way.
Also, he would be in high demand for anything that requires safety.
Any time he gets on an airplane, all he has to say is "this plane will not land safely."
He can be the benevolent doomsayer.
answered 1 hour ago
ShadoCatShadoCat
15.5k2053
answered 1 hour ago
ShadoCatShadoCat
15.5k2053
answered 1 hour ago
ShadoCatShadoCat
15.5k2053
answered 1 hour ago
ShadoCatShadoCat
15.5k2053
15.5k2053
$begingroup$
But suppose Bob wanted to go out to dinner but not with that person? Or that he didn't want to go out to diner with that person, but did want to go out to dinner with someone else?
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
28 mins ago
$begingroup$
@JustinThyme, "I want to go out to dinner with you." All it takes is a bit of creative logic.
$endgroup$
– ShadoCat
16 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
But suppose Bob wanted to go out to dinner but not with that person? Or that he didn't want to go out to diner with that person, but did want to go out to dinner with someone else?
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
28 mins ago
$begingroup$
@JustinThyme, "I want to go out to dinner with you." All it takes is a bit of creative logic.
$endgroup$
– ShadoCat
16 mins ago
$begingroup$
But suppose Bob wanted to go out to dinner but not with that person? Or that he didn't want to go out to diner with that person, but did want to go out to dinner with someone else?
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
28 mins ago
$begingroup$
But suppose Bob wanted to go out to dinner but not with that person? Or that he didn't want to go out to diner with that person, but did want to go out to dinner with someone else?
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
28 mins ago
$begingroup$
@JustinThyme, "I want to go out to dinner with you." All it takes is a bit of creative logic.
$endgroup$
– ShadoCat
16 mins ago
$begingroup$
@JustinThyme, "I want to go out to dinner with you." All it takes is a bit of creative logic.
$endgroup$
– ShadoCat
16 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In @KaspervandenBerg 's answer:
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
due to least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
I propose this:
You trust me less than you trust everyone else.
answered 1 hour ago
DylanDylan
2114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Path of least resistance: that person has a crisis of faith and becomes paranoid.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
44 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Wildcard Why would it be less resistance to alter this person's entire outlook on the world than to simply alter their opinion of one person?
$endgroup$
– Admiral Jota
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AdmiralJota is it easier for you to make people trust you or not trust you? (A: not trust you.) Why do think the fabric of reality could establish trust any more easily? Just food for thought.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
37 mins ago
$begingroup$
This becomes a paradox, and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In @KaspervandenBerg 's answer:
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
due to least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
I propose this:
You trust me less than you trust everyone else.
answered 1 hour ago
DylanDylan
2114
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Path of least resistance: that person has a crisis of faith and becomes paranoid.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
44 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Wildcard Why would it be less resistance to alter this person's entire outlook on the world than to simply alter their opinion of one person?
$endgroup$
– Admiral Jota
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AdmiralJota is it easier for you to make people trust you or not trust you? (A: not trust you.) Why do think the fabric of reality could establish trust any more easily? Just food for thought.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
37 mins ago
$begingroup$
This becomes a paradox, and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In @KaspervandenBerg 's answer:
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
due to least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
I propose this:
You trust me less than you trust everyone else.
answered 1 hour ago
DylanDylan
2114
$endgroup$
In @KaspervandenBerg 's answer:
There are seconds during this week/month/year that you will not trust me a bit. --Bob
due to least resistance, you end up with people only trusting bob slightly more than a bit.
I propose this:
You trust me less than you trust everyone else.
answered 1 hour ago
DylanDylan
2114
answered 1 hour ago
DylanDylan
2114
answered 1 hour ago
DylanDylan
2114
answered 1 hour ago
DylanDylan
2114
2114
$begingroup$
Path of least resistance: that person has a crisis of faith and becomes paranoid.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
44 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Wildcard Why would it be less resistance to alter this person's entire outlook on the world than to simply alter their opinion of one person?
$endgroup$
– Admiral Jota
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AdmiralJota is it easier for you to make people trust you or not trust you? (A: not trust you.) Why do think the fabric of reality could establish trust any more easily? Just food for thought.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
37 mins ago
$begingroup$
This becomes a paradox, and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Path of least resistance: that person has a crisis of faith and becomes paranoid.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
44 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Wildcard Why would it be less resistance to alter this person's entire outlook on the world than to simply alter their opinion of one person?
$endgroup$
– Admiral Jota
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AdmiralJota is it easier for you to make people trust you or not trust you? (A: not trust you.) Why do think the fabric of reality could establish trust any more easily? Just food for thought.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
37 mins ago
$begingroup$
This becomes a paradox, and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
36 mins ago
$begingroup$
Path of least resistance: that person has a crisis of faith and becomes paranoid.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
44 mins ago
$begingroup$
Path of least resistance: that person has a crisis of faith and becomes paranoid.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
44 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Wildcard Why would it be less resistance to alter this person's entire outlook on the world than to simply alter their opinion of one person?
$endgroup$
– Admiral Jota
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
@Wildcard Why would it be less resistance to alter this person's entire outlook on the world than to simply alter their opinion of one person?
$endgroup$
– Admiral Jota
40 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AdmiralJota is it easier for you to make people trust you or not trust you? (A: not trust you.) Why do think the fabric of reality could establish trust any more easily? Just food for thought.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
37 mins ago
$begingroup$
@AdmiralJota is it easier for you to make people trust you or not trust you? (A: not trust you.) Why do think the fabric of reality could establish trust any more easily? Just food for thought.
$endgroup$
– Wildcard
37 mins ago
$begingroup$
This becomes a paradox, and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
36 mins ago
$begingroup$
This becomes a paradox, and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
36 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Simple, there's a class of people that do similar all the time: Be a denialist speaker.
Many people will believe what's most convenient if it's said with authority and minimal requirement for thinking or action on their part. Just look at flat earthers, climate deniers, anti-vaxxers, and similar.
Just support wrong things with momentum, and everything suppporting that wrong thing will believe him.
answered 1 hour ago
liljoshuliljoshu
1,607311
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Simple, there's a class of people that do similar all the time: Be a denialist speaker.
Many people will believe what's most convenient if it's said with authority and minimal requirement for thinking or action on their part. Just look at flat earthers, climate deniers, anti-vaxxers, and similar.
Just support wrong things with momentum, and everything suppporting that wrong thing will believe him.
answered 1 hour ago
liljoshuliljoshu
1,607311
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Simple, there's a class of people that do similar all the time: Be a denialist speaker.
Many people will believe what's most convenient if it's said with authority and minimal requirement for thinking or action on their part. Just look at flat earthers, climate deniers, anti-vaxxers, and similar.
Just support wrong things with momentum, and everything suppporting that wrong thing will believe him.
answered 1 hour ago
liljoshuliljoshu
1,607311
$endgroup$
Simple, there's a class of people that do similar all the time: Be a denialist speaker.
Many people will believe what's most convenient if it's said with authority and minimal requirement for thinking or action on their part. Just look at flat earthers, climate deniers, anti-vaxxers, and similar.
Just support wrong things with momentum, and everything suppporting that wrong thing will believe him.
answered 1 hour ago
liljoshuliljoshu
1,607311
answered 1 hour ago
liljoshuliljoshu
1,607311
answered 1 hour ago
liljoshuliljoshu
1,607311
answered 1 hour ago
liljoshuliljoshu
1,607311
1,607311
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
My answer assumes that Bob can not predict HOW things will change, just that they will change, in subtle ways. Also, I am assuming that Bob can and will voluntarily answer your questions. I am also assuming that this works for any PREDICTIONS Bob makes. That is, any prediction that he makes will never be true. I am also assuming that Bob, in god faith, can tell the truth as it was at the time of him saying it.
I am not sure if the issue is in not being able to trust that the answer Bob gives you is the truth, but in being able to absolutely trust that the answer Bob gives you is NOT the truth.
If a betting man knew that Bob's answer could always be trusted to ultimately NOT be true, then a betting man could make a lot of money.
'Bob, what team will win the Series?' Then bet AGAINST the team he says. 'I will bet you that your favorite team x will NOT win the Series'. 'Oh, come ON, they are sure to win the series. You're ON, man, you're ON'.
Of course, a person with criminal intent would WANT him to tell the truth, so that it would become the UNtruth.
'Bob, try that door and tell me if it is locked?' In which case, you WANT him to tell the truth, that it is locked, so that it then becomes the UNtruth.
'Bob, is that watchman who is looking at us paying attention to us?'
'Bob, is that merchant charging for his goods?'
'Bob, will you tell the judge the truth about my guilt?' It doesn't matter if the judge believes him or not, but as soon as Bob says I am guilty, I am no longer guilty.
It would seem to me, that the utility and the advantage of having Bob as a friend would not be in what Bob says is the truth, but what HAPPENS in response to his telling the truth. That it reliably and immediately becomes the UNtruth in some way.
In day to day conversations as a friend, one could easily accommodate his eccentricities, if one knew absolutely that whatever he said, even if said in good faith, would be wrong.
'Bob, how much money do you have?' Bob: 'I have ten dollars'. So, if Bob answered truthfully in good faith, you know he has approximately ten dollars, but not exactly ten dollars.
'Bob, what time is it?' Bob: 'It is ten o'clock'. So again, if Bob is answering truthfully in good faith, and tells you the correct time, then you know it is AROUND ten o'clock but not exactly ten o'clock.
If he always answers with an approximate answer, that is close to the truth, you of course can always accommodate. The trick is to learn to ask Bob the question in the right way.
So those who perhaps find utility in Bob, and want to capitalize on his powers, but also want to have a good relationship with him on good faith, would have no problems as long as they always knew his good-faith answers were APPROXIMATE answers, and his devious faith answers were always the truth as he knew it at the time of his response. You and Bob would know the answer would be immediately incorrect as soon as he gave the response.
And, of course, there is the situations along the lines of: Bob: 'I need to go to the bathroom right now' means that, if it were the truth, Bob NO LONGER has to go to the bathroom right now, but he WILL have to go to the bathroom AGAIN (is that the right term) shortly.
in such a way, as long as the other person wanted to have a relationship with Bob, and Bob always responded in good faith with the truth, but both of you knew it was no longer the truth but approximately the truth, the relationship would work out.
So, really, it is about how much the OTHER person wants to have a good relationship with Bob, and is willing to accommodate, provided Bob enters the relationship in good faith.
answered 46 mins ago
Justin ThymeJustin Thyme
8,86311044
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
My answer assumes that Bob can not predict HOW things will change, just that they will change, in subtle ways. Also, I am assuming that Bob can and will voluntarily answer your questions. I am also assuming that this works for any PREDICTIONS Bob makes. That is, any prediction that he makes will never be true. I am also assuming that Bob, in god faith, can tell the truth as it was at the time of him saying it.
I am not sure if the issue is in not being able to trust that the answer Bob gives you is the truth, but in being able to absolutely trust that the answer Bob gives you is NOT the truth.
If a betting man knew that Bob's answer could always be trusted to ultimately NOT be true, then a betting man could make a lot of money.
'Bob, what team will win the Series?' Then bet AGAINST the team he says. 'I will bet you that your favorite team x will NOT win the Series'. 'Oh, come ON, they are sure to win the series. You're ON, man, you're ON'.
Of course, a person with criminal intent would WANT him to tell the truth, so that it would become the UNtruth.
'Bob, try that door and tell me if it is locked?' In which case, you WANT him to tell the truth, that it is locked, so that it then becomes the UNtruth.
'Bob, is that watchman who is looking at us paying attention to us?'
'Bob, is that merchant charging for his goods?'
'Bob, will you tell the judge the truth about my guilt?' It doesn't matter if the judge believes him or not, but as soon as Bob says I am guilty, I am no longer guilty.
It would seem to me, that the utility and the advantage of having Bob as a friend would not be in what Bob says is the truth, but what HAPPENS in response to his telling the truth. That it reliably and immediately becomes the UNtruth in some way.
In day to day conversations as a friend, one could easily accommodate his eccentricities, if one knew absolutely that whatever he said, even if said in good faith, would be wrong.
'Bob, how much money do you have?' Bob: 'I have ten dollars'. So, if Bob answered truthfully in good faith, you know he has approximately ten dollars, but not exactly ten dollars.
'Bob, what time is it?' Bob: 'It is ten o'clock'. So again, if Bob is answering truthfully in good faith, and tells you the correct time, then you know it is AROUND ten o'clock but not exactly ten o'clock.
If he always answers with an approximate answer, that is close to the truth, you of course can always accommodate. The trick is to learn to ask Bob the question in the right way.
So those who perhaps find utility in Bob, and want to capitalize on his powers, but also want to have a good relationship with him on good faith, would have no problems as long as they always knew his good-faith answers were APPROXIMATE answers, and his devious faith answers were always the truth as he knew it at the time of his response. You and Bob would know the answer would be immediately incorrect as soon as he gave the response.
And, of course, there is the situations along the lines of: Bob: 'I need to go to the bathroom right now' means that, if it were the truth, Bob NO LONGER has to go to the bathroom right now, but he WILL have to go to the bathroom AGAIN (is that the right term) shortly.
in such a way, as long as the other person wanted to have a relationship with Bob, and Bob always responded in good faith with the truth, but both of you knew it was no longer the truth but approximately the truth, the relationship would work out.
So, really, it is about how much the OTHER person wants to have a good relationship with Bob, and is willing to accommodate, provided Bob enters the relationship in good faith.
answered 46 mins ago
Justin ThymeJustin Thyme
8,86311044
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
My answer assumes that Bob can not predict HOW things will change, just that they will change, in subtle ways. Also, I am assuming that Bob can and will voluntarily answer your questions. I am also assuming that this works for any PREDICTIONS Bob makes. That is, any prediction that he makes will never be true. I am also assuming that Bob, in god faith, can tell the truth as it was at the time of him saying it.
I am not sure if the issue is in not being able to trust that the answer Bob gives you is the truth, but in being able to absolutely trust that the answer Bob gives you is NOT the truth.
If a betting man knew that Bob's answer could always be trusted to ultimately NOT be true, then a betting man could make a lot of money.
'Bob, what team will win the Series?' Then bet AGAINST the team he says. 'I will bet you that your favorite team x will NOT win the Series'. 'Oh, come ON, they are sure to win the series. You're ON, man, you're ON'.
Of course, a person with criminal intent would WANT him to tell the truth, so that it would become the UNtruth.
'Bob, try that door and tell me if it is locked?' In which case, you WANT him to tell the truth, that it is locked, so that it then becomes the UNtruth.
'Bob, is that watchman who is looking at us paying attention to us?'
'Bob, is that merchant charging for his goods?'
'Bob, will you tell the judge the truth about my guilt?' It doesn't matter if the judge believes him or not, but as soon as Bob says I am guilty, I am no longer guilty.
It would seem to me, that the utility and the advantage of having Bob as a friend would not be in what Bob says is the truth, but what HAPPENS in response to his telling the truth. That it reliably and immediately becomes the UNtruth in some way.
In day to day conversations as a friend, one could easily accommodate his eccentricities, if one knew absolutely that whatever he said, even if said in good faith, would be wrong.
'Bob, how much money do you have?' Bob: 'I have ten dollars'. So, if Bob answered truthfully in good faith, you know he has approximately ten dollars, but not exactly ten dollars.
'Bob, what time is it?' Bob: 'It is ten o'clock'. So again, if Bob is answering truthfully in good faith, and tells you the correct time, then you know it is AROUND ten o'clock but not exactly ten o'clock.
If he always answers with an approximate answer, that is close to the truth, you of course can always accommodate. The trick is to learn to ask Bob the question in the right way.
So those who perhaps find utility in Bob, and want to capitalize on his powers, but also want to have a good relationship with him on good faith, would have no problems as long as they always knew his good-faith answers were APPROXIMATE answers, and his devious faith answers were always the truth as he knew it at the time of his response. You and Bob would know the answer would be immediately incorrect as soon as he gave the response.
And, of course, there is the situations along the lines of: Bob: 'I need to go to the bathroom right now' means that, if it were the truth, Bob NO LONGER has to go to the bathroom right now, but he WILL have to go to the bathroom AGAIN (is that the right term) shortly.
in such a way, as long as the other person wanted to have a relationship with Bob, and Bob always responded in good faith with the truth, but both of you knew it was no longer the truth but approximately the truth, the relationship would work out.
So, really, it is about how much the OTHER person wants to have a good relationship with Bob, and is willing to accommodate, provided Bob enters the relationship in good faith.
answered 46 mins ago
Justin ThymeJustin Thyme
8,86311044
$endgroup$
My answer assumes that Bob can not predict HOW things will change, just that they will change, in subtle ways. Also, I am assuming that Bob can and will voluntarily answer your questions. I am also assuming that this works for any PREDICTIONS Bob makes. That is, any prediction that he makes will never be true. I am also assuming that Bob, in god faith, can tell the truth as it was at the time of him saying it.
I am not sure if the issue is in not being able to trust that the answer Bob gives you is the truth, but in being able to absolutely trust that the answer Bob gives you is NOT the truth.
If a betting man knew that Bob's answer could always be trusted to ultimately NOT be true, then a betting man could make a lot of money.
'Bob, what team will win the Series?' Then bet AGAINST the team he says. 'I will bet you that your favorite team x will NOT win the Series'. 'Oh, come ON, they are sure to win the series. You're ON, man, you're ON'.
Of course, a person with criminal intent would WANT him to tell the truth, so that it would become the UNtruth.
'Bob, try that door and tell me if it is locked?' In which case, you WANT him to tell the truth, that it is locked, so that it then becomes the UNtruth.
'Bob, is that watchman who is looking at us paying attention to us?'
'Bob, is that merchant charging for his goods?'
'Bob, will you tell the judge the truth about my guilt?' It doesn't matter if the judge believes him or not, but as soon as Bob says I am guilty, I am no longer guilty.
It would seem to me, that the utility and the advantage of having Bob as a friend would not be in what Bob says is the truth, but what HAPPENS in response to his telling the truth. That it reliably and immediately becomes the UNtruth in some way.
In day to day conversations as a friend, one could easily accommodate his eccentricities, if one knew absolutely that whatever he said, even if said in good faith, would be wrong.
'Bob, how much money do you have?' Bob: 'I have ten dollars'. So, if Bob answered truthfully in good faith, you know he has approximately ten dollars, but not exactly ten dollars.
'Bob, what time is it?' Bob: 'It is ten o'clock'. So again, if Bob is answering truthfully in good faith, and tells you the correct time, then you know it is AROUND ten o'clock but not exactly ten o'clock.
If he always answers with an approximate answer, that is close to the truth, you of course can always accommodate. The trick is to learn to ask Bob the question in the right way.
So those who perhaps find utility in Bob, and want to capitalize on his powers, but also want to have a good relationship with him on good faith, would have no problems as long as they always knew his good-faith answers were APPROXIMATE answers, and his devious faith answers were always the truth as he knew it at the time of his response. You and Bob would know the answer would be immediately incorrect as soon as he gave the response.
And, of course, there is the situations along the lines of: Bob: 'I need to go to the bathroom right now' means that, if it were the truth, Bob NO LONGER has to go to the bathroom right now, but he WILL have to go to the bathroom AGAIN (is that the right term) shortly.
in such a way, as long as the other person wanted to have a relationship with Bob, and Bob always responded in good faith with the truth, but both of you knew it was no longer the truth but approximately the truth, the relationship would work out.
So, really, it is about how much the OTHER person wants to have a good relationship with Bob, and is willing to accommodate, provided Bob enters the relationship in good faith.
answered 46 mins ago
Justin ThymeJustin Thyme
8,86311044
answered 46 mins ago
Justin ThymeJustin Thyme
8,86311044
answered 46 mins ago
Justin ThymeJustin Thyme
8,86311044
answered 46 mins ago
Justin ThymeJustin Thyme
8,86311044
8,86311044
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Easy. Bob can gain people's trust through his actions. If he acts to help people, that will show he's trustworthy.
answered 33 mins ago
HS-nebulaHS-nebula
1112
New contributor
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Easy. Bob can gain people's trust through his actions. If he acts to help people, that will show he's trustworthy.
answered 33 mins ago
HS-nebulaHS-nebula
1112
New contributor
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Easy. Bob can gain people's trust through his actions. If he acts to help people, that will show he's trustworthy.
answered 33 mins ago
HS-nebulaHS-nebula
1112
New contributor
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Easy. Bob can gain people's trust through his actions. If he acts to help people, that will show he's trustworthy.
answered 33 mins ago
HS-nebulaHS-nebula
1112
New contributor
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 33 mins ago
HS-nebulaHS-nebula
1112
New contributor
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 33 mins ago
HS-nebulaHS-nebula
1112
answered 33 mins ago
HS-nebulaHS-nebula
1112
1112
New contributor
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
HS-nebula is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bob can be a superhero and become rich really easy.
All he needs to do is to spread conspiracy theories.
Bob says the Earth is flat. The Earth assumes a spherical geometry. Had Bob not used his power, we would eventually be suffocated by the giant elephants' magical freezing farts which keep the frozen barrier st the rim in place, or we would eventually be smashed by the cosmic turtle's sexual partner.
Bob says aliens are abducting people and probing their cavities. Now the aliens can't do that - Bob is a one man X-com!
Bob says planes leave out chemtrails that are used for mind control. Now they don't anymore! Take that, Illuminatti!
And so on. The only conspiracy theories he can't defeat are vaccine and GMO related ones, because those can actually cause direct harm to people.
So most everyone from the average Joe to the eggheads of our time will not trust Bob, but that's not a problem. He will have the undisputed and unwavering trust and loyalty of basically every Infowars follower. He can even take over Alex Jones's place and make huge loads of cash that way.
Heck, Bob could even easily become the next republican president, and he would save the world from climate change by claiming that coal is cleaner than solar and wind power.
answered 2 hours ago
RenanRenan
51.1k14118255
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Republicans don't have a corner on the hot air market lol
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bob can be a superhero and become rich really easy.
All he needs to do is to spread conspiracy theories.
Bob says the Earth is flat. The Earth assumes a spherical geometry. Had Bob not used his power, we would eventually be suffocated by the giant elephants' magical freezing farts which keep the frozen barrier st the rim in place, or we would eventually be smashed by the cosmic turtle's sexual partner.
Bob says aliens are abducting people and probing their cavities. Now the aliens can't do that - Bob is a one man X-com!
Bob says planes leave out chemtrails that are used for mind control. Now they don't anymore! Take that, Illuminatti!
And so on. The only conspiracy theories he can't defeat are vaccine and GMO related ones, because those can actually cause direct harm to people.
So most everyone from the average Joe to the eggheads of our time will not trust Bob, but that's not a problem. He will have the undisputed and unwavering trust and loyalty of basically every Infowars follower. He can even take over Alex Jones's place and make huge loads of cash that way.
Heck, Bob could even easily become the next republican president, and he would save the world from climate change by claiming that coal is cleaner than solar and wind power.
answered 2 hours ago
RenanRenan
51.1k14118255
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Republicans don't have a corner on the hot air market lol
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Bob can be a superhero and become rich really easy.
All he needs to do is to spread conspiracy theories.
Bob says the Earth is flat. The Earth assumes a spherical geometry. Had Bob not used his power, we would eventually be suffocated by the giant elephants' magical freezing farts which keep the frozen barrier st the rim in place, or we would eventually be smashed by the cosmic turtle's sexual partner.
Bob says aliens are abducting people and probing their cavities. Now the aliens can't do that - Bob is a one man X-com!
Bob says planes leave out chemtrails that are used for mind control. Now they don't anymore! Take that, Illuminatti!
And so on. The only conspiracy theories he can't defeat are vaccine and GMO related ones, because those can actually cause direct harm to people.
So most everyone from the average Joe to the eggheads of our time will not trust Bob, but that's not a problem. He will have the undisputed and unwavering trust and loyalty of basically every Infowars follower. He can even take over Alex Jones's place and make huge loads of cash that way.
Heck, Bob could even easily become the next republican president, and he would save the world from climate change by claiming that coal is cleaner than solar and wind power.
answered 2 hours ago
RenanRenan
51.1k14118255
$endgroup$
Bob can be a superhero and become rich really easy.
All he needs to do is to spread conspiracy theories.
Bob says the Earth is flat. The Earth assumes a spherical geometry. Had Bob not used his power, we would eventually be suffocated by the giant elephants' magical freezing farts which keep the frozen barrier st the rim in place, or we would eventually be smashed by the cosmic turtle's sexual partner.
Bob says aliens are abducting people and probing their cavities. Now the aliens can't do that - Bob is a one man X-com!
Bob says planes leave out chemtrails that are used for mind control. Now they don't anymore! Take that, Illuminatti!
And so on. The only conspiracy theories he can't defeat are vaccine and GMO related ones, because those can actually cause direct harm to people.
So most everyone from the average Joe to the eggheads of our time will not trust Bob, but that's not a problem. He will have the undisputed and unwavering trust and loyalty of basically every Infowars follower. He can even take over Alex Jones's place and make huge loads of cash that way.
Heck, Bob could even easily become the next republican president, and he would save the world from climate change by claiming that coal is cleaner than solar and wind power.
answered 2 hours ago
RenanRenan
51.1k14118255
answered 2 hours ago
RenanRenan
51.1k14118255
answered 2 hours ago
RenanRenan
51.1k14118255
answered 2 hours ago
RenanRenan
51.1k14118255
51.1k14118255
$begingroup$
Republicans don't have a corner on the hot air market lol
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Republicans don't have a corner on the hot air market lol
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Republicans don't have a corner on the hot air market lol
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
Republicans don't have a corner on the hot air market lol
$endgroup$
– pojo-guy
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Couldn't Bob simply tell someone he meets like some girl he likes very much and after many different machinations and presumed falsehoods he'd say something like "You simply do not understand me" by accident? In that way someone actually WOULD understand Bob's superpower without being harmed? Then communication could be carried out albeit in a very curiously and perhaps very humorous way. Just a thought.
It would be interesting to have a scene of an argument between Joe and Bob perhaps... I don't know how you'd do it but it could amount to a superpower Abbot and Costello routine.
answered 49 mins ago
KodiakMFLKodiakMFL
11
New contributor
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Not necessarily. It would just make someone "not-so-simply" don't understand Bob.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
47 mins ago
$begingroup$
The trick is he WANTS her to understand him, and him saying 'You don't understand me' would result in her understanding him, but her understanding of him does not necessarily have to conform to what he really is. It becomes cyclic. A non sequitur.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
38 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Couldn't Bob simply tell someone he meets like some girl he likes very much and after many different machinations and presumed falsehoods he'd say something like "You simply do not understand me" by accident? In that way someone actually WOULD understand Bob's superpower without being harmed? Then communication could be carried out albeit in a very curiously and perhaps very humorous way. Just a thought.
It would be interesting to have a scene of an argument between Joe and Bob perhaps... I don't know how you'd do it but it could amount to a superpower Abbot and Costello routine.
answered 49 mins ago
KodiakMFLKodiakMFL
11
New contributor
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Not necessarily. It would just make someone "not-so-simply" don't understand Bob.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
47 mins ago
$begingroup$
The trick is he WANTS her to understand him, and him saying 'You don't understand me' would result in her understanding him, but her understanding of him does not necessarily have to conform to what he really is. It becomes cyclic. A non sequitur.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
38 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Couldn't Bob simply tell someone he meets like some girl he likes very much and after many different machinations and presumed falsehoods he'd say something like "You simply do not understand me" by accident? In that way someone actually WOULD understand Bob's superpower without being harmed? Then communication could be carried out albeit in a very curiously and perhaps very humorous way. Just a thought.
It would be interesting to have a scene of an argument between Joe and Bob perhaps... I don't know how you'd do it but it could amount to a superpower Abbot and Costello routine.
answered 49 mins ago
KodiakMFLKodiakMFL
11
New contributor
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
Couldn't Bob simply tell someone he meets like some girl he likes very much and after many different machinations and presumed falsehoods he'd say something like "You simply do not understand me" by accident? In that way someone actually WOULD understand Bob's superpower without being harmed? Then communication could be carried out albeit in a very curiously and perhaps very humorous way. Just a thought.
It would be interesting to have a scene of an argument between Joe and Bob perhaps... I don't know how you'd do it but it could amount to a superpower Abbot and Costello routine.
answered 49 mins ago
KodiakMFLKodiakMFL
11
New contributor
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 46 mins ago
answered 49 mins ago
KodiakMFLKodiakMFL
11
New contributor
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 49 mins ago
KodiakMFLKodiakMFL
11
answered 49 mins ago
KodiakMFLKodiakMFL
11
11
New contributor
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
KodiakMFL is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$begingroup$
Not necessarily. It would just make someone "not-so-simply" don't understand Bob.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
47 mins ago
$begingroup$
The trick is he WANTS her to understand him, and him saying 'You don't understand me' would result in her understanding him, but her understanding of him does not necessarily have to conform to what he really is. It becomes cyclic. A non sequitur.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
38 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Not necessarily. It would just make someone "not-so-simply" don't understand Bob.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
47 mins ago
$begingroup$
The trick is he WANTS her to understand him, and him saying 'You don't understand me' would result in her understanding him, but her understanding of him does not necessarily have to conform to what he really is. It becomes cyclic. A non sequitur.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
38 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not necessarily. It would just make someone "not-so-simply" don't understand Bob.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
47 mins ago
$begingroup$
Not necessarily. It would just make someone "not-so-simply" don't understand Bob.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
47 mins ago
$begingroup$
The trick is he WANTS her to understand him, and him saying 'You don't understand me' would result in her understanding him, but her understanding of him does not necessarily have to conform to what he really is. It becomes cyclic. A non sequitur.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
38 mins ago
$begingroup$
The trick is he WANTS her to understand him, and him saying 'You don't understand me' would result in her understanding him, but her understanding of him does not necessarily have to conform to what he really is. It becomes cyclic. A non sequitur.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
38 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f142465%2feverything-bob-says-is-false-how-does-he-get-people-to-trust-him%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
$begingroup$
This Bob better stay "Silent Bob", because saying trivial things like "Good day" would have unintended consequences.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
My paycheck will be less than one million dollars next week.
$endgroup$
– Dylan
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@Dylan Pretty sure he would simply not get a paycheck at all.
$endgroup$
– Ville Niemi
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
What if he says "2+2=4"? There is little the universe can change without violating a lot of itself. I guess such statements are impossible as that's the smallest change the universe needs to handle such a statement.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@ Demigan Then you would have a paradox and nothing would happen.
$endgroup$
– Justin Thyme
43 mins ago