okay so let me um I've erased the statement that I had here which was in 600 BC s1 was true because what I want to show you is that there's just with this format which again was just like what we did you know or there on P if P then Q but wait I don't like Q so I've got a problem this is if P then Q but not Q so not P so this format is just the case where you realize you're saying something that leads to safety easy to say something else but that you don't believe that other thing that you're being allowed to say and so you so you realize whoops I didn't I didn't mean to say that in the beginning so in fact there are a number of these a number of statements that we could supply in this blank that are going to make this get progressively worse for the general run so like I said before with just in 600 in 600 BC s1 was true that's already something that you may feel like is not what you want to say that you want to say it in one of these other qualified ways like well they thought it was true but or they were doing their best but I'm humble that I might be wrong but and so forth right but look this gets worse this gets worse and by the way you know if you say any of those things I just said right you realize the point is you you're not a general relatives you know I think a general relatives could say was 680 the earth was flat and now it's not and maybe it will be again so okay that was just to sort of get the intuitions flowing that well there's their view there's our view and then there's the truth right that seems like the right thing saying and it doesn't make you cocky like you're not saying you know the truth you're not saying you'll ever know the truth but if we're right they're wrong if they're right we're wrong we're wrong but one thing is for sure one of us is mistaken if they say the earth is flat when we say it's not that's all the absolutist wants to establish that this is not that these are not the same concept okay so look this gets worse suppose suppose I were to say if general relativism is correct then here's something else that would follow from general relativism general relevance was correct you look at this definition you realize well what about if we all died tomorrow what would happen to the shape of the earth if we all died tomorrow well it wouldn't have one if general relativism is correct so you want to satisfy yourself that based on this definition if general realism is correct if this is correct and what I could write here and I've written it on the piece that I typed up for you if general business correct then if we all died tomorrow if there were no people alive anymore there was nobody to believe anything about the shape of the earth then what would happen to the shape of the earth would the earth continue to be spherical if we all die tomorrow knowing it couldn't but it's even worse it couldn't be not spherical either it couldn't be spherical because there's nobody to believe it anymore so it's not true anymore that the earth is spherical but it's not false either because nobody believes that the earth isn't spherical nobody's believing anything there's no perceptions so there's just no truth anymore best thought that's not right is it think about it if we all died tomorrow don't you want to say something like this if we all died tomorrow the earth would still be whatever it was today if it's spherical then we'll just all be laying will this all be dead on a spherical earth if it's um not spherical then we'll all be dead on a not spherical earth but there's nothing about us dying that's going to change the shape of the earth is there I mean and by the way maybe there's not even on earth at all maybe we are on the head of a pen of some God but if there's not on earth our dying isn't going to make any difference and if there is an earth our dying is gonna make a difference that's absolute is talk of course the general absolutist would say yeah we can all die tomorrow it's not gonna have anything to do with whether s1 is true or s2 or s3 nothing about us dying is gonna have any impact on ordinary statements like this because these are not the same if these are the same then as soon as the last person takes their last breath now earth is spherical earth is spherical Oh poof the earth stops being spherical and the earth stops existing and the earth no longer exists nor does it not exist these are all hard things to say and in fact what seems right I think you'll think if you think this through is we all died tomorrow nothing's going to change about these the truth of these there will be something that changes about our perceptions of these there won't be any perceptions of these anymore so here's how the argument would look good general relativism is correct then if we all died tomorrow s2 would suddenly be false I'm sorry s2 would suddenly cease to be true if we all died tomorrow the earth wouldn't have any shape anymore but it's not the case that if we all died tomorrow the earth shame therefore it's not the case that general business correct by the way very similar argument would go like this before we got here did the earth have a shape before humans got here and started thinking about the shape of the earth well if you're a general relativist you'd have to say no there's no way the earth could have existed before us there's no way it could have had a shape before you notice not that it did or didn't exist there's no way it could have existed before us if this is true but that's just false it's not the case that it couldn't have existed before us in fact I suspect you think it did exist before us just like rocks and trees existed potentially before us but not if this is true so you want to just absorb this definition until you can see all these things coming out of it if that definition is correct then before we got here nothing could have existed after we die nothing can exist but it's not the case that before we got here nothing could exist after we die nothing could exist how about this one now look you could lower your friend in you could sort of lower your friend into a trap here and say something like this you could say so let me see if I understand what you're saying you're talking to here your friend who's still hanging on to this notion of general relativity you could go at them this way you could say look if I understand what you're saying I guess one thing I need to be is humble right I need to be humble and realize that I guess we could be wrong about the shape of the earth and your friends gonna go yes of course we could be wrong about the shape of the earth we could be on the head of a pen of some God and then you know be polite be polite you know go to the chin and look up to the ceiling and go I guess I misunderstood you then because you're saying that we could be wrong about the shape of the earth that would mean that even if we all think it's spherical but that's not the same thing as it being true that it's spherical I mean what it mean to be wrong about the shape of the earth it would mean we all think it's got one shape but in fact it doesn't but I thought you said you say to your general in history I thought you said that when everybody believes something that it's got to be true now what your friend is going to say at this point is probably whatever all the way you're being so picky let's just talking I'll get some D but in fact you just like you know you just like reached in and grabbed your friend's heart and show it to something right in front of their face right you've just you just you've just levied a fatal blow at their view right if they say we could be wrong about the shape of the earth then they have just denied that P 1 and P 2 mean the same thing that's why when your friend says don't you realize we could be on the head of a pen of some God and that's why I'm a general relativist that rocks and trees exist because we say they do maybe it's becoming clear to you now why I keep using that as an example of your friends saying something sounds kind of right but it can't really be right could we be on the head of a pendulum god yes I think you want to say we could we can't know for sure or not unless you're a general a relativist and if you're a general relevance there's no way we could be on the head of a pen of some God you know why because we don't all believe that we're on the head of a pen of some God so how could it be true how can it be true if we don't all believe it well if you're a general relativist it can't so as soon as your friend says we can all be on the head of a pen of some God and then turns right around and says that's why I'm a general relativist rocks and trees exist because we say they exist if rocks and trees exist because we say they exist basically your friend is saying we can't be on the head of a pound of Sanko we can't be wrong we don't perceive ourselves to be on the head of a pen of sun god so it can't be true which brings me to another kind of argument here if general relevance was correct then not only could we not be wrong about the shape of the earth we can't be wrong about anything as long as we all believe it we can't be wrong about any claim that we all believe so whether its electrons exist there are rocks and trees the earth is spherical whatever claim you want to put in there water is h2o if general relativism is true we can't be mistaken about anything because if we believe it that's the same thing as it being true but of course it's not the case that we can't be mistaken about the world around us in general forget just the shape of the earth we could be wrong about everything we could be on the head of a pen of some God but you have to be a general absolutist to say that that we could be on the head of the constant God the world could be a grand illusion not if you're a general relativist your general relativist our perceptions are the reality so how could reality be a grand illusion how could we be wrong about it I remember again dinner etiquette how could we be wrong about dinner etiquette if dinner etiquette is just whatever we say it is well we can't be wrong about dinner etiquette in a certain kind of way so again dinner etiquette is one kind of case but the earth and electrons and rocks and trees well that's just another so we've got several kinds markets here general realm is incorrect and then 600 ad s1 was true but it's not the case quite that in 600 and 600 BC sorry it's not the case quite that in 600 BC s1 was true so it's not the case of general incorrect if general ism is correct then if we all died tomorrow there would be no facts about the shape of the earth there would be no truth about electrons nor would there be any falsity but it's not the case that those that those things could happen that those things could be the case if we all died tomorrow it's not going to change anything presumably about that truth of any particular statement about the world and then if general relevance is correct and before we started having perceptions before we got here nothing could have been true and nothing could have been false that doesn't seem quite right and now I've just said if general relevant is correct then we couldn't be mistaken about the shape of the earth but of course we could be mistaken about Shifu general Rome is one is correct and we couldn't be mistaken about anything as long as we all believed it but of course we could be mistaken about something even though we all believe it water just might not be h2o we might find that we get a closer look at it and it's just not the constitution of water the fact that we all believe something just doesn't have anything necessarily to do with it being true there's one last one that's a little more subtle but sort of devastating again you could lure your friend in you go okay well let me see if I understand you correctly then I guess one thing is for sure right we don't know everything again you're not you're gonna lure your friend in they're gonna go do we really have to say that out loud yeah we don't know everything but then you're gonna go to the chin and look up at the ceiling and be polite you're you ah I must have misunderstood you because how could we not know everything if general relevant is true what does it mean to say we don't know everything it means there's some statement that's true and we haven't yet discovered its truth in other words there's some statement that's true and we don't yet believe it but how could something be true if we don't believe it when general relativism is the claim that for something to be true just is for us to believe it so look who's being arrogant now I mean your friend thought they were all about humility look what they're gonna get stuck saying we can't be wrong about anything as long as we all believe it and secondly we know everything there's no true statement that we don't believe I'm pretty sure your friend didn't think they were going to end up saying that and I think once you get there right they're gonna realize they're standing in a puddle of blood you've sliced them up and probably they're gonna want to talk about something else at this point so when you make general relativism precise you realize that though some good ideas might be lurking in and around the discussion of what your friend was calling general relativism the actual claim of general relativism it's not about being humble when you say we could be wrong oh no you can't be wrong if general realism is true when you get the when you get the claim very clear we should be humble but that's general absolutist time we could be wrong but that's general absolutist on when you get this claim very clear you realize that it's some very there's a very devastating sort of set of arguments that all have this same form and I've got them all written out there but let me pause and come back in a separate video and say a bit more about this but now four sentences like these we've got some pretty devastating arguments against general relativism I'm going to change the sentences up a little bit and I think it's going to get a little bit harder but it shouldn't let me show you what I mean when I come back okay