You are very aware of the ambiguity and its purpose. It is possible that if you were casually reading that passage you would be more affected by it than a statement without ambiguity.
Yes, and that’s exactly why I object to it. It’s not just “failing to be truth-tracking,” it’s specifically anti-epistemic.
I’m quite good at using ambiguity in conversation. I choose not to, because I don’t want to be dragging other people’s beliefs around in ways they haven’t consented to. It violates my ethics.
The membership of this forum largely agrees, which is why you’re getting downvotes (including from me) despite mostly saying true things.
Yes, and that’s exactly why I object to it. It’s not just “failing to be truth-tracking,” it’s specifically anti-epistemic.
I’m quite good at using ambiguity in conversation. I choose not to, because I don’t want to be dragging other people’s beliefs around in ways they haven’t consented to. It violates my ethics.
The membership of this forum largely agrees, which is why you’re getting downvotes (including from me) despite mostly saying true things.