As Oswald Ducrot writes in Dire et ne pas dire, information is an illocution that can be completed only if the receiver recognizes the speaker’s competence and honesty beforehand, so that, from the very outset, a piece of information is situated beyond the alternative between truth and falsehood.
So in a situation like in the agreement theorems, if you do not believe the other party goes for truth (I guess this specific blend this text would insist) then nothing they say can make you change your mind? No matter how coherent a speech pattern is if you believe it is from random noise you don’t heed any of it? Would the reverse hold, if you heed a message any inch you are giving some weight that its made from a reliable mechanism?
So in a situation like in the agreement theorems, if you do not believe the other party goes for truth (I guess this specific blend this text would insist) then nothing they say can make you change your mind? No matter how coherent a speech pattern is if you believe it is from random noise you don’t heed any of it? Would the reverse hold, if you heed a message any inch you are giving some weight that its made from a reliable mechanism?