Makes sense, thanks for explaining. I think when I wrote that, I meant to gesture more at “people will adopt useful-to-them versions of ideas even if those versions aren’t totally truthful”, though of course it does also imply that the uncorrupted version has truth value.
Ah. I didn’t think I was saying anything about its potential one way or the other, only about the mechanics of how it seems to get interpreted.
I was mainly going of off this, the perceived implication being that there is a widely-applicable truth value in the uncorrupted idea.
Makes sense, thanks for explaining. I think when I wrote that, I meant to gesture more at “people will adopt useful-to-them versions of ideas even if those versions aren’t totally truthful”, though of course it does also imply that the uncorrupted version has truth value.