Saw this in the guardian live feed, from trumps defence team:
‘ The president’s legal team said in its brief, “Insufficient evidence exists upon which a reasonable jurist could conclude that the 45th President’s statements were accurate or not, and he therefore denies they were false.”’
Any logicians out there? Or someone who can come up with an example to show the flaw in this argument?
If you cannot conclude that a statement is accurate, then it is not false.
Saw this in the guardian live feed, from trumps defence team:
‘ The president’s legal team said in its brief, “Insufficient evidence exists upon which a reasonable jurist could conclude that the 45th President’s statements were accurate or not, and he therefore denies they were false.”’
Any logicians out there? Or someone who can come up with an example to show the flaw in this argument?
If you cannot conclude that a statement is accurate, then it is not false.