On Sun, 2016-09-18 at 10:05 -0500, Nicholas Evans wrote:
> Being absurd doesn't generally make it untrue.
> If your line of reasoning is upheld, CFJs have no meaning because
> they do not refer to truth. If so, we have no conflict resolution
> system. I'm concerned that purposely breaking the conflict resolution
> system is not treating Agora Right Good Forever.

Really, (inquiry) CFJs have never really been about the verdict,
they've been about the reasoning given by the judge. Often it's
possible to judge the truth value of a CFJ's statement without solving
the underlying problem at all.

Proto: CFJs don't have verdicts at all, just a statement by the judge
which explains the relevant circumstances and removes as much
uncertainty as reasonably possible about the truth value of the CFJ's


Reply via email to