Once Trump's dementia becomes undeniable, will his followers always be proud to repeat all that he has said as truth of the gospel?

Update:
More evidence, almost a year ago, from his rally in Montana:
"I've beaten more records from Elton John, he seems to have a lot of records. And I, by the way, do not have a musical instrument. I do not have a guitar or organ. …

Update 2:
No organ. Elton has an organ. And many other people who help. No, we broke a lot of records. We broke almost all the records. Because you know, look, I only need this space. They need a lot more room. For basketball, hockey and all sports, they need a lot of space. We do not need it. We have people …
show more
No organ. Elton has an organ. And many other people who help. No, we broke a lot of records. We broke almost all the records. Because you know, look, I only need this space. They need a lot more room. For basketball, hockey and all sports, they need a lot of space. We do not need it. We have people in this space. So, we beat all those records.
Update 3:
Really we do it without, like, musical instruments. This is the only musical: the mouth. And I hope that the brain is attached to the mouth. Right? The brain, more important than the mouth, is the brain. The brain is much more important. "
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-goes-o …

Update 4:
Lol. Nobody needs to get close to the mainstream media, or to be a sheep any, to see that something is wrong here! I maintain that sheep are those who swallow all that Trump says as truth of the gospel!



19 Answers
19

.

Is it a tautology or not? According to my truth table this is not

if[(Q[(Q[(q[(q<->p)<->s]is a tautology and p-> s is contingent, should q-> s) be contingent?

Since I can not get[(Q[(Q[(q[(q<->p)<->s]to be a tautology, I do not know how to proceed.

What do you think?

NutritionLess realizes the truth from fiction or myths from truths.


  1. sujj ghtn

    sujj ghtn
    New member


    joined:
    Today & # 39; hui
    posts:
    1
    I like receipts:
    0
    Trophy points:
    1
    Sex:
    Male

    NutritionLess is not real, any man can easily benefit from three inches in more than a week. Similarly, it is no longer appropriate for the enzyme to be increased by 5 inches, regardless of age, or for ordinary masturbation to increase the duration and width of the ball. Another myth is that weightlifting decreases the size of the enzyme. The reality: dietary supplements intended for the natural improvement of man are very effective. But wait! These natural supplements give you an extra amount of rules and contours while having an enzymatic action. Take note: "During sex". The quality male natural enhancement merchandise incorporates herbal components that maximize your libido. This enzothrust libido will be, in

dnd 5th – What magic of truth detection (excluding the truth zone) does a Ring of Mind Shielding protect?

arguably, understand languages and languages

The ring confers immunity to the magic that "allows other creatures … to determine if you lie. No, you'll notice, magic that determines if you are lyingbut a magic that would allow another creature to come to such a conclusion.

So, if I do not speak your language and you use a spell to understand my speech, and I'm obviously lying to you (you say I'm a bad liar and I contradict myself), magic allows you to determine that I am lying, because otherwise you do not know what I'm saying. Therefore, I am immune to magic and you can not understand my speech as long as I wear the ring.

Note that immunity must apply even when I am not lying, otherwise the spell would still allow you to determine that I am lying because your translation is no longer working.

We can say that any type of magic

"Prof. Moody": Hello class! I am Professor Moody! Constant vigilance! Today we are going to learn summon a bigger demon for legitimate educational reasons.

Hermione: Locate the creature Professor Moody!

If the imposter wears a Ring of Mind shield, the magic should be unable to confirm or disprove his claim to be Professor Moody, as this would allow Hermione to determine that he is lying . In reality no sounding the magic can corroborate any truth statement, true or false, that he has made. Or could do in the future. It emits a cone of insoluble light in both directions.

And now things are going off the rails

Alice: Hey, is this a Ring of Mind Shielding?

Bob: no

Alice: throws identify

Yes identify works, so he will confirm that Bob is lying. Yes identify does not work, then also reveals that Bob is lying.

The possible solutions to the paradox are:

  • Many other magical objects do not resist being identified. This is not therefore in itself a solid proof that it is a shield of spirit.
  • The magic of divination is usually unable to determine if something is a protective shield in spirit. No ring needs to be present for this to happen. the abstract category of Rings of Mind Shielding resists magic.
  • Identify It will work very well, but Alice will be strangely unable to conclude that Bob is lying or lying. She may forget what he said, or assume that he does not know what the ring has done, or will simply never be able to assemble both facts.
  • The ring will prevent Bob from answering the question in the first place, so that he can neither lie nor tell the truth.
  • Or all this line of reasoning is false and this magic immunity conferred by the Ring protects only against the magic detecting the lies, if there are any, that there is not yet in no published source. (With the exception of detect thoughts, which is already blocked by the other effects of the Ring.)

I think the last of them is probably the intended function of the item, but it is the least fun option.

dnd 5e – What "anti-lie detection" features actually affect the Truth Zone?

D & D 5th has a handful of spells and features designed to protect the user from the magic of lying detection. The examples I am aware of are the glibness spell and subclass of Soul of Deceit of Brain Thief. More precisely, glibness said:

[…] No matter what you say, the magic that determines if you tell the truth indicates that you are truthful.

Soul of Deceit provides the same functionality, but goes one step further:

[…] whatever you say, the magic that would determine if you tell the truth indicates that you are truthful if you wish, and you can not be forced to tell the truth by magic.

At first glance, these "anti-lie detector" features seem designed to defeat Truth zone. I certainly thought so when I wrote this answer. However, as rightly pointed out the comments on this answer, Truth zone is not precisely a lie detection spell, and the precise interaction between this spell and these features is unclear. I will read the entire spell carefully because all of this could be important:

You create a magic zone that protects against deception in a sphere of 15 feet radius centered on a point of your choice within range. Until the spell ends, a creature that enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn or starts his turn must make a save charisma roll. On a failed save, a creature can not deliberately lie in the ray. You know if each creature succeeds or fails their save throw.

An affected creature is aware of the spell and can avoid answering questions that it would normally answer with a lie. Such a creature can be evasive in its responses as long as it remains within the bounds of truth.

In short, a failed backup has the following consequences:

  1. Affected creature can not lie
  2. The affected creature is aware of the compulsion
  3. The caster knows that the creature failed during its backup.

while a successful backup only alerts the caster that the backup has been passed. It is important to note that each creature in the spell's area makes this save roll even if it is immune to all effects of the spell.

The problem is that Truth zone does not tell the caster directly whether the affected creature is lying or not. It tells the caster if the creature failed its save throw against the spell. So, despite the spell's name, it's unclear whether it's "a magic that would determine if you're telling the truth". The additional clause of Soul of Deceit clearly seems to have to overcome the compulsion of the spell against the lie, but beyond that, it is difficult to know what other effects, either Soul of Deceit or glibness protect against.

So, assuming the creature fails its save roll and is affected, how far glibness or Soul of Deceit protects the affected creature from the effects of Truth zone? Specifically, does either of these means allow the affected creature to tell a deliberate lie, and if so, what information does the caster Truth zone receive when they do it, and how do they differ from the information that the caster would receive if the affected creature did not have the effect of protecting them?

Note that I do not ask about the affected creature's ability to be elusive or avoid answering a question as described in the last paragraph of Truth zone. Being evasive is always allowed by fate. Suppose the affected creature wants / must tell a deliberate lie.

dnd 5th – How does the antimagic field spell affect the truth zone's ability to know if a target has succeeded or not?

The wise Alice launches Antimagic Field on herself at the corner of Paladin Bob. Bob, not realizing this, goes around the corner and throws Zone of Truth over an area containing Alice.

Obviously, the effects of the Truth Zone are hanging around Alice, so she does not make any save rolls against the spell.

However, Truth Zone contains the following clause:

You know if each creature succeeds or fails their save throw.

What does Bob know about Alice 's success or failure of the coup de grace that she' s never done? Does he "know" that she "succeeded"? Or does he know anything, and so does he know that something has gone wrong with the fate due to his blatant lack of knowledge about Alice's backup?

dnd 5th – How can the Truth Zone spell be defeated without the knowledge of the caster?

Mechanically, Truth zone can be defeated only by high-level features

As you say, any attempt to resist or avoid the effects of Truth zone alert the launcher. And in the context of a loyalty test, avoiding the effect is synonymous with admitting disloyalty. The only exceptions to this rule are some high-level features: Mastermind Rogue's Soul of Deceit feature (as mentioned in Louis Wasserman's answer) destroys the truth-detection system and the level-8 spell. glibness provides a similar ability:

[…] No matter what you say, the magic that determines if you tell the truth indicates that you are truthful.

Note that while glibness causes Truth zone read what you say true, do not you necessarily protect against the obligation to tell the truth. If you intend to use it, you should first ask your deputy minister how it will work. Truth zone to avoid arguments when this actually happens. (On the other hand, Soul of Deceit says explicitly that you can not be forced to tell the truth by magic, so there is no ambiguity there.)

In any case, unless you have access to available features or spells around level 15-17, you will need to pass your Loyalty Test by saying what your character thinks is the truth.

Believe your lies

However, there is at least one small, hard-to-exploit loophole that requires no powerful capacity: Truth zone only prevents a creature from speaking a deliberate lie. If you manage to believe your lies, you will be able to say them while having the effect of Truth zone. For example, if the question of loyalty is something like "Are you loyal to the Empire?", Then you will be able to answer with a simple "yes," even if you plan to murder the person. Emperor, as long as you wish. really and honestly believed it would help the Empire. Obviously, it's a very circumventing the situation, but I want to emphasize that this is materially different from being evasive or "lying with the truth". This is a case where you give exactly the truthful answer expected of you, but for a completely different reason (praying that you will never be asked to specify this reason).

In practice, when you try to use this, you should probably expect reactions from your DM, asking you if your character really believe that. This "loophole" has a concentration on character rather than mechanics. Therefore, if you plan to do so, be prepared with a solid story to justify your honesty. And of course, be prepared to accept the fact that a slightly different question might reveal that your interpretation of loyalty differs from that of your interrogators. In the example above, you would not go well if you were asked instead "Are you loyal to the emperor?"

Unfortunately, I have no experience to share about using this "loophole" in a real game. I simply emphasize that this is the only loophole I can think of.

dnd 5e – How does the antimagic field affect the Truth Zone's ability to know if a target has succeeded or not?

The wise Alice launches Antimagic Field on herself at the corner of Paladin Bob. Bob, not realizing this, goes around the corner and throws Zone of Truth over an area containing Alice.

Obviously, the effects of the Truth Zone are hanging around Alice, so she does not make any save rolls against the spell.

However, Truth Zone contains the following clause:

You know if each creature succeeds or fails their save throw.

What does Bob know about Alice 's success or failure of the coup de grace that she' s never done? Does he "know" that she "succeeded"? Or does he know anything, and so does he know that something has gone wrong with the fate due to his blatant lack of knowledge about Alice's backup?

dnd 5th – How can Truth Zone be defeated without the caster knowing?

Mechanically, Truth zone is almost foolproof for loyalty testing

As you say, any attempt to resist or avoid the effects of Truth zone alert the launcher. And in the context of a loyalty test, avoiding the effect is synonymous with admitting disloyalty. To my knowledge, there is no way to avoid the effect of the spell without alerting the caster that you did it. So, if you want to pass the loyalty test, you will have to do it by saying what your character thinks is the truth.

Believe your lies

However, this leaves at least a small loophole difficult to exploit: Truth zone only prevents a creature from speaking a deliberate lie. If you manage to believe your lies, you will be able to say them while having the effect of Truth zone. For example, if the question of loyalty is something like "Are you loyal to the Empire?", Then you will be able to answer with a simple "yes," even if you plan to murder the person. Emperor, as long as you wish. really and honestly believed it would help the Empire. Obviously, it's a very circumventing the situation, but I want to emphasize that this is materially different from being evasive or "lying with the truth".

In practice, when you try to use this, you should probably expect reactions from your DM, asking you if your character really believe that. This "loophole" has a concentration on character rather than mechanics. Therefore, if you plan to do so, be prepared with a solid story to justify your honesty. And of course, be prepared to accept the fact that a slightly different question might reveal that your interpretation of loyalty differs from that of your interrogators. In the example above, you would not go well if you were asked instead "Are you loyal to the emperor?"

Unfortunately, I have no experience to share about using this "loophole" in a real game. I simply emphasize that this is the only loophole I can think of.

5th dnd – Can you force honesty by using Spell to Death and Truth Zone spells?

Speak with the dead target a corpse:

You give a semblance of life and intelligence to a dead body of your choice in the beach, allowing him to answer the questions you ask.

A corpse is not a creature, it is what remains after the death of the creature. And according to an unofficial Twitter Decision by Crawford, the corpse is actually an object.

Truth zone target only creatures:

Until the end of the spell, a creature who enters the area of ​​the spell for the
first time on a turn or starts his turn he has to make a charisma
saving throw.

So a corpse, even under the effects of talk with dead people would not be affected by that.

Another unofficial twitter decision by Crawford supports this for this exact combination of spells:

Truth Zone works on creatures. Speak with dead works on a spirit in a corpse – not a creature.

Even if, for whatever reason, you consider a corpse as a creature, it still does not force you to reveal information honestly. First, it only has an effect if the creature fails a charisma save (you will have to decide what it is because the corpse is no longer a creature and has no stats). Secondly, the corpse does not even have to try to answer the question effectively. There are many ways to be vague or cryptic while remaining technically truthful and thus obscure the information given to the PCs.

Of course, in the universe, there is not necessarily any reason for the body to automatically consider enemies of the PC and avoid giving them truthful answers. So, if you want them to avoid answering, make sure that they have a reason to do it.