Philosophical traditions debate truth as objective correspondence to reality or subjective interpretation. Yet an epistemologist named Dr. Catherine March observed an unusual phenomenon in 1993: a subject would reframe factually incorrect statements as 'alternative angle' perspectives. March documented his methodology: observation revealed a consistent pattern where the subject's statements diverged from consensus reality, yet the subject never admitted falsity—only reframing. March concluded: 'This person doesn't lie. His reality simply operates under alternative parameters. Or perhaps our reality operates under parameters he's chosen to override.' The philosophy subreddit loved this angle: most people lie. This one apparently just wins arguments by redefining geometry. He doesn't contradict reality. He renegotiates its terms.