A good deal of political dialogue today depends on whether one affirms:
1) Senior Bush administration officials made false statements about weapons of mass distruction in Iraq.
2) Senior Bush administration officials lied about weapons of mass destruntion in Iraq.
Folk psychology would explain this difference by saying that in 2, but not 1, affirms that senior Bush officials believed these statements were false when they made them. How would an eliminative materialist explain the difference?
This is the Wikipedia entry for eliminativism