Respond to my post please.
It means that he cannot assumed to either be brave or not brave, because we do not know the nature of him.
He may be apparently one or the other, depending on the circumstances, but we do not know whether he is brave unless he actually is brave or not.
it is saying he is brave and not brave at the same time
thus it is a contradiction ie ends in meaninglessness
That depends on how you define ‘time’ Colin Leslie Dean.
Because there are no singular points in time (outside of conjecture), there can be no contradiction.
And besides, you didn’t say “at the same time” at first.
Ok, Unreasonable showed you a meaning. To him it means something. To you it does not. Either way it has meaning because Unreasonable found meaning in it.
Lmao! I am honestly amazed at the way you see only what supports your ideas. You look at what I say and pull out like a fragment of my idea and take it out. The overall message just flys right by. why are we on this website if not to learn from each other? I mean, we can all get caught up in our own ideas but jeez.
Lmao! I am honestly amazed at the way you see only what supports your ideas. You look at what I say and pull out like a fragment of my idea and take it out. The overall message just flys right by. why are we on this website if not to learn from each other? I mean, we can all get caught up in our own ideas but jeez.
A contradiction shows you where you have made a logical fault. To me, that means that I should recheck my logic. So I have just proven that all contradictions do in fact, have meaning. 
Therefor, contradictions do not equal meaninglessness because all contradictions have meaning.
then i will make it clearer for you
he is brave and he is not brave’ at the same time
contradiction
ie ends in meaninglessness nonsense
No it’s not meaninless, because I’ve just proven that it has meaning.
Checkmate, biatch. 
so what is the meaning of
he is brave and he is not brave’ at the same time
It means I have to recheck my logic, as I’ve stated earlier. Very simple.
Hold on…
If he is “brave and not brave at the same time”, then why do you say that he is and is not?
Are you making a point? Because, I have never heard such a thing uttered in “real life”. Perhaps it is a meaningless statement insofar as it has never happened and never will happen. Then, according to you, hypothetical situations are contradictory and meaningless to which I would agree with, because hypothetical situations are not “real”. They don’t exist except in your imagination, but that does not make the actual situations ‘contradictory’ or ‘meaningless’. If you agree with that, then you are misusing the concepts in an abstract way that does not actually make a point. Is he brave? Is he not brave? Who is he? Tell me and I will tell you if he is brave or not.
There just may be an instance or moment (in time) where a particular man is both brave and not brave at the same time. Perhaps you or I have just not seen it as of yet? It depends on the definitions, and especially, the (actual) contexts of any situation whether they be hypothetical or not.
If this is all true, then you may as well say this:
A man is brave and not brave at the same time, and this is contradictory and meaningless because this man does not exist.
It was meant to show that a contradiction is meaningless. (But you already know that is not the case.)
Edit: Hah! It does have meaning!
That’s true. The example discussed is merely an extension of such a possible meaning, whether it be contradictory or not.
So from this thread, this is what I’ve gathered.
Contradiction does not equal Meaninglessness
Universely, everything is meaningless. Subjectively, nothing is meaningless.
How did you come to this conclusion?
I’m interested to hear it!
you have to check your logivc as the statement is nonsense ie ends in meaninglessness
i asked for the meaning of a statement which is a contradiction
not
the meaning of contradictions