> You cannot believe the view I will defend in this book. I therefore will not be able to convince you that this view is true.
Isn’t it necessary for then to try to “convince” you insofar as just stating a conclusion without supporting arguments is no different than stating an opinion?
Or put a different way, why would you ever desire to hear opinions without trying to understand them or establish their truth?
> You cannot believe the view I will defend in this book. I therefore will not be able to convince you that this view is true.
This appears as a concession that the truth about the topic cannot be determined. In which case, from a philosophical point of view, what’s the point?
That being said, I often prefer the presentation of “Here are some interesting things I’ve observed and thoughts I’ve had. Do what you will with them.”