| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"The other guy" |
| Date: |
06 Apr 2004 01:24:09 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Agnostics vs. Atheists & religionists |
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 11:32:35 -0500, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote:
It also includes "1a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God
or gods" which includes people who simply don't believe in gods.
If someone does not believe in the existence of gods then they believe that
gods do not exist. The change in the position of the word "not" is known as
raising in English grammar. The meaning of the sentence stays the same.
See http://www.bartleby.com/68/65/4965.html for more details. I posted this
last time. Why did you cut and ignore it? It proves my point completely.
Your reference does _not_ say the sentences mean the same thing. It
merely says both are gramatically correct.
.
|
|
| User: "Editor of EvilBible.com" |
|
| Title: Re: Agnostics vs. Atheists & religionists |
06 Apr 2004 02:57:19 PM |
|
|
"The other guy" <xyzzy@plugh.cav> wrote in message
news:abt570dsc709p0pca41r3e5iglqbplvv1q@4ax.com...
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004 11:32:35 -0500, "Editor of EvilBible.com"
<Dont_Reply@Here.com> wrote:
It also includes "1a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God
or gods" which includes people who simply don't believe in gods.
If someone does not believe in the existence of gods then they believe
that
gods do not exist. The change in the position of the word "not" is known
as
raising in English grammar. The meaning of the sentence stays the same.
See http://www.bartleby.com/68/65/4965.html for more details. I posted
this
last time. Why did you cut and ignore it? It proves my point
completely.
Your reference does _not_ say the sentences mean the same thing. It
merely says both are gramatically correct.
It doesn't say it explicitly, but it very clearly says it implicitly.
RAISING
Contrary to what you might expect, raising has nothing to do with
"higher" or "better" language-quite the reverse, according to some. It is
the technical name for the location of the negative in this sentence: I don'
t think he's very helpful. The version some people urge as logically better
is I think he's not very helpful, but for most of us that has a more Formal
ring. There is absolutely nothing wrong with either version; the grammar of
each is Standard: choose the tone you seek. Raising simply shifts the
negative from the subordinate clause where it logically belongs to the main
clause, especially when the main clause's verb is suppose, think, believe,
seem, or the like. Those who oppose raising argue that statements such as I
don't think are illogical-but so is much in Standard English. See DON'T
THINK.
http://www.bartleby.com/68/65/4965.html
Don't Think
as in I don't think it's raining, is fine in conversation, although purists
often criticize it for being illogical. You did think, the objector notes;
the negative belongs with the raining, not with the thinking; that is, I
think it is not raining. But idioms don't have to be logical, and (I) don't
think is a Standard Conversational idiom, widely accepted in all but the
most Formal writing as well.
http://www.bartleby.com/68/91/1991.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
