The default position...

[Willamena]

I'm obliged to ignore comments from you then. Goodbye.

As you wish.

(Talk about closed minded.)

 

[Curious George]

George, the double negative in question cancels out. I'm bored with the double negative game George, I have better things to do.

That is funny, I am pretty sure that proof I gave you shows that it doesn't. Do you have a proof to show that it does?

 

[Bunyip]

That is funny, I am pretty sure that proof I gave you shows that it doesn't. Do you have a proof to show that it does?

Sorry George, not interested. I do not think you are trying to communicate honestly. I addressed your 'proof' several times, you ignore whatever I say and just repeat yourself. It is not as amusing a tactic as you appear to think.
Re - read my prior rebuttals to your 'proof', I do not care to write it out again for no apparent reason.

Willamena seems to enjoy the obfuscation, double/triple/quadruple negative and repetition game as much as you do - why not persue it with her? You can ignore each other and repeat yourselves, whilst pretending not to understand whatever each other says to your hearts content.

 

[Willamena]

Willamena seems to enjoy the obfuscation...

For the record, clarification, but I can see how it might be obfuscated for some.

 

[Curious George]

Sorry George, not interested. I do not think you are trying to communicate honestly. I addressed your 'proof' several times, you ignore whatever I say and just repeat yourself. It is not as amusing a tactic as you appear to think.
Re - read my prior rebuttals to your 'proof', I do not care to write it out again for no apparent reason.

Willamena seems to enjoy the obfuscation, double/triple/quadruple negative and repetition game as much as you do - why not persue it with her? You can ignore each other and repeat yourselves, whilst pretending not to understand whatever each other says to your hearts content.

Your rebuttals?

You simply said that I used poor English and the double negative cancels out. No reasoning why the double negative cancels out. Just the assertion that what I really meant when saying "does not believe that God does not exist" equals "believes god exists."

Give me a post number where you believe you said otherwise.

 

[Bunyip]

Your rebuttals?

You simply said that I used poor English and the double negative cancels out. No reasoning why the double negative cancels out. Just the assertion that what I really meant when saying "does not believe that God does not exist" equals "believes god exists."

Give me a post number where you believe you said otherwise.

I can't be bothered explaining why double negatives cancel out George. I referred you to the wiki page on double negatives.

 

[Willamena]

I can't be bothered explaining why double negatives cancel out George. I referred you to the wiki page on double negatives.

Next you'll be denying the negative embedded the positive?

One consequence of the formal markedness asymmetry is that a negative statement embeds its affirmative counterpart within it; when Nixon famously insisted “I am not a crook” or Clinton “I did not have sex with that woman”, the concealed affirmation was more significant than the surface denial. The same asymmetry is exploited in non-denial denials, such as Republican campaign operative Mary Matalin’s disingenuous protest “We’ve never said to the press that Clinton’s a philandering, pot-smoking draft-dodger” (see also Giora 2007 on psycholinguistic evidence for the persistence of negated material). Negation > Notes (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

[Curious George]

I can't be bothered explaining why double negatives cancel out George. I referred you to the wiki page on double negatives.

Are you suggesting all double negatives cancel out? I have said they do not. I have asserted both the t.v. example and the belief of God example of double negatives that do not cancel. If you think all double negatives cancel out I will gladly find you sources that address this, since you are only willing to assume my logic is ignoring you.

 

[Bunyip]

Next you'll be denying the negative embedded the positive?

LOL, that is what you are doing Willa. Which is why this is boring me to tears.

 

[Willamena]

LOL, that is what you are doing Willa. Which is why this is boring me to tears.

Well, in deference to your feelings, I'll stop making logical arguments.

 

[Bunyip]

Are you suggesting all double negatives cancel out? I have said they do not. I have asserted both the t.v. example and the belief of God example of double negatives that do not cancel.

For the second time - no I am not, I am (caps added because I have already said this) referring to a SPECIFIC COMMENT containing a double negative.

If you think all double negatives cancel out I will gladly find you sources that address this, since you are only willing to assume my logic is ignoring you.

You ignore my direct responses - I have already said that I was referring to a specific example of a double negative, not a general case. You are not being honest.

However amusing you think it is to ignore my responses, and then pretend that I have not responded - it is increasingly less amusing to me George.
I find your 'humour' equates to rudeness.

 

[Bunyip]

Well, in deference to your feelings, I'll stop making logical arguments.

You mean 'START making logical arguments' I hope.

 

[Willamena]

You mean 'START making logical arguments' I hope.

Well, logic is relative.

 

[Curious George]

For the second time - no I am not, I am (caps added because I have already said this) referring to a SPECIFIC COMMENT containing a double negative. You ignore my direct responses - I have already said that I was referring to a specific example of a double negative, not a general case. You are not being honest.

However amusing you think it is to ignore my responses, and then pretend that I have not responded - it is increasingly less amusing to me George.
I find your 'humour' equates to rudeness.

Okay, now why do you think this example does cancel out, while clearly acknowledging some do not?

 

[Bunyip]

Okay, now why do you think this example does cancel out, while clearly acknowledging some do not?

I answered to that in post 906#
This is a debate thread, maybe continue posting on a joke thread George?

 

[Curious George]

For the second time - no I am not, I am (caps added because I have already said this) referring to a SPECIFIC COMMENT containing a double negative. You ignore my direct responses - I have already said that I was referring to a specific example of a double negative, not a general case. You are not being honest.

However amusing you think it is to ignore my responses, and then pretend that I have not responded - it is increasingly less amusing to me George.
I find your 'humour' equates to rudeness.

Further I would point out that the negations were in separate clauses.

 

[Curious George]

This is a debate thread, maybe continue posting on a joke thread George?

Lol, it is getting more and more apparent that you have no reasoning. You asked for me to explain why the two statement were not equal. I have done such. I ask you to explain why you believe I have not done this and you say that the double negatives cancel out. Nothing on your wiki page nor any grammar page refute what I have said.

But instead of clearly showing how the negatives "cancel out" in the instance I have used, you direct me to read grammar pages, and insist that I am obfuscating. Yet I have given reasons, and you have not. So who is dodging what?

 

[ArtieE]

Belief and disbelief are facts that are opposites. In negating them both, one is left in a position.

i.e. A conscious person can never not be left in a position.

I can't figure out what this is supposed to mean. Can you explain the same using different words?

 

[ArtieE]

As I said, rather than write - 'doesn't believe God does not exist'', just edit out the double negative and write it as 'believes God exists'. That will save you a lot of confusion.

And would simply ignore all the people who sit on the fence and don't want to say they believe God exists or say they believe God doesn't exist because they think they lack enough evidence to make a decision either way. Fence-sitters apparently don't exist in your world Bunyip.

 

[ArtieE]

Atheist: the person who does not believe god does not exist.

Doesn't work for me.

Weak atheist: A person who does not believe god exists and does not believe god doesn't exist including all fence-sitters.
Strong atheist: A person who does not believe god exists and believes god doesn't exist. A person who has jumped off the fence.
Theist: A person who believes god(s) exist and has jumped off the fence to the opposite side of the strong atheist.

You don't even need to know there is a fence or know about the two ways to jump in order to not be a theist or strong atheist.