In other words: "Walk your talk" -- I like this expression.
>I read the web pages to which Eric pointed, adn a couple others on
>E-Prime, and intended to present here an E-Prime translation of the
>paragraph in question. But I have been working on it with some
>dedication, and confess myself stymied. I don't know whether this is a
>failure in 1.) my personal understanding of the E-Prime mindset, 2.) the
>logic of the paragraph in question, or 3.) the concept of E-Prime itself.
>But whatever it is, I'm getting nowhere. Every time I think I've gotten
>it, I find another "be" form in the middle of my reframed concept.
Good scientific approach, Eva. It prompts me to formulate a hypothesis (or
a PCR falsifiable statement): E-Prime is designed to weaken our confidence
in our basic tool for survival: our mind. It undermines our sense of
reality and existence. If anything only "appears to be" rather than "is"
than of course we are helpless and vulnerable to the MAIDS virus.
[...]
>I don't, however, debate the usefulness of questioning "is" usages when
>disagreements and misunderstandings arise.
Questioning never hurts, especially in statements like "such-and-such is"
(an Objectivist, Buddhist, idiot, etc.) but in definitions "is" is the
simplest way of expressing what we think (it also "appears" to be so,
although "appears" appears to be a longer word).
>Eva
>
>
who -- this time only -- isn't...
Regards, Tadeusz (Tad) Niwinski from planet TeTa
tad@teta.ai http://www.teta.ai (604) 985-4159