4 ms·

The only difference in meaning I see in those two statements is the original is more strongly worded (ie, less room for interpretation). The second statement d

The only difference in meaning I see in those two statements is the original is more strongly worded (ie, less room for interpretation). The second statement doesn't imply how badly the community is missed, the first explicitly states it's the most missed thing. "most non-believers" also implies a smaller percentage of the group than simply saying "non-believers". No one would say "christians believe dancing is immoral", but they would say "christians believe in God". The reason is the implication is wrong. There are denominations to that do believe dancing is immoral, but it would be more accurate to say "some", or "many". Whereas the second sentence would be considered more accurate since you would probably be hard pressed to find a christian who didn't believe in God. The short and sweet of it is that if he didn't mean to imply most non-believers than he should probably clarify that because the language, as is, very strongly implies it.

dragonwriter 11y ago
> The only difference in meaning I see in those two statements is the original is more strongly worded (ie, less room for interpretation). The former claims that (some) non-believers claim to miss community the most (of all the things they miss about religion.) The latter claims that most non-believers claim to miss community. They aren't similar but of different strength, they are fundamentally different. One is a claim about how much (relative other missed things) community is missed by an unspecified subset of nonbelievers, the other is a claim about how frequently (without reference to relative placement) community is missed by nonbelievers. I'd say that, if anything, the latter is the stronger claim, in that former is true if any of the many millions of nonbelievers misses community more than they miss any other aspect of religion, while latter is only true if an absolute majority of nonbeliever miss the community of religion at least some amount.
- mreiland 11y ago
  You won't find many unbiased native english speakers who agree that the (some) is the implication there. It's just not how the language is used in every day speech for exactly the reasons I outlined previously. At this point there's no reason to continue with this conversation. The basis of your argument is flawed, but you're not likely to see it, and I'm not likely to give you any leeway with respect to the (some) interpretation. So lets stop here.
  - dllthomas 11y ago
    As a native English speaker, I very much read it as an implicit "some", for whatever that's worth. I don't know whether I'm unbiased - I'm not sure what positions/beliefs would be expected to bias me... I understand us to be discussing the phrase, "One thing non-believers report missing the most is a community." I would paraphrase, "If you survey non-believers, asking them what they miss most, one thing that shows up is community." I would include a pragmatic expectation that it shows up a non-negligible portion of the time, or else we shouldn't be bothering to mention it; but certainly no expectation that it be a majority or even plurality.

dragonwriter 11y ago

> The only difference in meaning I see in those two statements is the original is more strongly worded (ie, less room for interpretation). The former claims that (some) non-believers claim to miss community the most (of all the things they miss about religion.) The latter claims that most non-believers claim to miss community. They aren't similar but of different strength, they are fundamentally different. One is a claim about how much (relative other missed things) community is missed by an unspecified subset of nonbelievers, the other is a claim about how frequently (without reference to relative placement) community is missed by nonbelievers. I'd say that, if anything, the latter is the stronger claim, in that former is true if any of the many millions of nonbelievers misses community more than they miss any other aspect of religion, while latter is only true if an absolute majority of nonbeliever miss the community of religion at least some amount.

mreiland 11y ago
You won't find many unbiased native english speakers who agree that the (some) is the implication there. It's just not how the language is used in every day speech for exactly the reasons I outlined previously. At this point there's no reason to continue with this conversation. The basis of your argument is flawed, but you're not likely to see it, and I'm not likely to give you any leeway with respect to the (some) interpretation. So lets stop here.
- dllthomas 11y ago
  As a native English speaker, I very much read it as an implicit "some", for whatever that's worth. I don't know whether I'm unbiased - I'm not sure what positions/beliefs would be expected to bias me... I understand us to be discussing the phrase, "One thing non-believers report missing the most is a community." I would paraphrase, "If you survey non-believers, asking them what they miss most, one thing that shows up is community." I would include a pragmatic expectation that it shows up a non-negligible portion of the time, or else we shouldn't be bothering to mention it; but certainly no expectation that it be a majority or even plurality.