|
|
#113
10-14-2005, 08:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Sayings that people totally butcher.....
[ QUOTE ]
Purposely. [/ QUOTE ] how do people butcher this? 
|
|
#114
10-14-2005, 08:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sayings that people totally butcher.....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] "This year's budget deficit is half a trillion dollars. This begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" [/ QUOTE ] I'm not seeing the problem. [/ QUOTE ] that makes no sense. the phrase 'begs the question' refers to something being granted as true when it might not be. "OOT should kick all of the retarded posters in the nuts."....the information granted as true that may not be is that all OOT posters have nuts...so it begs the question.. Done.
|
|
#115
10-14-2005, 08:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sayings that people totally butcher.....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] "This year's budget deficit is half a trillion dollars. This begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" [/ QUOTE ] I'm not seeing the problem. [/ QUOTE ] that makes no sense. the phrase 'begs the question' refers to something being granted as true when it might not be. "OOT should kick all of the retarded posters in the nuts."....the information granted as true that may not be is that all OOT posters have nuts...so it begs the question.. Done. [/ QUOTE ] This still isn't even entirely accurate. The phrase is used in logical arguments - an argument that "begs the question" actually assumes, in and of itself, that what it is actually arguing for for is true. In other words, you use your original point as proof of your point. A more accurate example using your idea would be "OOT posters have no nuts, so you cannot kick them in the nuts" - this statement truly begs the question, because you have to assume the first part is true in order to know the second part is true. It is a sort of circular logic. Maybe this isn't a great example, but I was trying to use your same thought.
|
|
#116
10-14-2005, 08:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sayings that people totally butcher.....
[ QUOTE ]
that makes no sense. the phrase 'begs the question' refers to something being granted as true when it might not be. "OOT should kick all of the retarded posters in the nuts."....the information granted as true that may not be is that all OOT posters have nuts...so it begs the question.. [/ QUOTE ] Your explanation doesn't make any sense to me. I've always understood that when something 'begs the question', that something induces one to ask a followup question. So I turn to google. This is what I found. It's not completely clear either. It sounds like my understanding of the phrase is common, but more colloquical than correct? I think? "What is the origin of "begs the question"? (Phrase origins) It's said that beggars can't be choosers, although some people would like a few options when using a common expression featuring the word "beg." The origin of begs the question is "petitio principii" - Latin for "laying claim to a principle." It describes an argument that is false because it relies on a conclusion that is assumed but not proven. Over time, "begs" has also come to mean "poses" or "addresses" the question. To highlight some people's unhappiness with this trend, the Canadian Oxford devotes several paragraphs to what it clearly identifies as an expanded but "disputed" definition. The lexicographers resist weighing in with a ruling - unsurprising, since dictionaries prefer description to proscription nowadays. But the 1997 Oxford Guide to Canadian English Usage doesn't hesitate to offer advice: "In Canadian newspapers, 'begs the question' almost always means 'raises the question' or 'brings up the issue.' Although this usage is very common, it should probably be avoided because it is completely at odds with the formal meaning of the expression and constantly criticized by commentators." Several news organizations, including the Canadian Press and Globe and Mail, have also told their journalists to stick with the original meaning. The CBC has published style guides over the years with similar recommendations, and columnist Martin O'Malley sent a reminder to the corporation's online news staff recently, along with some practical advice: "Since we seldom use 'begs' this way, many assume it means 'demands that a question be asked.' It does not. Best to avoid the phrase or risk embarrassment."
|
|
#117
10-14-2005, 08:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sayings that people totally butcher.....
Here's one I never heard anyone else use, other than a former co-worker.
He would say "relative to" when he meant "relevant to". "I just found out something relative to the discussion we had earlier."
|
|
#118
10-14-2005, 08:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sayings that people totally butcher.....
[ QUOTE ]
This still isn't even entirely accurate. The phrase is used in logical arguments - an argument that "begs the question" actually assumes, in and of itself, that what it is actually arguing for for is true. In other words, you use your original point as proof of your point. A more accurate example using your idea would be "OOT posters have no nuts, so you cannot kick them in the nuts" - this statement truly begs the question, because you have to assume the first part is true in order to know the second part is true. It is a sort of circular logic. Maybe this isn't a great example, but I was trying to use your same thought. [/ QUOTE ] I understand your post. I was simply trying to leave the argumentative aspect out of it. I figured my post would explain it to those who don't know what the phrase means. Many people think that an example of 'begging the question' just means that a statement makes you ask another question. In reality, most simply, 'begging the question' has to do with assuming, without proof, that some aspect of the statement is true. This is simply not true. As for the post that didn't understand what I was trying to say (not SlowPlayRay)....your misunderstanding is a result of the fac tthat you think 'begging the question' means it induces you to ask a question in a cause effect manner. That is the source of your confusion.
|
|
#119
10-14-2005, 08:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sayings that people totally butcher.....
Passage 1:
It has been said that 'Someone should round up all of OOT and kick them in the nuts'. This begs the question: Do the members of OOT even have nuts? Does everyone agree that this is a proper usage of the phrase? Passage 2: This year's budget deficit is half a trillion dollars. This begs the question: How are we ever going to balance the budget? They seem superficially similar to me. It seems like the dispute then, is not that a statement prompts a question. Both camps agree on this point. But, more specifically, what kind of question is prompted. Passage #2 is an example of any related or followup question question that could be prompted from the preceding statement. Passage #1 is an example where a specific kind of question is prompted - one that questions the validity of some pre-supposition made in the original statement. I can see how the latter usage could have evolved from the former, when compared this way. It's a fairly subtle difference.
|
|
#120
10-14-2005, 08:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Sayings that people totally butcher.....
[ QUOTE ]
Passage 1: It has been said that 'Someone should round up all of OOT and kick them in the nuts'. This begs the question: Do the members of OOT even have nuts? Does everyone agree that this is a proper usage of the phrase? [/ QUOTE ] Noooooooo, this is EXACTLY how people use it improperly all the time! This was good advice: [ QUOTE ] Best to avoid the phrase or risk embarrassment. [/ QUOTE ] Just found this: wikipedia rules - read and learn!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
