On 31 Oct 2003, at 20:59, Jan Coffey wrote:
--- William T Goodall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 31 Oct 2003, at 17:29, Andrew Crystall wrote:
On 31 Oct 2003 at 15:19, William T Goodall wrote:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=religion
4. "A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion."
You realize that is a figurative usage as in 'baseball was his religion' and not actually about religion qua religion?
I don't accept that,
You don't accept that the use of the word "religion", or that the intent was
that use?
You don't accept that you are mistaken about this usage?
sorry.
But you are sorry - for what?
I'm perfectly willing to argue that many people in these days worship capitalism as a religion, quite seriously.
That would be a non sequitur.
No it isn't.
It is actually. First Andrew argued that the definition 'A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion' meant religion qua religion and was not a figurative usage of the word.
Then he said " I'm perfectly willing to argue that many people in these days worship capitalism as a religion, quite seriously."
Now it seems to me that for this to make any sense he must mean something other than "I'm perfectly willing to argue that many people in these days pursue capitalism with zeal, quite seriously."
But if he does mean something different than that, then he is using a different definition of religion than the one he used in the first paragraph.
Hence it is a non sequitur.
-- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/
One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs. -- Robert Firth
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
