HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Aug. 15, 2005 When an American writes articles on theology, religion, ethics, philosophy and politics, you would suppose that he is an individual of rarefied intelligence, possessed of an almost lawyer-like command of the English language. Only with such a linguistic tool at his disposal might he make the delicate distinctions and persuasive arguments that are the stock in trade of those who pretend to speak authoritatively on such topics. But to disabuse yourself of the notion that an amateur theologian-philosopher must necessarily be also a masterful writer, you need only visit useless-knowledge.com. There you can find such grammatical laggards as Dennis Siluk, Ken Hughes, and, last but not least, Tracey Stevens. If an American writer seems to find it exceedingly difficult to put his thoughts into intelligible English, it may be that his thoughts have not crystallized sufficiently. In other words, the writer’s opinions may be illogical and disjointed. Another possibility is that he never learned the rules of grammar that anyone who has advanced to the 10th or 11th grade ought to know thoroughly. So we might suppose that the writer is not ready to address such topics. In either case, we may safely conclude that his articles have little if any value. One cannot read a single article written by Tracey Stevens that does not simply abound in stylistic and grammatical blunders. I’m not trying to seize upon every little comma or typographical error as a pretext for criticizing Stevens’ articles. The fact is simply that I often have to read his sentences two or three times to figure out what he is trying to say. I selected a few of the dozens of awkward sentences in his articles to illustrate my point. In each case, I have rewritten his sentence in a more articulate style, though of course there is some latitude of choice in such proofreading. MUSINGS, July 26, 2006. The problem being with that reasoning is 2000 years ago; paper was expensive and not easy to come by. The problem with that line of reasoning is that 2000 years ago paper was scarce and expensive. They are similar enough to warrant eyewitness testimony but not so similar as to warrant collusion. They are similar enough to warrant concluding that they were eyewitness testimony rather than collusion. Sure, if it’s successful then life goes on but if the change isn't successful (when has there been a good mutation) then the species checks out. Sure, if the change is successful, then life goes on, but if not, the species disappears. MORALITY DOES NOT CHANGE...July 13, 2006. Reform is typically from the inside, reformers judge society and then if there is perceived problems, they campaign for change. Reform is typically from the inside. Reformers judge society, and if they perceive problems, they campaign for change. Doesn’t it break down to if you don’t conform to society’s standards, then we’re going to insure that your gene’s don’t get passed on? Doesn’t it reduce to a rule that, if you don’t conform to society’s standards, society will insure that your genes won’t be transmitted to posterity? THE ELEVEN CHAPTERS OF LIFE…May 4, 2006. Of course the other definition is to bequeath something at the time of death however I seriously doubt that this is what they are referring too. Of course the other definition of ‘to will’ is ‘to bequeath’. However, I doubt that is what they meant. THOSE THAT DON’T STUDY HISTORY…February 23, 2006 We quickly found out that North Vietnam wasn’t interested in a large scale decisive battle, figuring that would be a quick way to lose and turned it into a gorilla war. We soon found out that North Vietnam wasn’t interested in a large-scale, decisive battle, since they figured they would suffer a quick defeat. So they turned to guerrilla warfare instead. RAMBLING THOUGHTS…February 17, 2006-08-13 Prejudice is the act of pre judging something or someone although generally to feelings about members of a group. Prejudice, which is the act of prejudging people or things, is usually directed at members of groups. THE SLIPPERY SLOPE OF LIFE…January 13, 2006 I do know what its like to go out at 11:30 pm for ice cream, To come home and run out for Mexican food, to be on the receiving end of thosr hormonal surges, to have the house cold enough that penguins would be shivering and my wife to threaten my life is I so much as touch the thermostat. I do know what it’s like to go out at 11:30 PM for ice cream, to come home and run out for Mexican food, to be the victim of my wife’s hormonal surges, to have the house so cold that penguins would shiver, with my wife threatening my life if I even touch the thermostat. ------------ About the author Thomas Keyes: I have written two books: A SOJOURN IN ASIA (non-fiction) and A TALE OF UNG (fiction), neither published so far. I have studied languages for years and traveled extensively on five continents. Email: udikeyes@yahoo.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
