Here is your post where you assert the subject of the OP is the truth of the Bible. That is not the case. The subject of that sentence is the speakers belief. This is why you are not arguing my points, but simply responding with generic undefended claims.
Here is the refutation. The OP asks 'what 'fact' is established by that statement?" The fact of the OP by definition of the term fact would be the Bible. Below is that relevant part of the definition of the word "fact": "Something believed to be true or real:" What is that something that is believed in the OP....? The Bible. The Bible is that something.
See my post above.. you are attempting to misrepresent what is being sought in the OP... which was the 'fact'.
The fact revealed by the sentence is that something is believed by the subject noun of the sentence, i.e., the "I". The Bible is not the subject of the sentence; it is the object. The "I" is the subject, and what is revealed is that something is believed by that "I", and not that what he believes is actually true or false. That grammar sure can come in handy.
No misrepresentation of any kind. The fact revealed by the OP sentence is that the speaker believes something to be true. No fact is revealed in the sentence as to whether what he believes is actually true, only that he believes it. Nothing more.
Your disregard for the definition of the word 'fact' is also telling. It is even more telling when you use a portion of the definition in your statement above.
The sentence does not address the issue as to whether the speaker is correct in his belief. It simply states that he believes. The sentence makes no claim as to the accuracy of the belief. If you think it does, try this. "I believe farts smell like roses." Does that mean farts smell like roses? Is his belief true? Is he right? It seems you would contend that would be the case, when of course it is not true. At least it is not true of mine. You would be wise not to argue grammar with someone who publishes regularly for money and has to be very familiar with the AP Style Guide and make sure that the work conforms to it.
By the way, we were both wrong here. The subject of the verb in the sentence was never the bible. The subject of the verb was the "I". The object of the verb was the bible. The bible doesn't "do" anything in that sentence. The "I" does the doing, doesn't it?
Then that is your belief. Who am I to question your belief? You still do not address the issue of the fact as requested by the OP. According to you, YES! To him, Yes! To him, Yes! Then prove to him that his belief is not true. Then your statement of fact above about the roses was an intentional misrepresentation as to what you believe. You publish also, huh. Cool. So do I. That is how I supplement my income.
All the "To Him"s show that there would be no fact statement about the smell of farts. It would be a subjective thing, and not an immutable truth, right? In other words, the only thing that is proven is his belief, not what farts smell like. You seem to agree with this. When you are dealing with your editors, how do they manage your lack of understanding of subject and object? Does it annoy them, or do they see it as a cute quirk?
On the contrary. "To him" and his mind, they are 'facts' because he believes them to be real. Do you know of any 'immutable truths'? Even mathematics are subjective and are, according to Einstein "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. (Albert Einstein)" Name something, anything, that is not subject to the subjective mind. Nope, it is proven that what he believes is a fact. That is between me and my editors and is off-topic.
So you are agreeing with me. No objective truth regarding the smell of farts, or the truth of the bible, is stated by these sentences, only the beliefs of the speakers, the subjects of the sentences. So if you agree with me, why do you seem so contentious? As for the editors remark, you opened that door when you questioned my grammar skills and suggested yours were superior. Fair is fair, now isn't it? And I didn't even run and tell Mom!
No! I am not agreeing with you. For the obvious and previously stated reasons... I don't agree with you. Fair is always fair. BTW: Who is "Mom"?
In your previous post you agreed with me absolutely. You made a very clear case for the subjectivity declared in both sentences, and that no objective truth had been asserted. What part of what you said don't you agree with?
Prove your claim instead of just making a statement. Show the quotation of where I 'absolutely' "agreed with" YOU. Twisting and contorting again, I see. I have not said that I disagreed with anything that I said, only what you have said.
Then show me how what you are saying differs from what I've said. You repeatedly say that the object of the sentence is true to the subject. We agree. The subject believes. That is a subjective conclusion, and not a statement that the object of the sentence is true independent of the subject believer. It is a statement of the belief of the subject. "To him." "To him." Exactly. There is no objective truth statement made. Just what the belief system of the subject is. Nothing more, nothing less. Where do we disagree?
I already have. Look back at the thread, for yourself. Where was that stated. Again, you make claims without showing your reference to subject of said claim. Quote me. Don't just allege. Do we? Per the definition of 'fact', the subject is the 'something believed to be true'. And the 'fact' of that something that he believes. Well, at least you were able to make partial quotations. The subject of this thread is not 'objective truth', but rather, 'fact' and the conditions created by the definitions of the word 'fact' See above. Also, your consistent dismissal of the definition of the word 'fact'. You still have not answered my other question "who is Mom?".
Not according to the definition of the term 'fact'. Now if you have a problem with that definition, then take up your concerns with those publishers of the definition. Until then, that is an officially accepted definition and the publishers have more expertise than either you or me in that matter. First of all, your assertion above is a fallacy of ignorance and absurdity. You assert through the use of the term "everyone" that a high degree of boredom has set in. Well, obviously there are some that hold an interest in this thread. You, Me, and others (indicated by the numerical count on the views). Secondly, you assert that I have been badly beaten up in this thread. Mere biased and personal opinion of you. I see it otherwise, because of your constant need to bring in straw arguments such as the one that is the subject of this paragraph. 'beat up'? Yes! According to the Bible which you say is not factual, you are now leaning on the Bible for protection. You should learn more about Pride and the Bible. If you are bored, then go on out into the world and seek your adventures in a place where you think you can bully your way through a contest by misrepresenting things and by dismissing facts such as clearly accepted definitions given by a secularized dictionary. More unsubstantiated presumption. You state that I know... How do you KNOW that I know such a thing? Are you a mind-reader? Except those that cause the 'views' count to keep increasing. Enjoy. Don't get a case of heartburn or indigestion.
Show where I ever shared an opinion on the truth or lack of same of the Bible, mindreader. I only discussed sentences. You will find no misrepresentations by me, just the repeated tripping over your own shoes all over this thread. Grammar ignorance, logical errors. This was a total abortion on your part. Noticed your edit of my truth claim at the end. Pretty absurd, wasn't it? Punked. I'll eat fine.
For all the hidden viewers that are not contributing, please chime in and let Incorporeal know how he did.
No, silly. It will either show that noone cares about your ridiculous threads anymore, or let you know how persuasive your arguments are. I didn't ask for anyone's support, just to say how you did. Would you be afraid of that outcome? God knows I didn't need any help on this one.
Post #37 "No objective truth regarding the smell of farts, or the truth of the bible, is stated by these sentences, only the beliefs of the speakers, the subjects of the sentences." That statement of yours is not in the form of a question, but rather a declaration. A declaration of alleged fact.
You really can't read, can you? You are honestly grammar impaired. My statement makes no personal claim by me regarding the truth of the Bible. It merely states the sentence doesn't make any objective claim either, but simply reports the belief of the subject. What is wrong with you, Inc? This is outrageously lame, even by your diminishing standards.
Is it your statement? Is it your belief? If you don't believe it, then why did you make the statement?
