ellauri077.html on line 488: This also means that no positive content lies “behind” it, because existential irony places the totality of existence under negation, and, therefore, no possible meaning remains for it.
ellauri096.html on line 142: If you know that your beliefs are jointly inconsistent, then you should reject R. M. Sainsbury’s definition of a paradox as “an apparently unacceptable conclusion derived by apparently acceptable reasoning from apparently acceptable premises” (1995, 1). Take the negation of any of your beliefs as a conclusion and your remaining beliefs as the premises. You should judge this jumble argument as valid, and as having premises that you accept, and yet as having a conclusion you reject (Sorensen 2003b, 104–110). If the conclusion of this argument counts as a paradox, then the negation of any of your beliefs counts as a paradox.
ellauri096.html on line 149: . After all, a conjunction of tautologies is itself a tautology and the negation of any tautology is a contradiction.
ellauri096.html on line 177: The (K-0) argument stinks of the liar paradox. Subsequent commentators sloppily switch the negation sign in the formal presentations of the reasoning from K∼p
ellauri119.html on line 758:

Alisa is right that an existential sentence is in principle easier to prove than its negative. Just produce a specimen. I bet she filched it from Karl Popper. The negation takes another universal premise to prove it from. But God is a harder nut. If God supporters could produce the specimen, they'd still need to prove uniqueness and the requisite universal properties. God opposers try to argue they do not need that hypothesis. Thing is the supporters clearly feel that need. It's not logic, it's a eusocial insect's builtin circuit. Less stupid egomaniacs are aware of its usefulness as a mind numbing anesthesiac, opium for the masses. Fiction or fact, its a great hypothesis. It would deserve inventing if it did not come pre-installed. Alisa was a silly hag.
ellauri159.html on line 1419: The world appears as a pluralism, 264. Elements of unity in the pluralism, 268. Hegel's excessive claims, 273. He makes of negation a bond of union, 273. The principle of totality, 277. Monism and pluralism, 279. The fallacy of accident in Hegel, 280. The good and the bad infinite, 284. Negation, 286. Conclusion, 292.—Note on the Anaesthetic revelation, 294.
ellauri203.html on line 119: Another problem, which could make matters worse, was the intrusion of the socialist (atheist) teaching mentioned above. From his own experience, Dostoevsky knew the danger and destructiveness of this socialist way, offered by many as the way to reform society. In his letter to M. Pogodin, Dostoevsky writes that ‘socialism and Christianity are antonyms’. Christianity and private enterprise are synonyms. The danger of this way, in Dostoevsky’s opinion, was its negation of God and establishment of a new atheistic society.
ellauri260.html on line 323: So far we have allowed the Socialist ideal to speak for itself and to instruct us as to its aims. That is the only way to understand properly both its affirmation and its negation. We have now to form our own opinion on it, and to take up a clear position in regard to what we have seen.
xxx/ellauri125.html on line 533: negation is noble, self-culture beneficent, self-possession is
xxx/ellauri157.html on line 228: It likewise reinterpreted the traditional Jewish notion of humility. To the Hasidic Masters, humility did not mean thinking little of oneself, a commendable quality that derives from an external origin (read: the false Messiah) in Jewish spirituality, but rather losing all sense of ego entirely (bittul-the negation of ego). Such losing one's head could only be achieved by beginning from the inside, through understanding and awareness of Divinity in Hasidic philosophy.
xxx/ellauri261.html on line 585: Hegel argued that God (as Absolute or Father) is radically negated by the concrete incarnation of God (as Christ or Son). This negation is subsequently itself negated at the Crucifixion of Jesus, resulting in the emergence of the Holy Spirit, God as both concrete (the church) and absolute (spiritual community). In Hegelian thought, therefore, the death of God does not result in a strict negativity, but rather, permits the emergence of the full revelation of God: absolute consciousness.
11