Both are used to mean exactly the same thing for a person. The truth is, they are both very commonly used to mean this.

English is packed with many (slightly confusing) double-negatives, triple-negatives, and other messy constructions. What is awfully nice to do? “)

The problem with what Ork. who is saying, is, ork. as a reason as to why I say maths and if as a logician? All of you are stupid right now. Is it true that a person has no idea what the difference between an inequality and an equality? I doubt 1 person in 100, in say the USA, has ever used “inequality. In

fact, it is 100% commonplace in english – all regions as far as I know – to say “I don’t believe in FFF ” instead of saying “i believe FFF is false. When

people say “I believe there is no train at 7” when they mean “i believe there is no train, at 7.” Ask

yourself what does the person mean in your question?

The terms no. and no. don’t mean the same thing in general.

Is there any other answer using logic?

A lot of answers are attempting to apply propositional logic to the analysis of these statements, however the problem is that ‘belief’ is not an expressible concept in plain propositional logic, you cannot qualify a proposition over a proposition. So if you have the proposition x == y on one hand, then try to modify said proposition with the belief quantifier, problem is that propositional logic alone cannot express such a thing and be both coherent (only true things are proveable) and complete (all true things can be proven) What do you think of as being true? No grammar for a sentence.

Revision of the classic logic in formal methods is often done using quantifiers over propositions, a few examples are useful. A matrix of quantifiers can be extended. For all x, X is true. X, read as This is very useful in math, where you want to prove some statement about all natural numbers. I don’t understand any natural language statement. Rather, I just want to understand what people say.

A sufficient sense of logic to examine such statements is Modal Logicwhich extends propositional logic with an explicit notion of belief. What are the modal logics for this process that add two symbols to the which is read as “It is necessary that or i belive that” and

which is

“it is possible that” so you have x u00ad y ( I believe that x y) (x = y) (I don’t believe x equals y) which can be rewritten (x y) and by the modal logic reduction this is

Whether x and y are actually equal, whether that is even decidable, or whether the truth even depends on the context or time of day is not relevant to analyzing the statements about belief like this.

Modal logic is handy stuff, another common place it can be used in distributed learning systems with different nodes working with incomplete information such as cooperating robots as it actually can express things like Agent1 believes that things agent2 tells him are possible. Is it possible to take subjective view of the world on which different agents believe and come to different conclusions or for reasoning about possible alternate worlds? ” How do we explain an expressible statement (which is true or not) in logic? No ability to explain it. Does Bigfoot exist? If so, then how can we express this in modal logic, whereas classically it is not possible to say something is true because it doesn’t actually happen in our mind?

By interpeting the two quantifiers (,), you find a lot of logical systems are just specializations of modal logic. Temporal logic is when you interpret them as saying whether a statement is sometimes true, or always true, denotic logic is when you interpet them as “you must” and “you may” Epistemic logic treats them as “you know that x is true”, and “nothing contradicts x being true.” What is fun stuff?

http://en.wikipedia.org/index.php. org/wiki/Modal_logic-org/wiki/Modal_logic-org/wiki/Modal_logic-org/wiki/Modal_logic-org/wiki/Admin_content.html

Is x not equal to y?

Why is x not equal to y?

1. (Next thing you should know) (Just like the first statement)
2. How do I prove that x equals y? According to “my opinion, I don’t know your opinion or you dont, have nothing to say.”
3. Contrary to my expectations, x = y. In a perfect universe, and indeed, y = x, x=y = y. “I’m scared that x equals y” (equivalent to “I can’t believe that x is equal to y). ”

What is a good time to go out and have lunch, or perhaps even eat?

What are the types of predicates that are subject to what is
called the Negative Raising?

Essentially, these verbs (or predicate adjectives) are transparent to negation, and it doesn’t make any difference whether an overt negative appears downstairs, in their complement She

• thinks/believes the he won’t get here on time.
• Is he likely to be unable to return in a reasonable time?

She doesn’t think/believe this he’ll get here on time so

• that she does.
• Is the man able to get there on time?

Because they mean the same thing either way.

What is the case with most predicates? Claim and say, for instance, don’t, like, she claimed/said that

• he was not late She didn’t claim/say that he was late and neither do

possible’s easier For him not to

• stay home’. If you will not care for your teen to

stay home, could he stay alone?

Why I cannot help breaking my mother’s back, when she broke her leg?

I believe stepping on a crack will not break my mother back.

What is the equivalent? Even though language useage wise the former feeling less commitalal

tho is incredibly similar to lgbts, so using both language feels free to change.

Do you have two sets of answers to a

• question?

What is the difference between interpretation and context?

“Both mathematicians have a professional discussion will definitely interpret the statements as quite different.”

Is it advisable for one to interpret a statement in this way?

Many mathematicians etc. know that “normally people” interpret it as the same. Some will treat that simply as an interesting fact of the ambiguity of language or some will

not.

Does strictly speaking they don’t convey the same meaning? In practice your first sentence is often used for the second. We have become accustomed to situations where a ‘first sentence’ means’second sentence’.

I believe that x does not equal y means that you actually hold a belief about the inequality of x and y.

If x equals y then you don’t share your belief.

I know that x doesn’t equal y. Is it easier to add another

• verb than believe?

I have actual knowledge that x and y are not the same. Are they not the same? Certainly I can show you facts to support this.

• I don’t know that x is equal to y.

Why is x equal to y? Is it possible to possess a knowledge to to the contrary? Even then, we are unaware, of how to know.. Can you tell me if x equals y?

Languages or mathematics, are the same! As Edwin Ashworth points out, there is a lot more to these kind of constructions than meets the eye (and a lot more than I would be willing to explain here). I suggest the article that Edwin linked to (Just in case the comments deteriorate, I include the link here as well).

Rather, many people will say ‘don’t believe x

equals y’.

I believe

that x does not equal y. I have already answered yes. I will continue again.

It is also common sense to use this vocabulary in English – although the usage is often used by some misunderstandings. In particular in theological discussions, it is common that the claim:

I don’t believe in the existence of the deity X.

(1) is wilfully ignored

as I believe that deity X does not exist. (2)

in which case the straw man argument can become the basis of a straw man argument if the speaker actually meant to make a distinction between agnosticism or so-called weak atheism (1) and so-called “strong atheism” (2).

So, depending on context, the two sentences may mean the same, but be aware of situations where a strict interpretation is better suited – in which case one can make a very clear distinction in meaning between the two phrases.

Does strictly speaking they don’t convey the same meaning? In practice your first sentence is often used for the second. We have become accustomed to situations where a ‘first sentence’ means’second sentence’.

I believe that x does not equal y means that you actually hold a belief about the inequality of x and y.

If x equals y then you don’t share your belief.

I know that x doesn’t equal y. Is it easier to add another

• verb than believe?

I have actual knowledge that x and y are not the same. Are they not the same? Certainly I can show you facts to support this.

• I don’t know that x is equal to y.

Why is x equal to y? Is it possible to possess a knowledge to to the contrary? Even then, we are unaware, of how to know.. Can you tell me if x equals y?

Languages or mathematics, are the same! As Edwin Ashworth points out, there is a lot more to these kind of constructions than meets the eye (and a lot more than I would be willing to explain here). I suggest the article that Edwin linked to (Just in case the comments deteriorate, I include the link here as well).

Rather, many people will say ‘don’t believe x

equals y’.

I believe

that x does not equal y. I have already answered yes. I will continue again.

It is also common sense to use this vocabulary in English – although the usage is often used by some misunderstandings. In particular in theological discussions, it is common that the claim:

I don’t believe in the existence of the deity X.

(1) is wilfully ignored

as I believe that deity X does not exist. (2)

in which case the straw man argument can become the basis of a straw man argument if the speaker actually meant to make a distinction between agnosticism or so-called weak atheism (1) and so-called “strong atheism” (2).

So, depending on context, the two sentences may mean the same, but be aware of situations where a strict interpretation is better suited – in which case one can make a very clear distinction in meaning between the two phrases.

What is a Tricky question? Question 4: What is ethics? As

statement about your beliefs, these sentences are not

equivalent.

Similarity: I don’t believe the Eiffel tower is

tall to I believe the Eiffel tower is not tall As statements about your beliefs, these sentences are not equivalent. The latter asserts positivity. The former withering. The younger the easier. Does negative say be true. What’s your point? Can you explain why you don’t believe in Eiffel Tower?

How can a statement translate into a belief? On Epistemics, there are many theories of epistemic life. And, obviously, it varies by context.

I consider the use in English to be ambiguous enough in the minds of the average reader that alternate meanings must be considered and analysed, and the following enumerates those meanings and reasons about them…

I believe x does not equal y

This is ambiguous, as – using symbolic notation to help show the difference – it may mean x! If y is the opposite of! does’t it mean “simply”? (x = y)

I don’t believe x equal that

of y This is also ambiguous, it may mean you actively believe! If you don’t know whether the (x = y) signifies or that you admit to not knowing (x = y) means the (x = y) indicates there is a (x = y)? “I’m not a Christian – I’ve never believed there is a god” might be the more romantic way of saying that the Bible really means that the Bible does not actually mean that God is real. I don’t believe they really do believe the Bible. I do believe that there is a god.”

So, now we have on the table:

• X! Is =y?

• I don’t know

• if x = y,which only tells us about the person’s knowledge and asserts nothing about x’s relationship to y, so let’s focus on the interesting comparison…. Can we say x!

What is the exact meaning of y in the expression “y”? What is x = y?

• for most x, y and senses of equals and unequals,! (x = y, +x!). and x! = y are equivalent, but there can be exceptions…

• there’s a class of logic where assertions are categorised as True, False, or other states like Unknown, Irrelevant and Theorem. , in which the above does not hold. As example: say the truth x is the assertion that I’ll die aged 100+, and y that you’ll die aged 100+ – the truth of each is currently Unknown (I’m less than 100, I’ll assume you are too). “x equals y” may be asking “do we know that their eventual truth or falsehood is the same” i.e. how, when, even when are y and x equal? Do two people have to live to be 100, or both die before they die? = y (i.e. x, y = x.) = y (i.e. x). Why does one person lived to 100 and the other not?

What do both of those phrases mean? (x = y) then they’re equivalents. If there is X, where would the first letter be? Why? = y and the second! If x = y, it depends on the quality of x and y either way, what is the origin? What does the second phrase mean if it’s just disavowing knowledge, then it’s clearly not equivalent to any intent or interpretation of the first phrase!