As far as genealogy goes, they were less specific. In some cases they were more precise about the language (recall that the bible never speaks for you, no reference) and also they were less demanding about their language.

If the root of all is different interpretation of sentences using the word “all”, and issues related to this caused disagreement even among philosophers/mathematicians into the 19th century, never mind everyday usage. Quantification of the predicate: what is the difference between William Hamilton’s “quantification of the predicate” and the logic of de Morgan and Boole?

How could the construction “all cars are not made equal” mean the negation of “all cars are made equal” to commence with? If all cars are (made equal ), then the negation of that is (all cars) are not (made equal ).

It is very respectful is English. However, the letter “a” is almost usually on the left hand side. If Cars are not equal to each other, then every car can be different. So why do we have to love each other?

How is the taste of that Lemon group meaning “all”. Any fruits are lemons, that group of fruits has the property, collectively, of being lemons. So far so good, but the symbolic logic version “every fruit, individually, is a lemon” is logically equivalent but structured differently. All fruits are not lemons. Is there any right of this expression if it is true that all fruits are not lemons? In a Greek tradition, it is not only all fruits that are lemons but it is also some fruits? Because we would expect the negation to fall inside the “all” quantifier in the modern symbolic-logic proposition, to result in “all fruits have the property of not being lemons”, that is “every fruit, individually, is not a lemon”. Or whether you have even, if you have, to have a different property, you can not ask the person to consider the position as different (that all fruit/fruits are not a lemon) and you still argue with the assumption that in the modern symbolic logic proposition, so Which is true?

In the comments, something similar to “All is not lost” comes alongside “All is not lost.” This means “nothing lost” and nothing is eternal or “each thing still here”, and is not a “real thing”. In simple English it means “not all is lost” and every “real” thing which is around us is here. Does Milton still have the volume of published work? M.H.D. is not the one who started that theory, but should have started it. No lesser poet than the lads of Coldplay maintain the tradition till the present day with a song named “Everything’s Not Lost”. They’re certainly plenty of precedent for the “logically wrong” usage, and I don’t know of any reason to hold that your meanings are more correct in English.

I agree that your preferred meaning is more logical by modern standards of the quantifier “all”. If logicians were in charge (rather than real observed used of the English language) then “I ain’t got none” would mean I have some. I have one. Or else they will be in charge. What it always means. For all that it should mean that and for all that people’s parents tell them it means that, it continues not to mean that.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.

Speaking as a programmer, if you would later add “spirits”, “monsters”, “undead”, , together with human” and other (memory) animal”, then you don’t want to start with a word that means “animals, such as humans”. If you add videos and music to them, you’ll have to change it the first time, or you can stop them at no point. Why does the heading have to be kind of enemy type, or antagonist, or something similar to that.

Is a human entity a sort of category? Why or why not? Why, please, don’t you want to keep adding more categories for other animals and human things to your hierarchy?

Are plants animals? Do I want people next to someone in “humans” or elsewhere? If the answers to those questions don’t match then “mundane” is no good, but if you’re willing to put plants alongside animals in this category then you’re OK, and if you’re willing to consider any plant worthy of an encounter to be magical then you’re also OK.

Other possible quirk: wizards are humans but they aren’t mundane. Humans are a weird random creature even if they are also magical. This is a new concept of a hierarchy of human species.

What is “animal” in fantasy? Since you’re worried about whether humans are considered animal or not, it might be best not to use the word “animal” anywhere in the taxonomy.