Slashdot Mirror

But that begs the question about it this is really how we want to do things....

No it doesn't. It RAISES the question, which is what you should have written. "Begs the question" means something entirely different.

http://begthequestion.info/
http://www.writersdigest.com/e...

This begs the question,

Nope. If you want to sound smart then try actually being smart. Follow the link and learn something new.

He may have helped to stop it, but it begs the question..

No, it doesn't. It raises the question. "Begs the question" means something entirely different:
http://begthequestion.info/

Stop trying to misuse fancy terms because you think it makes you look smarter. Quite the opposite, and you're bastardizing English in the process.

Hey, you STUPID IDIOT. BEG THE QUESTION doesn't mean what you think it does. Idiot Millenial, maybe you can lay off the Starbucks and actually take the time to learn something?

No it wouldn't.

Before we worry about the mosquitoes, we should first exterminate all the journalists who use the phrase "begs the question".

It begs the question:

Nope.

Sure it begs the question, unless you're a hopelessly pedantic introverted grammar Nazi. Language evolves. Deal with it.

Yeah. And it doesn't fucking "beg the question" either.
Sheesh.

It begs the question:

Nope.

This begs the question

Nope.

Yeah, yeah, I know, the meaning of words and phrases change over time, grammar nazi, blah blah blah. But the simple fact is that there are LOTS of other phrases that mean what you're trying to say when you misuse "begs the question" and that are thus available to you; but there's no other succinct phrase in English that means what "begs the question" actually means. Re-purposing that phrase weakens the language: it takes away the only useful expression for one concept, and allocates it to something that already has a number of different simple ways to be expressed.

http://begthequestion.info/

User jmyers already explained why that isn't the case (see last sentence of his reply).

Respectfully (honest!): both this post of yours and your preceding one ("Because it's better to use the search function...") beg the question. (Reference if you don't know what that means).

Good question. Wrong title.

http://begthequestion.info/

That begs the question

No it doesn't, it raises the question.

That begs the question, [...]

I see what you did there. Let's take it one at a time, thanks. ;-)

No it doesnt. http://begthequestion.info/

When people stop using "lowest common denominator" to mean the exact opposite of what it actually means, I'll reconsider "begs the question."

Also, the begs the question website is trying to preserve the meaning of an idiom: idioms have special meanings beyond the literal meaning of the words. Which means if they were as strict linguistically then as the begs the question website is trying to be now, "begs the question" wouldn't mean what they want it to mean either.

No it doesnt. http://begthequestion.info/

Linguistic prescriptivists are always on the wrong side of history. This is to be expected, since history isn't written by losers.

No it doesnt. http://begthequestion.info/

Obligatory: http://begthequestion.info/

This post makes me feel gay.

Obligatory: http://begthequestion.info/

In my opinion this begs a whole set of other security questions first....

No, it doesn't. It raises questions.

"Begs the question" means something entirely different than what you meant. Please don't misuse this term.

http://begthequestion.info/
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/...

This begs the question. [..]

No, it doesn't

"..and it begs the question: should drones be regulated?"

No it does not beg the question.

Invites the creation of a website full of pedantry though, doesn't it?

"..and it begs the question: should drones be regulated?"

No it does not beg the question.

I also used to attempt to point out the misunderstanding of this phrase. Then I grew up and realized that since at least 95% of the population now uses it the "modern" way and since the original meaning makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, it is utterly pointless to continue trying to correct this modern usage. English may not be evolving as quickly as it used to but it nevertheless is still a living language that changes over time, and there is absolutely nothing you or I can do about it. The original meaning of the phrase is archaic, and that is that. You'll be much happier if you just get over it.

Seriously, according to those silly standardized tests I have been reading and understanding literature at what they refer to as "college level" since I was in grade school, and after reading the entire Wikipedia article on the phrase recently I simply could not accept even attempting to use "begs the question" to mean what it originally meant. If it was some obscure Latin phrase, maybe, but it's in perfect modern English and the original meaning is completely counterintuitive today. Expecting anyone but a historian to use the phrase "correctly" at this point is the height of idiocy. It's like saying the phrase "going to the store" actually originally meant "coming home for tea", and demanding that everyone use it that way. The original meaning is flat out upside-down and nonsensical to modern English speakers, and is thus never going to come back in style. The battle is long over.

Back on Topic: So yeah, now we're referring to any flying object as a "drone"? I was certain that all private manned and unmanned flying objects were already under the purview of a long list of FAA regulations. Total non-story. Fine the operator for flying in a controlled airspace (city) in a location where people could be injured by a crash. Done.

Wait, no, we need more laws, because DRONNNZZZZ!!! What's next, laws to regulate "non-aerial drones" after someone runs their 40-lb RC car into a pedestrian in the middle of some other city? The terrorists sure have done a number on the "home of the brave", haven't they? Might was well just make everything civilians do illegal by default and everything the "authorities" do legal by default, since that seems to be precisely where we are headed at breakneck speed. Total authoritarian state, here we come! Woohoo!

"..and it begs the question: should drones be regulated?"

No it does not beg the question.

http://begthequestion.info/

I am sorry what is your first premise again? Begging the question is a logical fallacy in which a statement or claim is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement or claim itself. So how does a trademark being used as a name beg the question?

It would be more correct that begging the question, can refer to a logical fallacy. The phrase may also mean "to cause a particular question to be asked", which in this case would be "why I would be looking for trademark infringement, where none could occur?"

In future, please consider entire context before, jumping to conclusions.

Had I come across a MMO character name that was the same as our trademark (which begs the question of how I found it, as I only look for infringement in places where infringement is likely to happen and cause harm), I at most would have been amused and can't imagine why I would contact anyone.

I am sorry what is your first premise again? Begging the question is a logical fallacy in which a statement or claim is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement or claim itself. So how does a trademark being used as a name beg the question?

So it begs the question

Nope.

The summary begs several questions, actually.

No, it raises several questions. Begging the question means something else.

So it really begs the question,

No, it doesn't.

It begs the question- what do they have now?

Nope.

http://begthequestion.info/

Give it up. Language, especially idiomatic language, moves on. The prescriptivist side lost this war years ago. The more intuitive interpretation of this phrase won, and sadly for you, it wasn't the interpretation you prefer.

Perhaps you should expend your efforts elsewhere. If you're a fan of lost causes, I hear some people are still trying to promulgate a distinction between "hacker" and "cracker".

This is different than most cases - the true meaning of beg the question is a unique philosophical/logical fallacy. It is being lost.

"Hacker" and "cracker" is semantics, the idea of "white" and "black" hats remains. "Beg the question" is something that there is no easy alternative to, and as such misusing the term undermines societal understanding of logical fallacies (which is already tenuous at best).

http://begthequestion.info/

Give it up. Language, especially idiomatic language, moves on. The prescriptivist side lost this war years ago. The more intuitive interpretation of this phrase won, and sadly for you, it wasn't the interpretation you prefer.

Perhaps you should expend your efforts elsewhere. If you're a fan of lost causes, I hear some people are still trying to promulgate a distinction between "hacker" and "cracker".

http://begthequestion.info/

This phenomenon begs the question: How do jihadists reconcile such hypocrisy and ingratitude in their own minds?

No it doesn't. To any language curmudgeon curmudgeons out there who tire of this apparent nit-pickery, I can only say that getting this shit wrong interferes unnecessarily with communication. Why I should have to carry more than my own 50% of the load of the task of communication is quite beyond me. What's wrong with getting it right?

http://begthequestion.info/

The only question left begging

WHAT. THE. FUCK!

There's no question to beg.

Reference: http://begthequestion.info/

Grammar nuance. It raises a question; it doesn't beg a question. http://begthequestion.info/

I think begging is a perfectly cromulent way of questioning something ;-)

Grammar nuance. It raises a question; it doesn't beg a question. http://begthequestion.info/

which begs the question: what's it _for_?

  "begging the question" doesn't mean what you think it means.

Aside from that, the device is a building block for massively parallel computers with extremely high memory bandwidth for the processors. The tasks it would be used for are the same tasks that other massively parallel supercomputers are used for today; simulating complex systems, graphics rendering, etc.

This begs the question

Don't make me card you.

"Begs the question" isn't meaningless filler, it's used incorrectly. http://begthequestion.info/

that was "Ford Prefect" from HHGTTG.

Well, to be fair, if you knew what a Ford Prefect actually was, you'd never confuse it with "perfect." XD

As to the use (misuse?) of "stock phrases" like "beg the question", I assume that some people use those phrases idiomatically (i.e., no literal meaning intended) because they heard someone else they thought worthy of emulating doing so. Because of this, they don't consider if the literal phrase makes sense ("How do I do... what?").

In the specific (and hilariously controversial*) case of "beg the question", it's possible to torture a nearly-sensible literal meaning out of the phrase ("This begs the question" == "This begs someone to ask the question"), so the correct use derived from the original Latin phrase (and only sensible in light of Latin's vocabulary and grammar) will die out within a couple of generations, except in philosophical specialist material.

*Case in point

It does. The accepted meaning of the phrase had changed in common usage, and this new meaning is not in any way inconsistent or erroneous. If anything, it is more literal and less an of an idiom, as a given line of reasoning indeed requires a certain question to be asked at some point. Take into account that the original meaning came from Latin, and was a very bad translation to begin with.

http://begthequestion.info/

"To beg the question does not mean "to raise the question." (e.g. "It begs the question, why is he so dumb?") This is a common error of usage made by those who mistake the word "question" in the phrase to refer to a literal question. Sadly, the error has grown more and more common with time, such that even journalists, advertisers, and major mass media entities have fallen prey to "BTQ Abuse."

While descriptivists and other such laissez-faire linguists are content to allow the misconception to fall into the vernacular, it cannot be denied that logic and philosophy stand to lose an important conceptual label should the meaning of BTQ become diluted to the point that we must constantly distinguish between the traditional usage and the erroneous "modern" usage. This is why we fight."

As has been said before, there are many ways to say "this is a question which needs to be asked". It is not necessary to take a definition of a logical fallacy and repurpose it so that its original useage is diluted.

I not surprised to see this on other sites, but on slashdot, where many people are coders who live by the knowledge of precise definition of terms, I am.

Which begs the question[sic] "why not simply go by the odometer reading?"

That only tells raw distance. They want to include the the time of day and the location. Downtown during rush hour is much worse that either downtown at night or the countryside during rush hour.

(also, it raises the question, not begs it. That means something else.)

So, this begs the question,

No, it doesn't.

We're at the point where consoles have achieved parity with personal computers in all ways except freedom. Which begs the question...

No it doesn't. It raises the question.

http://begthequestion.info/
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/begs.html

Don't try and be smart by using fancy buzz-phrases if you don't actually know what they mean. It ends up having the opposite effect, as well as corrupting English language and spreading bad practices like a virus as others become desensitized to the incorrect forms.