95:
85:
64:
31:
314:
298:
383:
930:
world as it has unfolded. The concept of logical negation is the more fundamental and general concept being discussed here. An encyclopedia is organized from general to specific so as to eliminate prejudicing the reader to certain interpretations of meaning over other interpretations. One of the goals in logic is to strip away the interpretations and identify what lies behind them as a foundation.
373:
342:
22:
449:
200:
169:
469:
1401:
1277:
210:
744:
This article is all very well, but if someone (like my freshman calculus students, say) wants some help in understanding what negation is, this will leave them more confused. I just added a helpful sentence in the preamble, pointing out that negation is a perfectly natural thing to do and formalizes
581:
Thanks for your "respect". As for making this into seperate articles, If it really is the right thing to do, I'm sure we could get a consensus for that. In that case reversion against consensus, would not stand. As i said on my talk page: ":... moving pages which are likely to be non-controversial,
1143:
Negation is defined here for a two-valued
Boolean logic, using some kind of sets. I do not think this definition is general enough. Later in the article you find references to intuitionist logic, where there may be more than two values, and of course no sets. I believe the beginning of this article
1085:
I've seen the tilde being used to mean aproximate or aproximatly, as in " a day has ~24 hours" or in some programming language (i don't remember which exactly) combined with the equal sign "~=" to mean aproximatly equal (used with floats, it returns true if the two values are less than a predefined
929:
It's only a mere symbolic echo is it? Hmm. You realize that one could look at it the other way with more justification do you not? Negation is based on a principle of logic. A principle is supposed to be true in all possible worlds, while the language phenomenon only exists in a particular historic
891:
and thus has a scope implicated in its syntax and semantics, which has a lot of interesting detail, most interestingly negative polarity items. The article should be revised to point to any rhetorical or logical negation items; but it should subsume most of the current item, which is very limited
570:
Separating page is a good idea, but I don't think it is possible. The main reason is that people will revert back after doing this!!! In my opinion, if you think moving article EACH TIME requires discussion, you should talk to the committee of wikipedia. But I respect with your action, don't worry.
1191:
I came to this article looking for information on the "¬" character, not just its meaning, but also things like its origin, name, how people write it when not using a computer, typewritter etc, why it is present in the Abnt2 keyboard layout for AltGr keypresses but isn't seen in most other layouts
886:
in
English on "Negation and Negative Polarity". I still own the rights; I've signed no contracts because it was a hurryup job after the original author bailed. So, I hereby place it in the public domain for use in Knowledge. It's very dense -- they wanted only 1000 words -- and it refers to the
776:
It looks to me like there has been discussion about this already here. I would like to see the logical, grammatical, mathematical, and computer science applications of all of the operators on the single page for each of those concepts. I'm not sure this is what people had in mind. However, quite
712:
JA: Whole books have been written on
Negation in wider rhetorical and philosophical senses that go far afield from logical negation. And consider: If pseudoscience is false science — is pseudopseudoscience then true science, or does it just get pseuder and pseuder with re*iteration? The mind
860:
in French about
Negation in Linguistics (not quite complete yet) and there are very many things to say, most of them having little to do with Logical Negation, even if there should be links of course. By the way, I quoted the English article as a reference. Thanks for attention. Félix Potuit.
701:
talking about separate subjects here. Grammatical negation clearly relates to logical negation; and various other sorts of negation, such as negation in mathematics or negation in computer programming, are likewise aspects of the same phenomenon: all involve the use of symbols to either flag
640:, and that big an umbrella would give folks rheum to discuss just about anything that comes to mind. Maybe someday, maybe soon, but right now the article is not big enough to justify it, and mostly needs to be better organized internally, say with a subhead for "rhetorical considerations".
822:
are the same concept. I would like to similarly unite and rearrange articles so that they are all -- you know -- encyclopedic. Please visit the project proposal linked above and leave a comment. If you take a look at how chocked full of potential the
1342:
It would be useful to list details of text encoding for (at least) Unicode : U+2310 - Reversed not sign (⌐); and U+00AC - Not sign (¬). In addition it would be good to mention other encodings UTF-8, CP437 / extended ASCII (#169 & #170).
1109:
Quoth the article: "So, if statement A is true, then ¬A (pronounced "not A") would therefore be false; and conversely, if ¬A is true, then A would be false." I'm not certain, but wouldn't that be the contrapositive, not the converse?
551:
be a good thing would be to create separate pages for the "negation (grammar)" and "negation (logic)" or "logical negation" and make this a disambiguation page, however this would have to be discussed and agreed to here first.
501:
The internet smilies section doesn't really belong in an article about negation. While the smiley is created using a symbol for negation, it has nothing to do with the concept of negation, which is the topic of the article.
595:
For what it's worth, I'd support the split into "negation (grammar)" and "negation (logic)", making "Negation" a disambiguation page. That would make the other two links (album and comic) less obtrusive at the top.
951:
I have proposed that we expand the logical connectives into an encyclopedic series of 16 articles as the center of these concepts. I think there is enough material on each of them to warrant a substantial
151:
609:
I would also support splitting the article into two separate pages on grammar and logic/mathematics; not sure that mathematical negation and logical negation require separate treatment.
1479:
1529:
1420:
543:, with as far as I can tell no prior discussion. I've now moved the page back. This is the second time that QQ has moved this page there. The first time the page was moved back by
1554:
1534:
1288:
650:
Well it's not just a question of article size. I see it as more a question of utility, having separate articles would allow other articles to link with more specificity.
1549:
1004:
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class.
1524:
1469:
231:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the
1484:
582:
like simple misspellings etc. usually don't require any discussion. However for other moves ... it is always best to start a discussion on the talk page first."
458:
352:
1544:
765:
I have been working on all of the logical operators recently. I would like to see a consistent format for them. There is a wikiproject proposal for this at:
439:
429:
35:
1504:
892:
in scope and coverage. P.S. I'm not a
Knowledge member and don't want to become one; but I'm willing to contribute. - John Lawler www.umich.edu/~jlawler
268:
258:
1494:
981:', in each case there is a link, and a small paragraph blurb intro. This would not require a merge, but rather a small duplication of material. Be well,
141:
1559:
1464:
478:
356:
321:
183:
887:
monadic negative functor "~ / ˺ / NOT" in predicate calculus, but its focus is on the fact that negation, like quantification and modality, is an
1474:
766:
1254:
I did a bit of work on this and there is no agreed definition of negation according to F.H. Heinemann 1944. Text added with ref regarding this.
1514:
405:
117:
1217:. Unfortunately, I don't feel qualified to clean this up myself. Needs attention from an editor with the right technical knowledge. Thanks. –
512:
Probably because there doesn't seem to be a proper page about the ¬ character, which is what I was looking for when I found this article... --
1539:
1489:
233:
789:
I don't think a remerge is needed: the present separation between logical negation and negation more broadly conceived (at present labelled
1499:
1374:
1236:
The definition of
Negation in the article is to be true when its operand is false. "FALSE" however is defined as the negation of TRUE, see
547:. In my view this is a highly inappropriate name for this page, since the article also talks about term negation as used in grammar. What
1323:
1068:
1019:
899:
1519:
1411:
1393:
1270:
1255:
1241:
973:
One of the ways that this could be organized so as to please everyone, is the way that big city articles have, for instance, a main '
396:
347:
108:
69:
1041:(~) - at least two books I have read use this notation. Perhaps we should add a small note that the tilde is sometimes used too?
223:
174:
1509:
1459:
1358:
636:
does not make sense, as negation is a semantic topic, not a purely syntactic one. The classical distinction would make it
882:
I agree. Negation is a natural language phenomenon that is only echoed symbolically in logic. I have recently written an
1438:
44:
978:
305:
179:
1192:
and so on. Could someone expand this article talking about the ¬ symbol itself, or create it's own article please? --
1065:
1149:
1129:
1378:
1072:
903:
1327:
1023:
770:
727:
814:
I hope you will reconsider. I am trying to expand all of the logical operator articles. The concept behind
1259:
1245:
1124:
This is weird of course, since it presumes double negation law. Not always valid, depending on the logic.
1115:
654:
586:
561:
50:
1111:
862:
94:
503:
1346:
1319:
1197:
1092:
1037:
The symbol used in the article is new to me; so far, I was certain that negation was symbolized by a
895:
722:
JA: So where are we on this? I need to continue working on the "16 function" articles. I'll make a
672:
1350:
21:
1354:
1145:
1125:
1042:
1005:
832:
828:
819:
798:
794:
723:
637:
597:
404:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
116:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
1415:
1046:
633:
540:
388:
100:
702:
statements as being contrary to fact, or what to do if something turns out to be not the case.
84:
63:
749:
668:
215:
572:
536:
1432:
1177:
684:
680:
651:
583:
558:
529:
517:
1222:
1193:
1088:
777:
frankly I'm thinking any one of them could be a feature article of the day in the making.
731:
714:
688:
641:
1389:
544:
313:
297:
1453:
1298:
982:
840:
780:
856:
I suggest not to merge the articles, and to expand
Negation (rhetoric). I wrote an
883:
1426:
1173:
1061:
703:
610:
513:
401:
113:
382:
1218:
802:
378:
228:
205:
90:
857:
555:
Please no further moves of this page without discussion and agreement here.
1168:
redirects to this article. Does this character have a meaning different to
1293:
888:
836:
815:
790:
676:
1400:
1276:
1316:⌙ redirects here, but the article doesn't explain what ⌙ is used for.
1240:. These definitions are therefore mindlessly circular and meaningless.
448:
227:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
372:
341:
974:
679:
for the primary logical meaning, instead of creating more havoc with
1164:
199:
168:
1418:. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at
1057:
1038:
730:
article for all the Hegelians and No-Exitentialists to toy with.
1284:
1086:
margin of error apart from each other), kinda like how !=, : -->
824:
468:
1445:
1382:
1362:
1331:
1306:
1263:
1249:
1237:
1226:
1201:
1181:
1153:
1133:
1119:
1096:
1076:
1050:
1027:
1008:
985:
907:
865:
843:
805:
783:
752:
734:
717:
706:
691:
657:
644:
613:
600:
589:
575:
564:
521:
506:
15:
1283:
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect
748:
This also needs some examples. I'll add some if I have time.
1275:
467:
447:
312:
296:
1421:
Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 25 § 不
767:
Knowledge:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Logical_Operators
1406:
1213:
1018:
Didn't lingo (director) use this symbol? If I may ask.
1414:
to determine whether its use and function meets the
667:. How about something analogous to what we did for
400:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
112:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1211:Someone has added comments into this section, with
279:
1480:Knowledge level-5 vital articles in Mathematics
835:articles are, maybe you will see my point with
1530:Mid-importance philosophy of language articles
977:' page with several supporting pages such as '
1144:should be reworked, to be more professional.
8:
801:needs to be expanded, and references given.
1555:Theoretical Linguistics Task Force articles
1338:Add character encoding details for symbols.
1535:Philosophy of language task force articles
1344:
1317:
336:
276:
163:
58:
797:) seems sensible to me. However, I think
1550:C-Class Theoretical Linguistics articles
697:One other problem is that we really are
675:? But it still seems advisable to keep
1525:C-Class philosophy of language articles
1470:Knowledge vital articles in Mathematics
338:
165:
60:
19:
745:something we do in everyday language.
237:about philosophy content on Knowledge.
1485:C-Class vital articles in Mathematics
1238:http://en.wikipedia.org/False_(logic)
687:(a constant PITA to use as a link).
7:
1064:in C/C++? The logical NOT would be
394:This article is within the scope of
221:This article is within the scope of
106:This article is within the scope of
1545:Mid-importance Linguistics articles
49:It is of interest to the following
1505:Mid-importance Philosophy articles
459:Theoretical Linguistics Task Force
14:
1495:Mid-priority mathematics articles
479:Philosophy of language task force
414:Knowledge:WikiProject Linguistics
126:Knowledge:WikiProject Mathematics
1560:WikiProject Linguistics articles
1465:Knowledge level-5 vital articles
1399:
417:Template:WikiProject Linguistics
381:
371:
340:
243:Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy
208:
198:
167:
129:Template:WikiProject Mathematics
93:
83:
62:
29:
20:
1424:until a consensus is reached.
434:This article has been rated as
263:This article has been rated as
246:Template:WikiProject Philosophy
146:This article has been rated as
1475:C-Class level-5 vital articles
1051:11:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
866:17:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
761:Proposed move and re-structure
713:toggles, the world does not.
522:09:37, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
1:
1515:Mid-importance logic articles
1264:22:48, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
1250:13:43, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
1182:17:58, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
1154:06:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
1134:06:35, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
1077:12:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
1009:04:19, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
476:This article is supported by
456:This article is supported by
408:and see a list of open tasks.
120:and see a list of open tasks.
1540:C-Class Linguistics articles
1490:C-Class mathematics articles
1446:03:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
1227:04:53, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
753:07:55, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
683:(already directed here), or
1500:C-Class Philosophy articles
1202:04:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
1120:14:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
1097:04:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
986:23:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
908:23:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
507:15:48, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
1576:
1363:17:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
1087:= and <= came to be. --
440:project's importance scale
269:project's importance scale
1520:Logic task force articles
1383:16:38, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
1332:22:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
784:05:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
475:
455:
433:
366:
320:
304:
275:
262:
193:
145:
78:
57:
1412:redirects for discussion
1394:Redirects for discussion
1307:22:02, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
1291:if you wish to do so. –
1287:. Please participate in
1271:Redirects for discussion
1028:17:34, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
1000:WikiProject class rating
844:23:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
806:11:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
735:04:05, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
718:19:24, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
707:19:03, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
692:18:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
658:18:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
645:15:40, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
614:13:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
601:13:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
590:18:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
576:18:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
565:17:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
152:project's priority scale
1289:the redirect discussion
771:Talk:Logical connective
397:WikiProject Linguistics
353:Theoretical Linguistics
280:Associated task forces:
109:WikiProject Mathematics
1510:C-Class logic articles
1460:C-Class vital articles
1280:
1105:Minor Semantics Issue?
728:Negation (metaphysics)
472:
452:
357:Philosophy of language
322:Philosophy of language
317:
301:
224:WikiProject Philosophy
1279:
632:for now. First off,
471:
451:
316:
300:
36:level-5 vital article
1232:No proper Definition
1187:The ¬ symbol itself?
884:encyclopedia article
673:Tautology (rhetoric)
420:Linguistics articles
132:mathematics articles
1416:redirect guidelines
1410:has been listed at
820:negation (rhetoric)
799:negation (rhetoric)
795:negation (rhetoric)
724:Negation (rhetoric)
638:negation (rhetoric)
539:moved this page to
528:Re move of page to
249:Philosophy articles
1281:
634:negation (grammar)
541:logical inequality
473:
453:
389:Linguistics portal
318:
302:
234:general discussion
101:Mathematics portal
45:content assessment
1365:
1349:comment added by
1334:
1322:comment added by
1014:Lingo Programming
979:History of Denver
910:
898:comment added by
669:Tautology (logic)
494:
493:
490:
489:
486:
485:
335:
334:
331:
330:
327:
326:
216:Philosophy portal
162:
161:
158:
157:
1567:
1444:
1409:
1403:
1312:⌙ redirects here
1305:
1296:
1216:
893:
685:Negation (logic)
681:Logical negation
530:logical negation
422:
421:
418:
415:
412:
391:
386:
385:
375:
368:
367:
362:
359:
344:
337:
287:
277:
251:
250:
247:
244:
241:
218:
213:
212:
211:
202:
195:
194:
189:
186:
171:
164:
134:
133:
130:
127:
124:
103:
98:
97:
87:
80:
79:
74:
66:
59:
42:
33:
32:
25:
24:
16:
1575:
1574:
1570:
1569:
1568:
1566:
1565:
1564:
1450:
1449:
1443:
1425:
1405:
1397:
1371:
1369:Life oreatation
1340:
1314:
1294:
1292:
1274:
1234:
1212:
1209:
1189:
1161:
1141:
1107:
1035:
1016:
1002:
763:
742:
704:Smerdis of Tlön
624:
611:Smerdis of Tlön
533:
499:
419:
416:
413:
410:
409:
387:
380:
360:
350:
285:
248:
245:
242:
239:
238:
214:
209:
207:
187:
177:
131:
128:
125:
122:
121:
99:
92:
72:
43:on Knowledge's
40:
30:
12:
11:
5:
1573:
1571:
1563:
1562:
1557:
1552:
1547:
1542:
1537:
1532:
1527:
1522:
1517:
1512:
1507:
1502:
1497:
1492:
1487:
1482:
1477:
1472:
1467:
1462:
1452:
1451:
1429:
1396:
1386:
1375:41.114.198.255
1370:
1367:
1339:
1336:
1313:
1310:
1273:
1267:
1233:
1230:
1208:
1207:Distributivity
1205:
1188:
1185:
1160:
1157:
1146:Vlad Patryshev
1140:
1139:The Definition
1137:
1126:Vlad Patryshev
1106:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1080:
1079:
1034:
1031:
1015:
1012:
1006:BetacommandBot
1001:
998:
997:
996:
995:
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
988:
962:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
956:
955:
954:
953:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
934:
933:
932:
931:
918:
917:
916:
915:
914:
913:
912:
911:
873:
872:
871:
870:
869:
868:
849:
848:
847:
846:
809:
808:
762:
759:
757:
741:
740:Too technical!
738:
726:, and maybe a
710:
709:
661:
660:
623:
622:Proposed split
620:
619:
618:
617:
616:
604:
603:
598:Eric Qel-Droma
579:
578:
535:Earlier today
532:
526:
525:
524:
498:
495:
492:
491:
488:
487:
484:
483:
474:
464:
463:
454:
444:
443:
436:Mid-importance
432:
426:
425:
423:
406:the discussion
393:
392:
376:
364:
363:
361:Mid‑importance
345:
333:
332:
329:
328:
325:
324:
319:
309:
308:
303:
293:
292:
290:
288:
282:
281:
273:
272:
265:Mid-importance
261:
255:
254:
252:
220:
219:
203:
191:
190:
188:Mid‑importance
172:
160:
159:
156:
155:
144:
138:
137:
135:
118:the discussion
105:
104:
88:
76:
75:
67:
55:
54:
48:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1572:
1561:
1558:
1556:
1553:
1551:
1548:
1546:
1543:
1541:
1538:
1536:
1533:
1531:
1528:
1526:
1523:
1521:
1518:
1516:
1513:
1511:
1508:
1506:
1503:
1501:
1498:
1496:
1493:
1491:
1488:
1486:
1483:
1481:
1478:
1476:
1473:
1471:
1468:
1466:
1463:
1461:
1458:
1457:
1455:
1448:
1447:
1441:
1440:
1435:
1434:
1428:
1423:
1422:
1417:
1413:
1408:
1404:The redirect
1402:
1395:
1391:
1387:
1385:
1384:
1380:
1376:
1368:
1366:
1364:
1360:
1356:
1352:
1348:
1337:
1335:
1333:
1329:
1325:
1324:77.61.180.106
1321:
1311:
1309:
1308:
1304:
1302:
1297:
1290:
1286:
1278:
1272:
1268:
1266:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1252:
1251:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1231:
1229:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1215:
1206:
1204:
1203:
1199:
1195:
1186:
1184:
1183:
1179:
1175:
1171:
1167:
1166:
1158:
1156:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1138:
1136:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1122:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1104:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1084:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1069:80.177.58.134
1067:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1054:
1053:
1052:
1048:
1044:
1040:
1032:
1030:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1020:71.90.128.212
1013:
1011:
1010:
1007:
999:
987:
984:
980:
976:
972:
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
963:
950:
949:
948:
947:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
941:
928:
927:
926:
925:
924:
923:
922:
921:
920:
919:
909:
905:
901:
900:68.41.169.229
897:
890:
885:
881:
880:
879:
878:
877:
876:
875:
874:
867:
864:
859:
855:
854:
853:
852:
851:
850:
845:
842:
838:
834:
830:
826:
821:
817:
813:
812:
811:
810:
807:
804:
800:
796:
792:
788:
787:
786:
785:
782:
778:
774:
772:
768:
760:
758:
755:
754:
751:
746:
739:
737:
736:
733:
729:
725:
720:
719:
716:
708:
705:
700:
696:
695:
694:
693:
690:
686:
682:
678:
674:
670:
666:
665:Okay, I guess
659:
656:
653:
649:
648:
647:
646:
643:
639:
635:
631:
630:
621:
615:
612:
608:
607:
606:
605:
602:
599:
594:
593:
592:
591:
588:
585:
577:
574:
569:
568:
567:
566:
563:
560:
556:
553:
550:
546:
542:
538:
531:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
510:
509:
508:
505:
496:
481:
480:
470:
466:
465:
461:
460:
450:
446:
445:
441:
437:
431:
428:
427:
424:
407:
403:
399:
398:
390:
384:
379:
377:
374:
370:
369:
365:
358:
354:
349:
346:
343:
339:
323:
315:
311:
310:
307:
299:
295:
294:
291:
289:
284:
283:
278:
274:
270:
266:
260:
257:
256:
253:
236:
235:
230:
226:
225:
217:
206:
204:
201:
197:
196:
192:
185:
181:
176:
173:
170:
166:
153:
149:
143:
140:
139:
136:
119:
115:
111:
110:
102:
96:
91:
89:
86:
82:
81:
77:
71:
68:
65:
61:
56:
52:
46:
38:
37:
27:
23:
18:
17:
1437:
1431:
1419:
1398:
1392:" listed at
1372:
1345:— Preceding
1341:
1318:— Preceding
1315:
1300:
1282:
1269:¬ listed at
1256:88.203.90.14
1253:
1242:88.203.90.14
1235:
1210:
1190:
1169:
1163:
1162:
1142:
1123:
1112:Daniel Draco
1108:
1036:
1017:
1003:
863:89.83.23.161
779:
775:
764:
756:
747:
743:
721:
711:
698:
664:
662:
628:
627:
625:
580:
557:
554:
548:
534:
500:
477:
457:
435:
395:
264:
232:
222:
148:Mid-priority
147:
107:
73:Mid‑priority
51:WikiProjects
34:
1214:these edits
1062:Bitwise NOT
894:—Preceding
839:. Be well,
769:. Also see
652:Paul August
584:Paul August
559:Paul August
504:18.62.4.221
411:Linguistics
402:linguistics
348:Linguistics
123:Mathematics
114:mathematics
70:Mathematics
1454:Categories
1194:TiagoTiago
1089:TiagoTiago
732:Jon Awbrey
715:Jon Awbrey
689:Jon Awbrey
642:Jon Awbrey
240:Philosophy
229:philosophy
175:Philosophy
1351:ACED.wiki
983:Greg Bard
545:Lowellian
39:is rated
1373:Beliefs
1359:contribs
1347:unsigned
1320:unsigned
1043:Korodzik
952:article.
896:unsigned
889:operator
841:Gregbard
816:negation
791:negation
781:Gregbard
677:Negation
497:emoticon
184:Language
858:article
438:on the
267:on the
150:on the
41:C-class
1427:Utopes
1174:Abdull
1056:Isn't
975:Denver
831:, and
629:Oppose
514:Beeurd
47:scale.
1219:Wdchk
1039:tilde
1033:Tilde
803:Dsp13
549:might
306:Logic
180:Logic
28:This
1439:cont
1433:talk
1379:talk
1355:talk
1328:talk
1301:Talk
1260:talk
1246:talk
1223:talk
1198:talk
1178:talk
1172:? --
1150:talk
1130:talk
1116:talk
1093:talk
1073:talk
1060:for
1047:talk
1024:talk
904:talk
825:nand
818:and
793:and
750:Ewjw
671:and
663:JA:
626:JA:
518:talk
1295:MJL
837:not
833:and
699:not
430:Mid
259:Mid
142:Mid
1456::
1436:/
1381:)
1361:)
1357:•
1330:)
1262:)
1248:)
1225:)
1200:)
1180:)
1159:⌐?
1152:)
1132:)
1118:)
1110:--
1095:)
1075:)
1049:)
1026:)
906:)
829:or
827:,
773:.
573:QQ
537:QQ
520:)
355:/
351::
286:/
182:/
178::
1442:)
1430:(
1407:不
1390:不
1388:"
1377:(
1353:(
1326:(
1303:‐
1299:‐
1285:¬
1258:(
1244:(
1221:(
1196:(
1176:(
1170:¬
1165:⌐
1148:(
1128:(
1114:(
1091:(
1071:(
1066:!
1058:~
1045:(
1022:(
902:(
655:☎
587:☎
562:☎
516:(
482:.
462:.
442:.
271:.
154:.
53::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
