82.963
düzenleme
On Dokuzuncu Mektup/en: Revizyonlar arasındaki fark
"The second kind of ‘consensus in meaning’ is that which occurs when different people relate a particular incident, for example, one okka(*<ref>*One okka was the equivalent of 2.8 lbs. or 1,3000 gr. (Tr.)</ref>)of food fed two hundred people, in different versions: one person describes in one way, another in another way, and another in yet another way, but all are unanimously agreed on the occurrence of the incident. Thus, its certain occurrence is s..." içeriğiyle yeni sayfa oluşturdu
("The latter is also of two kinds: the first includes those concerning which the consensus is implied by silence. For example, if a man in a community relates an incident in front of his people and those listening do not contradict him, that is, they respond to him by keeping silent, this implies their acceptance of the report. In particular, if that communit y is such as will not accept any error, will consider any lie reprehensible, is ready to critici..." içeriğiyle yeni sayfa oluşturdu) |
("The second kind of ‘consensus in meaning’ is that which occurs when different people relate a particular incident, for example, one okka(*<ref>*One okka was the equivalent of 2.8 lbs. or 1,3000 gr. (Tr.)</ref>)of food fed two hundred people, in different versions: one person describes in one way, another in another way, and another in yet another way, but all are unanimously agreed on the occurrence of the incident. Thus, its certain occurrence is s..." içeriğiyle yeni sayfa oluşturdu) |
||
| 124. satır: | 124. satır: | ||
The latter is also of two kinds: the first includes those concerning which the consensus is implied by silence. For example, if a man in a community relates an incident in front of his people and those listening do not contradict him, that is, they respond to him by keeping silent, this implies their acceptance of the report. In particular, if that communit y is such as will not accept any error, will consider any lie reprehensible, is ready to criticize and, in addition, shows an interest in the reported incident, its silence testifies strongly to the incident having occurred. | The latter is also of two kinds: the first includes those concerning which the consensus is implied by silence. For example, if a man in a community relates an incident in front of his people and those listening do not contradict him, that is, they respond to him by keeping silent, this implies their acceptance of the report. In particular, if that communit y is such as will not accept any error, will consider any lie reprehensible, is ready to criticize and, in addition, shows an interest in the reported incident, its silence testifies strongly to the incident having occurred. | ||
< | The second kind of ‘consensus in meaning’ is that which occurs when different people relate a particular incident, for example, one okka(*<ref>*One okka was the equivalent of 2.8 lbs. or 1,3000 gr. (Tr.)</ref>)of food fed two hundred people, in different versions: one person describes in one way, another in another way, and another in yet another way, but all are unanimously agreed on the occurrence of the incident. Thus, its certain occurrence is supported by ‘consensus in meaning’ and is definite; its actual occurrence is not harmed by differences in detail. | ||
<div lang="tr" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> | <div lang="tr" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"> | ||