I want to write a philosophical paper for journal publication. It's to be on what has been called "Theological Noncognitivism", "Ignosticism" and "Igtheism". The claim is as follows. "God" (capitalized, not "god" with a small "g"), "Allah", "Yahweh", "Elohim", "Creator of the universe" etc., are not the name [in English] of anything that exists or anything that doesn't exist, or anything that might exist, or anything that might not exist. They are "pseudo-terms" or "pseudo-words" or "pseudo-names", i.e., meaningless (vacuous of coherent meaning) rows of alphabet letters. There are no mental concepts of anything that any of these rows of alphabet letters can refer to. They are just meaningless rows of alphabet letters, although they are regularly spoken and written as though they refer to something. Indeed they trigger emotions in theists. The emotions they feel makes them think the emotions are caused by something that the row of letters "God" refers to. But the emotions are caused by the indoctrination they received as a child. Thus Christians, Jews, and Muslims do not believe in, or worship, any god. They only believe that they do. Yes, theists believe that they believe in something, and that they worship something, labeled "God" even though nothing has ever been defined or described by them or by anybody else for them to believe in. Atheists and agnostics, although they don't believe that they themselves believe in a god, they are wrong because they believe that theists believe in a god when theist don't believe in a god named "God" even though they believe that they do..
I want to stress the fact that language is man-made. No one should ever say "What does this word (or term or sequence of alphabet letters) mean?". They should only ask "What have humans long ago, ("word coiners creating the English language", if you will), through the ages, coined this word (or term or sequence of alphabet letters) and used it to refer to, if anything at all? To say "What does it mean?" automatically implies (begs the question) that it does refer to something. This is the way I want the paper to speak.
IOW I want it to be written mostly in metalanguage (language about language) rather than solely in object language (language about the world). If you can't undertake this can you name somebody who will?
Bu iş için 21 freelancer ortalamada $124 teklif veriyor
I can do a Theists, atheists and agnostics are all wrong for you within given deadline. Kindly consider me. I have more than 10 years of working experience in the industry. I am producing quality content for my client Daha Fazla
I am willing to help you Theists, atheists and agnostics are all wrong this project. I will deliver this work at very low price. My name is Rabia Faisal, I am working in the writing industry since 2011. In this time, Daha Fazla
I have looked over your project Theists, atheists and agnostics are all wrong and I feel myself most suitable for this project. I am a highly-qualified writer, and I can assure you quality work on this topic. Try me o Daha Fazla
I am requesting you to consider me for your project Theists, atheists and agnostics are all wrong and assure you perfect piece of work. I have seen and understood your requirements. I am providing writing services sin Daha Fazla
I will be happy to help you in the Theists, atheists and agnostics are all wrong project you posted. Please click on chat option. I am working in the writing industry since 2014, freelancer.com is the second forum wh Daha Fazla
After having a detailed view of your project Theists, atheists and agnostics are all wrong requirements. I feel very confident that I am your best choice. I have more than 4 years of experience of managing academic pr Daha Fazla
I have been a freelance content writer for past 10 years and worked on several magazines. Most of my writings are research based and I have previously worked on these sorts of topics
I am a true fan of discussions, both theological and philosophical, I really like to make sense of the question of What is behind the curtain?