The place for the grammatic cum religious discussion that will probably bore 3/4 of my friends

[ars_longa]

To get an idea what it was about you can go here and here. I wrote about the same issue in at least one more place, but, unfortunately, I lost the link. :(

P.S. Oh, and here is another bit of the same quite branched discussion - http://www.livejournal.com/users/elynross/213029.html

Comments

[irrelative.livejournal.com]

I have to disagree with you, I'm afraid.
Apollo (from your example) by no mean belongs to the same class of beings as God of Christians, Jews or Muslims (or Brahman of Hindu). The origin of confusion is the fact that the same word "G-O-D" is being used for both. Therefore capitalization or no capitalization is used to distinguish God (as in Absolute) from god (as in deity, ghost or demon) :-)

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

And here we go again with the belief in absolute god and its relation to grammar...

You really don't see the difference between a philosophy and a grammar rule? God is a general noun, devised to describe a certain species (deities). Personal names of said deities are proper nouns. The name of a class is not. Like cat, or dog, or man, or woman isn't. The fact that some religion is considering their god to be the one and only god and therefore capitalizing this word as a proper noun is a grammatic implication of a religious arrogance, akin to a very widespread amongst less developed societes tradition of naming only their own group "people" and naming any other group of people by a different word (barbars, for example). That has nothing to do with rules of grammar that indicate quite clearly what is generic and what is not. Now, the religious people have rights to express their beliefs in this way. No one else, though, is obliged to do the same.

[irrelative.livejournal.com]

General noun devised to describe a certain species is "god", whereas "God" is a prope name of a singular being. in this sence it is more "proper" that "Trurl" or "ars_longa" there might be other trurls and other ars_longas, but the very meaning of "other" in inapplicable to the idea of (monotheistic) God.
And yes, language (grammar included) is just a tool to reflect thought (philosophy included).
Here is an analogy if you like: "God" is related to "god" in a similar way as "Smith" related to 'smith" :-)

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

I'd recommend you to read the grammar book again. :) And can I humbly remaind you, that the idea of one and only true god isn't obligatory in our society anymore? You can choose whatever word you want as a personal name - Spring, Ocean, Meadow and so on. It's your right. And write it capitalized. Certainly. And, according to rules of our society others will also write it capitalized referring to you. However, I don't remember the Christian god filling this line in his birth certificate or other government-issued papers, designed to confirm his identity. Religion is ceparated from the state here. So, religion-based obligation are not mandatory in any form of civilian interaction. Including grammatic rules.

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

obligationS

[irrelative.livejournal.com]

But of course!
Nothing is obligatiry. You are free to talk/write any way you want! That is your right.
It is my right however not to understand what the hell you are talking about.

Now seriousely. Certainly the idea of the one and the only is no more obligatory in our society (it is a shame that it's ever been). However it does not influent the idea of the one and the only God in any way. You see, there are only two possibilities: either there is the one and the only God or there is not. You can refere to him/her/it as "God". You also can refere as "god" to something (anything from the monotheistic point of view) that is not him/her/it. Either way you are refering to entirely different things/persons/entities.
Of course, religion-based obligations are not mandatory. Should not be. Still, mutual understanding-based - are... if not mandatory, then by all means desireble.

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

рурб but that's exactly what I was talking about - that they are not mandatory and should never be. :) That's my whole fat point. :) Other than that I certainly have no objection to everyone writing this word in any manner he/she wants, up to and including big red Gothic letters. :)

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

And, by the way, the constatation that this rule is not mandatory certainly doesn't belong to the realm of 'of course' to some of my opponents. :)

[irrelative.livejournal.com]

As for me nothing is mandatory. There is a whole lot of things however that are better be agreed upon. Honestly, the difference is in words only :-)
Again, this is the difference between language and thought. Being a VERY lazy person i always keep trying to minimize this difference in order to make it easier to express myself. And as I do it I find (to my own surprise) that the more definite (=obligatory) the meanings of words are, the smaller this difference is.
See, I am the one for whom the word 'freedom' does not mean anything but "realized necessity" (? осознаная необходимость is what I mean).

Darn it... I can not fully express myself in English.
As a matter of fact - in Russian too.

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

I can. Sounds funny sometimes, yes. :)

The whole discussion begun with the statement that the word God should be always capitalized. That was what perked my attention. Like, since when it's a mandatory rule in modern grammar and can somebody explain it? It all snowballed from there, down up to the First Nicaean Council. I'm sure you'ra quite familiar with the picture. :) Of course, the original question was happily forgotten. :)

[irrelative.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that is how all the discussions go: all the way down to 1st Nicean Council or something like that :-)
That's what makes'em real good - and who the hell cares 'bout the original question? :-)

instant offtopic

[global-kid.livejournal.com]

Dear Ars_longa,

I'll vault to Chicago over the Pond for a couple of days early next week. Have never been to Chicago. Am really curious for this cradle of House and Dub. Is there any places (not too crowded) for an ignorant москаль to get a taste of what these things were and are in your blessed town? I mean a place to sit and sip a stout and relax... and listen to this heavenly dreadlock music? Sun/mon night? Or where to call/surf?

Re: instant offtopic

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, I'm the last person to ask about these things. I'm an essential working girl - no time for such decadent indulgences. :) My advice would be to go to http://www.cofe.ru/Apple/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=59158 - there you can find some good suggestions. If this won't help, I really don't know where to look next. :)

Re: instant offtopic

[ars-longa.livejournal.com]

And by the way, there is the guy who knows about that kind of entertainment - http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=foxmonk If he'll deign to answer, of course. :)