Changes

: I am not doubting that one or more copies were burned. I am just objecting to the suggestion that all copies were burned. Why not just say that a copy was burned? [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:40, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

: I am not doubting that one or more copies were burned. I am just objecting to the suggestion that all copies were burned. Why not just say that a copy was burned? [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:40, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

::Since Descartes clearly tells us that he couldn't get hold of the book because 'all copies were burned', but since he was mistaken in that some copies plainly survived, it is accurate to say that 'his book was burned'. It would be inaccurate to say that 'a copy' was burned since it seems to have been more than that. It would be equally inaccurate to say that 'all copies' were burned. To say 'his book was burned', which if you recall is what I said in the first place, covers that in-between point without laboring the issue.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 08:45, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

::Since Descartes clearly tells us that he couldn't get hold of the book because 'all copies were burned', but since he was mistaken in that some copies plainly survived, it is accurate to say that 'his book was burned'. It would be inaccurate to say that 'a copy' was burned since it seems to have been more than that. It would be equally inaccurate to say that 'all copies' were burned. To say 'his book was ordered to be burned', which if you recall is what I said in the first place and what the article now says, covers that in-between point without laboring the issue. I trust we can now let the article rest at that. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 08:45, 5 May 2007 (EDT)--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 08:47, 5 May 2007 (EDT)