The study of languages is a convincing metaphor, but the metaphor is better than the argument. Note that you could substitute ‘methodological naturalism’ for ‘Christianity’ in your essay and it would be no less coherent.
I see what you’re getting at, dear Dr Mott! And it had been a long time. But what about the part of the argument where I give the reasons why British people need to be fluent first specifically in Christianity rather than in any other “language?” I’m not sure that I know what methodological naturalism is, but does it have the same weight in Western European culture as Christianity has had over the centuries?
Bravo 👏 I’ve found that the better I understand English, the better I can explain to students what’s different—or similar—about Japanese.
The study of languages is a convincing metaphor, but the metaphor is better than the argument. Note that you could substitute ‘methodological naturalism’ for ‘Christianity’ in your essay and it would be no less coherent.
I see what you’re getting at, dear Dr Mott! And it had been a long time. But what about the part of the argument where I give the reasons why British people need to be fluent first specifically in Christianity rather than in any other “language?” I’m not sure that I know what methodological naturalism is, but does it have the same weight in Western European culture as Christianity has had over the centuries?
And how are you?!