There's a difference between "x is not negative" and "x is positive" (¬(x < 0) ⇏ (x > 0)). Why shouldn't a similar subtlety (or a larger one) exist in prosaic language?
“not unreasonable” expands to “You could provide reasons that seem valid, even if I don't agree that they support your conclusion.”
“reasonable” expands to something more like “The reasons you have provided support your conclusion.”
“reasonable” can work in this case, but it doesn't state as clearly that the speaker disagrees with your conclusions.
In a more general sense the “not un-” pattern is a marker for something that is qualitatively similar to the corresponding simple positive attribute (e.g. “reasonable” or “popular”) but not to the extent of the category of things fitting that simple positive attribute. That is, category “reasonable” is a strict subset of category “not unreasonable”.
The point of the comment was not questioning the meaning of the sentence. The phrase "not unreasonable" is quite common. With some effort, we can decpher the meaning. The point was that there are other ways to express that meaning, using fewer negatives.
For example, something like this:
"I don't consider it unreasonable to believe that supply chains will survive to 2030, so please, don't feel attacked by my beliefs."
It's the difference between "not crazy" (ie, "you don't agree with me, and that's okay") and "sane" (ie, "I'm wrong here").
There's a difference between "x is not negative" and "x is positive" (¬(x < 0) ⇏ (x > 0)). Why shouldn't a similar subtlety (or a larger one) exist in prosaic language?
Why not just say "x is zero"?
1 is also not negative.
1 reply →
“not unreasonable” expands to “You could provide reasons that seem valid, even if I don't agree that they support your conclusion.”
“reasonable” expands to something more like “The reasons you have provided support your conclusion.”
“reasonable” can work in this case, but it doesn't state as clearly that the speaker disagrees with your conclusions.
In a more general sense the “not un-” pattern is a marker for something that is qualitatively similar to the corresponding simple positive attribute (e.g. “reasonable” or “popular”) but not to the extent of the category of things fitting that simple positive attribute. That is, category “reasonable” is a strict subset of category “not unreasonable”.
The point of the comment was not questioning the meaning of the sentence. The phrase "not unreasonable" is quite common. With some effort, we can decpher the meaning. The point was that there are other ways to express that meaning, using fewer negatives.
For example, something like this:
"I don't consider it unreasonable to believe that supply chains will survive to 2030, so please, don't feel attacked by my beliefs."