On Capitalization

[cnorman18]

A small matter that has bothered me for some time, not as a theist but as a grammarian, is the rather studied and deliberate manner in which some on this board refuse to spell the word "God" with a capital letter when it refers to the God of Christianity or Judaism.

When referring to multiple gods, e.g. the Greek gods, or to unspecified "gods" in general, the uncapitalized form is perfectly proper; but when referring, as is most commonly the case here, to the Judeo-Christian God, it ought to be spelled properly, as "God," because it is in effect a proper name. That practice does not indicate belief or even respect; that is simply the way it's spelled.

Muslims do not typically use that term, preferring "Allah," and I do not notice anyone refusing to capitalize that. Again, that's simply the way it's spelled. No one assumes it means you believe in Allah when you trouble to spell it right.

Refusing to capitalize the word strikes me as petty and more than a little childish, nothing more than a calculated bit of provocation and disrespect. And it's silly. After all, you don't even see the most irrational and wrongheaded of fundamentalists and YECs referring to "charles darwin."

The word is "God." Spell it properly. No one's going to mistake you for a Baptist.

Debate question is obvious. Someone's going to try to defend this bit of petty nonsense.

(For the record, "rabbi" is not capitalized, except when used as a personal title: "my rabbi," as opposed to "Rabbi Stein." "Jew" and "Jewish," on the other hand, are always capitalized, in any form or context, but "synagogue" is not.)

I once taught English as well as mathematics. You don't have to respect God, but you ought to respect the language.

[Negative Proof]

I can see your point, cnorman. I, too, am usually a stickler for grammar, and take pride in my own spelling and use of the language (even though we all slip up on occasion).

However, the lower-case "g" in my spelling of "god" in referring to the Judeo-Christian god is very intentional. I do not see the need to capitalize, because I do not believe in him, and he is no different from any other god to me. In Christianity, he is given no proper name, much akin to naming a dog "Dog" or a cat "Cat".

It obviously seems childish to you, and understandably so. The reason I started doing it, however, was not because I simply chose to stop on my own as a sort of petty annoyance to those of faith, but rather because I was called out on it once in expressing my ideas on another site. A believer made the stupid argument that went something like "Well, if you don't believe, then why do you still capitalize His name?" Out of spite, I stopped, because on some level, it made sense to me. I don't beileve he's real, I certainly don't respect things I don't believe exist, and the word itself is a common noun. So I use it as such, and I believe it can be determined by the context of my argument which god it is I'm referring to, and if I feel I'm being ambiguous, I'll specify.

I realize that some religions do give their gods a proper name, and as such, these names should be capitalized. "Yahweh" or "Allah" or "Zeus" or "Jehova" are either proper names or non-english terms not translated to english in order to represent a proper name. Again, the distinction is not made as a jibe to believers, but rather as a personal preference, positively influenced by my lack of belief and god's lack of a real name.

[McCulloch]

I realize that some religions do give their gods a proper name, and as such, these names should be capitalized. "Yahweh" or "Allah" or "Zeus" or "Jehova" are either proper names or non-english terms not translated to english in order to represent a proper name. Again, the distinction is not made as a jibe to believers, but rather as a personal preference, positively influenced by my lack of belief and god's lack of a real name.

Normally the word English is capitalized. And you call yourself a stickler!

Substitute cat for god in the above and the application of the rule becomes self-evident.

• I realize that some households do give their cats a proper name, and as such, these names should be capitalized. "Bustopher" or "Macavity" or "Mungojerrie" or "Rumpleteazer" are proper names. But when referring to a cat by the word cat used in a grammatical sense as a proper name, it should be capitalized. My cat likes to catch birds. I don't like it when Cat brings his catch to the doorstep. The distinction is not made to honour cat owners or their cats, but rather as a consistent application of grammar rules.

So your last sentence could be properly done two ways

1. Again, the distinction is not made as a jibe to believers, but rather as a personal preference, positively influenced by my lack of belief and God's lack of a real name.
2. Again, the distinction is not made as a jibe to believers, but rather as a personal preference, positively influenced by my lack of belief and the god's lack of a real name.

[cnorman18]

I realize that some religions do give their gods a proper name, and as such, these names should be capitalized. "Yahweh" or "Allah" or "Zeus" or "Jehova" are either proper names or non-english terms not translated to english in order to represent a proper name. Again, the distinction is not made as a jibe to believers, but rather as a personal preference, positively influenced by my lack of belief and god's lack of a real name.

Normally the word English is capitalized. And you call yourself a stickler!

Substitute cat for god in the above and the application of the rule becomes self-evident.

• I realize that some households do give their cats a proper name, and as such, these names should be capitalized. "Bustopher" or "Macavity" or "Mungojerrie" or "Rumpleteazer" are proper names. But when referring to a cat by the word cat used in a grammatical sense as a proper name, it should be capitalized. My cat likes to catch birds. I don't like it when Cat brings his catch to the doorstep. The distinction is not made to honour cat owners or their cats, but rather as a consistent application of grammar rules.

So your last sentence could be properly done two ways

1. Again, the distinction is not made as a jibe to believers, but rather as a personal preference, positively influenced by my lack of belief and God's lack of a real name.
2. Again, the distinction is not made as a jibe to believers, but rather as a personal preference, positively influenced by my lack of belief and the god's lack of a real name.

Very well stated!

As I said at the outset, it's a small thing. My face does not turn red and steam does not blow from my ears when I see the word "God" without the capital G.

By the way--if one is asked, "Well, if you don't believe, then why do you still capitalize His name?" a perfectly acceptable answer would be, "Because, though I don't believe in God, I do believe in using the spelling rules of the English language properly." The question was a silly one and ought to have been marked as such, as opposed to accepting its specious premise and going along with it.

[Negative Proof]

By the way--if one is asked, "Well, if you don't believe, then why do you still capitalize His name?" a perfectly acceptable answer would be, "Because, though I don't believe in God, I do believe in using the spelling rules of the English language properly." The question was a silly one and ought to have been marked as such, as opposed to accepting its specious premise and going along with it.

Yes, I admitted that the argument was very silly, and meant to make no claim to its validity. However, even from the stupidest of questions, one can be led to come to a different conclusion. The fact was that I had been taught from childhood to capitalize god's name and the pronouns used to refer to him because I was supposed to beileve.

Further, I absolutely understand that I am contradicting the rules of grammar by refusing to capitalize the Christian god's name, and I absolutely concede that you are correct in correcting me. As far as spelling and sentence agreement go, I follow the rules as closely as I can to get my thought across. There are some things I do, however, that are my willful bending or blatant contradiction of the rules of grammar in order to better illustrate an opinion I hold or a thought I wish to convey. The lower-case "g" in god's name happens to be one of these. Another would be my comma splices in certain sentences. I use commas not only where they are appropriate, but anywhere in a sentence where I believe a pause is warranted or should be observed in order to convey an idea.

I don't do this to annoy anyone. I simply believe that a common noun used in the place of a proper name for something that cannot be proven to exist deserves no proper treatment. This is my belief and my practice. I don't seek to push its use on anyone else, nor do I seek to force everyone to use commas in the same way that I do. Again, I realize that I go against the rules of grammar when I do these things, and I willfully do so based on my own subjective beliefs.

Wow, that last sentence made me feel like an apologetic for a moment.

Your post was, indeed, well stated McCullogh. My argument wasn't that I wouldn't capitalize the name of a pet if it were named "Dog" or "Cat", it simply points to a certain laziness when naming said being. As for my lack of capitalization of the word "English", this was not intentional, and thank you for the correction. As I said, we all slip up sometimes.

[McCulloch]

Further, I absolutely understand that I am contradicting the rules of grammar by refusing to capitalize the Christian god's name, and I absolutely concede that you are correct in correcting me.[...] There are some things I do, however, that are my willful bending or blatant contradiction of the rules of grammar in order to better illustrate an opinion I hold or a thought I wish to convey. The lower-case "g" in god's name happens to be one of these.
[...]
I realize that I go against the rules of grammar when I do these things, and I willfully do so based on my own subjective beliefs.

Might I suggest a compromise? You stumbled upon it in the first sentence quoted above. It is grammatically correct and avoids the uppercase g. The final sentence before the ellipsis could be restated similarly as, "The lower-case "g" in a god's name happens to be one of these. "

I will not stamp and shout or even object if you do not. Deliberate flouting of grammar rules is a legitimate form of expression.

[cnorman18]

I find, once again, that I must concur with McCulloch, and thus alter my position. Writing "God" with a small g is indeed a legitimate way to make or emphasize a point, and the rules of spelling and grammar are not inviolate in that regard.

Also, I must agree, since, when it comes to the placement of superfluous commas, I, myself, do that, as well, and rather often...

Why, I have even been known to use the word "ain't."

[Negative Proof]

Why, I have even been known to use the word "ain't."

Ah, to be from Texas. I wouldn't be surprised if it were in the law books that we are required to use the word "ain't" at least once per day.

It's nice to be agreeing to agree with you for a change, cnorman. Even if it is only upon the specifics of a particular disagreement that we have.

And thank you once again, McCulloch, for your well-worded posts. In using an "a" before referring to the Christian god, however, I believe I might come across as more vague than I intend to. But, we'll see. If any confusion arises over how I type it, I suppose I'll just have to grit my teeth and start capitalizing. It is, after all, grammatically correct.

[cnorman18]

Ah, to be from Texas. I wouldn't be surprised if it were in the law books that we are required to use the word "ain't" at least once per day.

"Ain't," no.

"Y'all"--absolutely.

(Quite a useful word, actually, "y'all." There is no other word in English that clearly denotes the plural "you," now that "ye" is extinct.)

It's nice to be agreeing to agree with you for a change, cnorman. Even if it is only upon the specifics of a particular disagreement that we have.

Pfft. I an sure we agree on a great many things. Do you like chocolate?

Seriously: I have found on this board and others that I am generally more often in agreement with atheists than with fundamentalists on virtually every issue connected with religion--except, of course, that of God's existence.

And, as counterintuitive as it may seem, I consider that a relatively trivial point compared with issues of ethics, respect for science and rationality, freedom of thought, and above all respect and good will toward our fellow humans. I suspect that you and I are in agreement on those, as well.

(Reminds me of an old Doonesbury strip when Joanie Caucus was about to debate Phyllis Schafly: "Well, she's pro-life, pro-God, and pro-family." "And I'm AGAINST them?")

[McCulloch]

"Y'all"--absolutely.

(Quite a useful word, actually, "y'all." There is no other word in English that clearly denotes the plural "you," now that "ye" is extinct.)

There is a first nations language which has 5 versions of the first person plural pronoun (we and us in English).

1. you and me
2. some other person and me
3. more than one other person and me
4. you, me and some other person
5. you, me and more than one other person

[Qbert]

I was taught that the hebrew god's name is holy, that they did not mention him by name. Keeping that in mind, I see no reason why someone of no faith should be required to capitalize the word god, since the Hebrew god does have a name indeed. Capitalize his name...not what he is.