Is it okay not to add "and" or "but"?
A. Some philosophers have wanted to be able to show that they're not scientific, that they're in fact merely pseudo-scientific.
Q1) Is sentence A correct and natural English? Q2) Is it okay to add "but" as in ",... but that they're in fact merely pseudo-scientific"?
Q3) Doesn't the meaning of A change even if "but" is added as in Q2?
Q4) Is it wrong to add "and" as in ",... and that they're in fact merely pseudo-scientific"?
I think A is correct and natural, but I think there should be "but" in front of the second "that", but it seems to be omitted, but to place "and" before the second "that" seems to be wrong, though at least to place "but" there seems to be correct.
Am I right?
Top answer
fire1 Am I right? It's hard to say. The sentence does not make a lot of sense to me.
- fire1 Am I right?
- It's hard to say.
- The sentence does not make a lot of sense to me.
- Why would anybody want to show that they are pseudo- anything?
- And why would a philosopher shun science when his job is to determine the truth?
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
fire1Am I right?
It's hard to say. The sentence does not make a lot of sense to me. Why would anybody want to show that they are pseudo- anything? And why would a philosopher shun science when his job is to determine the truth?
0
Related Questions