Michael

Would one consider the terms "is not", "am not", "were not", etc. valid E-Prime? After all, no implication of indentity occurs; only the logical fact that no such identity exists.

Edit: I've noticed that the terms "is not", "am not" and "were not" do not have the formattng applied to the usual usages of the verb "to be". I assume this implies the validity of the negative copula in E-Prime...

nodalnim

I think that "is not" statements can actually help one break free from th damaging effects of "isness". For example, let's say I've developed a habit of thinking & saying: "I am a bad person." Not a very healthy habit. But, th statement, "I am not a bad person," can help reverse th effects of th more damaging one, if I make an attempt to accept it. Of course, I'm not a bad person! I'm not anything; no one can "be" anything at all.

"I am not a bad person," does not mean th same as, "I am a good person." Th latter bonds us to a self-limiting identity, that of absolute "goodness." Th former breaks us out of a different self-limiting identity, that of absolute "badness."

Of course, "is not" statements can damage also. Take this sentence: "You're not one of us."

Anyway, whether th negative copula "counts" or not, I couldn't say, but I would suggest that it can fit with th spirit of E-Prime.

My 2 cents,
Andrew / Nodal Nim