Originally posted by: KEV1N
Logically, yes, if you assume "more" is "not less (~less)" and useful is "not useless (~useless)".
Then "not less useless" = "not less" and "not useless" = more useful
But semantically, no, because less useless implies that the subject is still useless, just to a lesser degree. If a thing is useless to any degree, it can hardly be called useful.
Originally posted by: KEV1N
Logically, yes, if you assume "more" is "not less (~less)" and useful is "not useless (~useless)".
Then "not less useless" = "not less" and "not useless" = more useful
But semantically, no, because less useless implies that the subject is still useless, just to a lesser degree. If a thing is useless to any degree, it can hardly be called useful.
Originally posted by: KEV1N
Logically, yes, if you assume "more" is "not less (~less)" and useful is "not useless (~useless)".
Then "not less useless" = "not less" and "not useless" = more useful
But semantically, no, because less useless implies that the subject is still useless, just to a lesser degree. If a thing is useless to any degree, it can hardly be called useful.
