That’s not just a re-phrasing. That something is not to be avoided is not the same as that it is to be pursued—thus, “not should” is different from “should not”. Also, “that is not to say that...” is not a direct endorsement of what follows (EDIT: or its negation).
Rephrase this as the positive claim
and it feels a whole lot different. What evidence for this claim can we think of?
That’s not just a re-phrasing. That something is not to be avoided is not the same as that it is to be pursued—thus, “not should” is different from “should not”. Also, “that is not to say that...” is not a direct endorsement of what follows (EDIT: or its negation).
Yes, but “not shouldn’t” is the same thing as “should”, unless you’re an intuitionist. (I’m not not an intuitionist...)