I wonder what "structure" should one use, "to not" or "not to"?
Is there a difference? is one more accepted?
"It's human nature to not do what someone else wants"
"Like I needed another reason not to like dogs."
Can those sentences be re-written as:
"It's human nature not to do what someone else wants"
"Like I needed another reason to not like dogs"
Answer: Yes.
Proviso: But they suggest slightly different emphases, or occasionally different semantics. For example, with the negation you may be intending to express antipathy instead of apathy.
You might move the negation onto the verb to clarify:
"Like I needed another reason to dislike dogs"
This is really the problem of split infinitives in disguise. In this case, not is our adverb. When you write "another reason to not like dogs", to like is the infinitive that you have split with the adverb not.
Is it bad to split infinitives? In most cases, no, though some would disagree. As far as I'm concerned, all it should really come down to is that one choice of wording might be clearer or have the desired emphasis.
I would argue that using the phrasing "to not" puts more emphasis on "not", whatever that happens to mean in the context.
I think in former times NOT To was commonly used and now it is common to use TO NOT with no difference in meaning.
Compare these examples:
"I walked out not to agree with him but because I was too tired to listen anymore." "I walked out to not agree with him because silence denotes assent."
The first leaves it unclear whether I disagreed with him; the second is quite clear. Even with the two examples about human nature, I'll claim the "not to" example implies indifference but the "to not" example implies perversity.
