"< rss version="2.0" >"
"< !-- xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" - You can add this line to the rss specification if you want to. It's the only writing W3C has on rss feeds, I think. Atom is also a fine choice beside this RSS 2.0. Choose whatever you like, please. -- >"
"< !-- The atom links below are for the most part useless. Don't bother with it in RSS 2.0. Rather, you may want to investigate "namespaces" for the extensible RSS 2.0/2.0.1. -- >"
"< !-- The favicon is picked up automatically under the RSS 2.0 standard so it needs no explicit definition in any rss feed of this kind. -- >"
"< channel >"
"< title>The White Room Complete - The Last Part"
"< !--
"< !--
"< !--
"< link>http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html"
"< description>This is mainly the personal presentation of myself with various philosophy I've written (incl. Philosophical Notes and Issues From
the Internet)."
"< language>en-GB"
"< copyright>Terje Lea / Terje L. F. Olsnes-Lea, 1998-2011"
"< webmaster>t.lea@t-lea.net (Terje L. F. Olsnes-Lea)"
"< lastbuilddate>Wed, 18 Mar 2011 11:00:00 GMT"
"< docs>http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html"
"< image >"
"< title>The White Room Complete - The Last Part"
"< !--
"< url>http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/t_daemon_lea_142x141.gif"
"< link>http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html"
"< width>144"
"< height>144"
"< /image >"
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html
<p>As you can see from the preceding RSS message, this post of RSS will address all changes since 11. March and possibly
a few other changes before this that haven't been reported on before. This post of RSS will be deleted as soon as the proper listing
of changes takes place.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#PMRW
<p>You can add all the (meaningless) categories/set containers you want under a natural set/one set that contains members,
but where do you get when the bottom container is empty? Clearly, it's just rubbish and thus it's not a serious argument against
the project that Principia Mathematica represents.</p>
<p>[Edit:] Added ""The first natural level" can also be seen as "the deepest level" before, if any at all, the empty set
can occur." [End of edit.] I've added more also.</p>
<p>Note5: I've added member and members to object and objects to avoid ambiguity.</p>
<p>As you may infer, I've uploaded this addition to the project 05.03.2011, but it is only now reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html
<p>I have an idea over tele-medicine! Why just not have <i>the office</i>/"booth" with the nurse
in it and have the doctor to administrate 5 of them or so as much of the actual medicine can be carried out by the
nurse/secretary? This can be much more efficient and lower the threshold for seeking the services, i.e., a kind of
"medical McDonald's". Hush, don't tell the grumpy doctors!</p>
<p>While I'm at it, I don't hold the Tele-medicine-"booth" to be a new idea, I just want to be persistent on
it for various reasons... (heh-heh, yes...) Cheers!</p>
<p>This idea has already been published on Twitter 01.03.2011 and actually published on this website 05.03.2011 and
only now reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/quotes.html
<p>"No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>Schrödinger's cat can also be set up with a rat, by requirement of the ladies, slightly sedated and laid under
the guillotine. So when this condition of the atom triggers, the guillotine blade falls and decapitates the rat, rendering
it certainly and clearly dead, with its head chopped off and thus leaving the rat in 2 pieces. This may be a better
demonstration of the experiment.</p>
<p>Note on my competence to this: I must "warn" readers that I have been reading Lee Smolin's "The Trouble With Physics" (by Penguin
Group, 2006) and Roger Penrose's "The Road to Reality" (by Vintage Books, 2004). I have also studied physics all the way through upper
high school, 3 years, for the Norwegian equivalent of GCSE Science and I've looked carefully into Bayesian problems in philosophy
(relating to the Raven's Paradox by Carl Hempel) and (the metaphysics of) Time for that matter.</p>
<p>This addition has already been made to the Philosophy Now forum 23.02.2011 and it is
only now reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1424605/the-making-of-the-carthage-connection/
<p>I hereby suggest that we (in Europe) should reinvigorate Carthage as a city of the kind of Las Vegas and make it also to be the
business promotion site and portal for European-African connections (of mostly business importance)!</p>
<p>I think it's high time for Europe to do this and it should be possible to see as a fine conciliation to Africa, very diligently
(this year or next?)!</p>
<p>You know, as it lies there, by the plans, by Tunis, it only takes a complex of buildings and a rail over to Tunis to make it
look great! :-D</p>
<p>I think such a project may be able to hold many good virtues! Let's do it!</p>
<p>This addition has already been made to the blog on blog.t-lea.net and the Philosophy Now forum and it is
only now added to the Angelfire blog and RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
<p>Against "The Best is Not Consistent With Good (Only)"</p>
<p>Re: The EU is still a US-vassal</p>
<p>SCANDAL: Theory of St. Magnus' "Androids"</p>
<p>Re: what about Ether?</p>
<p>Re: Why we can not see the future?</p>
<p>Re: abortion crime - Watch the date for this one because it should have been added around
02. Feb. when has only been reported by RSS now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#PMRW
Mathematica by B. R. and A. N. W. It goes:</p>
<p>This is the start of the project of researching a possible completion of the Principia Mathematica by Russell and Whitehead.</p>
<p>For the time being, I have this to write. Out of 'I know nothing and my set is empty! Can you call illusions knowledge? I don't
think so! What is it to know? I have
absolutely no idea! To "know" has been assigned to me! Thanks, Russell, for pointing out the danger of having a single
proposition of knowledge!' TL (I think this quote has been made around 20.11.2009 or a little bit later, but at least in
2009. 23rd Nov. 2009 is by record of Twitter.),
I think the set theory that breaks the Principia Mathematica can be solved by <b>S = ∅</b> (set of solution is empty).<br>
In case of protest, one should remember that one object lower down the hypothetical chain of sets (by categories) triggers
necessary objects all the way up to the "first natural level where one would otherwise see an empty set right below it".
"The first natural level" can also be seen as "the deepest level" before, if any at all, the empty set can occur.</p>
<p>If this is the only problem, the way for Principia Mathematica is completed. If not, I think there are good chances for completing it.</p>
<p>There are also 3 notes that follow the writing.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>I just like to say that I support the aether theory, if not exactly for a fluid, but I guess most theorists hold that the
"fluid" is not a fluid as such. Rather, it's more about undetected phenomena connected to gravity yet not being any graviton.</p>
<p>An alternative view to aether can be this: in a unified picture of physics where the strong and weak magnetic forces are combined,
one may achieve a calculated picture that equals what we perceive as gravity, but without adding any new particles and only asserting
properties to mass in general, that is, "monades", the most basic constituents have a gravity/magnetic property to them and that is all.
Job's done! This is all there is to describe because we have simply reached the bottom level there is to describe whatsoever!</p>
<p>Let me point out again that magnetism has north and south poles and thus reflect earth gravity, but on a micro scale. So this
post is now also an update on my view on aether!</p>
<p>So let me be clear: I'm open to both of these views and that I intend to investigate these magnetic calculations first. I'm not
sure on the approach for (new) aether, MM-compatible, other than for the fact that I see it logical in the extension of Einstein's RT.
But I must point out that the aether research program now looks weak as one is yet to determine any property of it (apart from pure
physical space). I've been in the hope one can find or identify a kind of new ocean, one that is "plastic" in nature, has some kind
of an unknown physical property and is subtle and that matter just represents a function opposite to it by making gravity definite.
Further than this is hard to describe other than the fact that I think it is an aesthetic property of the Universe.</p>
<p>This addition to the Opinions on Physics has already been published, 24.02.2011, and it is only now reported by RSS.
I should be clear by this that I put my confidence on new calculations of strong and weak interactions to end the hunt for the
explanation of gravity as a separate entity. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
<p>4 U.S. American Authors I'd Like to Mention - Watch the date for this one because it should have been added around
11. Feb. when has only been reported by RSS now.</p>
<p>Re: Can Planned Parenthood be Trusted?</p>
<p>Curriculum/recommended reading of Philosophy</p>
<p>On Einstein's "Only two things are infinite, the universe...</p>
<p>About the 3 Volumes of "Moral Psychology" by W. S.-A.</p>
<p>Suggestion: (The Making of) The Carthage Connection!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/quotes.html
<p>"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein</p>
<p>"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein<br>
I've also made a comment to it so that any ambiguity is removed.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html
<p>The text: The different types of skin are shaped to the scalpel and can be statistically considered by measurement and thus
the blade can be shaped accordingly.</p>
<p>The sowing takes place on the underskin/leather-skin and natural healing is preserved the upper skin, possibly helped by medical
tape or a kind of medical glue. The sowing required by the work-"hand" is also a requirement to how long the extension should cut underneath
the overskin. Healing is yet to be confirmed to how effective it becomes by this particular design.<br>
(I think I originally have been thinking about this design in 2004, yet it's only published now.)</p>
<p>The text that hasn't made it quite in on the picture, says: bow of blade, extending behind the specifically shaped blade.<br>
Note: I hope to make the picture better, with or without text. I've also made a better title.</p>
<p>I'm sorry about the awful picture/drawing.</p>
<p>This idea has already been published, 23.02.2011 with a minor addition 24.02.2011, and it is now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1424015/the-threat-of-usa-beyond-north-korea-and-iran/
<p>Post subject: Re: Good and evil PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:58 am</p>
<p>Let me tell you about the threat scenario from USA, please.
<p>USA has the biggest army machine in the world, incl. its 750 nuclear warheads. When its not happy with something, i.e., "<b>Aren't we the
best??? Give us all your riches or we nuke you or destroy your best people by our covert operations by the conventional military force!!!
And this includes patents and science! In fact you are just energy containers filled with (false) hopes for the future that we want
exploited/bottled to drink like beer!!!</b>"</p>
<p>So my advise is this, the world in hypothetical opposition to USA should be symmetrical to USA in terms of both nuclear power and military
strength incl. technology and reliability of delivering damage, i.e., fx. by reliable missile technology that one has a fair certainty will
be able to strike one's targets. This can be nukes delivered from pressurized pilot's cabins for high altitude of the kind of space flight
almost like the stuff I think the B2s are equipped with, incl. heavy/strong target finders and pinpointers.</p>
<p>I, for one, see the world against USA as above the conflicts with North Korea and Iran (incl. terrorist dirty bombs) and that this
kind of conflict is conceivable. This is merely a warning. I'm not a crazy person. But still your ever loving demon/Satan!</p>
<p>So, the world! Here you are! Security for the 21st and 22nd century! Beyond this, I think Utopia is nearby if no conflict arises out of
these scenarios, if the right decisions are taken and shady scheming is kept below the national levels and below the big/middle sized
corporate level, i.e., common crook activity, but no real big threat as such!</p>
<p>(This has first been written on the Philosophy Now forum earlier, 24.02.2011.)</p>
<p>This addition has already been made to blog and it is only now reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423928/monkeybiz-family-abroad/
<p>Signals: "Send the monkey-biz family abroad! He-he-he. All 6 eh.. 7... eh... soon 8? He-he-he. In cages! He-he-he! Monkey-biz!
He-he-he. On the f*ck-rack. He-he-he!!!!"</p>
<p>F*cksh*t Norway. An Norway likes it, loves it, likes it, loves it!!!<br>
F*cksh*t Norway. An Norway likes it, loves it, likes it, loves it!!!<br>
F*cksh*t Norway!!!</p>
<p>"Monkey-biz forever!!! He-he-he!!! With blissful wishes and movie-scenes from Sorbonne, eh... eh... Sår bånn - Sore bottom!!! He-he-he!!!"</p>
<p>I'm sorry to make this writing to the blog to be honest. We'll see what the reality turns out to be in the (near) future!</p>
<p>This addition has already been made to blog and it is only now reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
<p>Post subject: Re: Good and evil PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 11:58 am</p>
<p>It's about moral character! You don't need the threat of punishment to choose good. You do it out of the inherent benefits, like a fluent
and happy society where people thrive and make the world better.</p>
<p>However, if it's a point to make it clear, there is <b>no</b> direct, opposite explanation. To bend/give way for the evil/bad/ethically devious can
<b>never</b> be justified ethically. You have <b>no</b> ethical alternative than to suffer it and have the respect for
choosing to do so. Thus, hopefully, your suffering will be revered by your contemporaries and the future, very honourably, some will say!</p>
<p>This addition has already been made on the Philosophy Now forum, as usual, and it is now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>Concerning protests to my theory on the basis of the cases of cancer in kids, i.e., below 18 yo., I write this:<br>
in the case of cancer in kids I think one should move the search to epigenetics from the parents and combine this with the
conditions (incl. epigenetics) of the children.</p>
<p>The children are also mostly struck with leukemia of what I understand.</p>
<p>Children are also (only) one percent or less of the total of cancer-struck patients whether malignant or benign...</p>
<p>This addition has already been made on the Philosophy Now forum, as usual, and it is now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>Concerning the Graviton and the Higgs' Boson:</p>
<p>I think it's clear at this stage that the Graviton and the Higgs' boson are blown out the window and are not to return to the world
of physics ever again.</p>
<p>Why? Because they need to show that the photon is relevant to both of these concepts when it's hard in the first place to show the
definite <i>particle</i> nature of the photon. Thus, photon necessarily must have both of these properties by which are hardly ever conceivable
to prove, as separable particles apart from the photon itself!<br>
It's clear however that the photon has "graviton" and "Higgs' boson" properties before we start out simply because "graviton"
is to explain why particles are drawn to other objects, especially planets, and "Higgs' boson" is to explain why particles have mass
whatsoever which all(?) have. It's therefore a kind of cheating to add "false particles" or "false names of properties" when they do not
add explanatory force. The "mystery" of the (basic) particle of photon remains and also the mysteries with how mass and gravitation
arise in the first place. Simply adding two names isn't very constructive in the general work of physics, I think (as mass and gravity
are already in place).<br>
I acknowledge that the Fermilab has set a confidence level for the finding of the Higgs' boson to 95%, but I'm sceptical of
how they get there and if their work is more than mere "string theory work".</p>
<p>It's definite though, that the photon has both properties of mass and particle nature since it is affected by gravity (fx. from Mercury
passing by the Sun). Yet the problem arises when you are to <i>identify</i> the graviton and the Higgs' boson, separately from the photon
itself!</p>
<p>The URL to Fermilab and the Higgs' boson: <a id="i100" href="http://www.fnal.gov/pub/presspass/press_releases/Higgs-mass-constraints-20100726-images.html">
http://www.fnal.gov/pub/presspass/press_releases/Higgs-mass-constraints-20100726-images.html</a>.</p>
<p>This addition has already been made on the Philosophy Now forum, as usual, and it is now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#ASD
<p>Post subject: The Analytic-Synthetic Divide - Against Quine and Two Dogmas PostPosted: Fri Feb 18, 2011 5:07 pm</p>
<p>I only need to put on the table the term "Exhaustive Categories" to (re-)make the analytic-synthetic divide valid again.</p>
<p>[Edit:]<br>
I'm not even sure if I need only dichotomies to apply the analytic-synthetic divide. Thus for the concepts of bachelor and husband,
we now have gap-closing concepts like boyfriend and couples living together, but who are not married. We also have the players. All
in all, the descriptive power of language has closed these gaps and laid out a fine band of exhaustive categories that lets no case
go undescribed!<br>
[End of edit.]</p>
<p>[Edit, 19.02.2011:] So, I think now that the visible light spectrum can go into the analytic category. Even then you can start some
nominated bottom end by 0 and go upward to 1, i.e., fuzzy logic. The point for the synthetic category, obviously, is to construct
larger pictures by the building blocks of the analytic category. Kant uses the classic notions from mathematics where the single
numbers are placed in the analytic category, I think, and the combination of numbers, the calculations, into the synthetic category!
[End of edit.]</p>
<p>Yes... Quine is still a foe!</p>
<p>This addition has already been made on the Philosophy Now forum, as usual, and it is now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#GTA
<p>I've put it like the following.<br>
For appreciating art correctly and determining what qualifies as art generally, you need to comply with the following:<br>
Your cognition, and by cognition only, you need to pass psychological normality, i.e., of the kind of IQ-tests, and respect that this is
also normative, and in this art evaluation you need to be honest and interested, with the honesty bringing you to the right level of
interest (for a valid judgment to obtain).</p>
<p>It may be that Stuckism has this already, but at least I provide a parallel wording.</p>
<p>This addition has already been made on the Philosophy Now forum, as usual, it has also been added to the blogs
and it is now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#TEA
<p>It's simply that I've added: Significance graphs by Philip Kitcher.<br>
The significance graphs are described in his book, if not somewhere else as well, Science, Truth, and Democracy (2001).</p>
<p>This addition has already been made on the Philosophy Now forum, as usual, and it is now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#AER
<p>These are:</p>
<p>Posted: Mon Jan 11, 2010 9:50 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>My respects for this thread go to Holdyourcolor of PF, http://forums.philosophyforums.com/threads/are-emotions-irrational-38870.html.</p>
<p>So, are emotions rational?</p>
<p>I hold these views:<br>
I believe that if emotions are perceived correctly, they can indeed represent the subsumed rationality.</p>
<p>Shedding tears in respect or in facing greater responsibiliy and challenges due to the loss of this loved one. If you had no favourable propositions
in your head of this person, there would be no loss. How this "porting" of the consciousness to emotions and back go, I can't say, but I don't deny
the possibility that there's perfection behind it. So, I'm with Yahadreas [a writer on this forum, Philosophyforums] and possibly beyond.</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 8:49 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I think you do indeed have the <i>choice</i> to "listen" to your feelings or ignore them! In this way, feelings may be a source for
data and thus rational, but not necessarily as many people ignore them.</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:38 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Can you, by 100% certainty, say that feelings (in the body) are not a reflection of the state of affairs in the brain? Similarly, can you, by 100%
certainty, say that feelings (in the body) are not a reflection of the state of affairs in the brain by <b><u>volition</u></b>, just
like every other thought? <b>No, I think you can't!!</b></p>
<p>chaz wyman writes:<br>
"This is a bit like asking is chalk cheese, or how chalky is cheese; how cheesey is chalk.<br>
As a given emotion is never the necessary consequence of any particular state of affairs is is then not a rational action.<br>
I suggest that any emotional state could be examined in this way, and a more rational course of action chosen, than a unbidden emotional state."</p>
<p><b>NO!!!</b></p>
<p>And as usual, I dispute that feelings are non-rational, non-cognitive or whatever else, very much in line with my view that feelings can be rational
to a great extent (beyond being pure maintenance of the body). Thank you.</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:00 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>i blame blame writes:<br>
"Is pain rational?<br>
Is the sensation of relative temperature rational?<br>
Is smell rational?"</p>
<p>Where does that limit go? If you have no data to enter your biological system, how are you supposed to live? How can you be alive without it? Therefore,
as conditions are premises (in a logical argument, syllogism), they have consequences on exactly this biological system of yours and this biological
feedback of the environment makes you able to sustain yourself. It's therefore <u>highly</u> rational to have these feelings because they make you able to
build this rationality further, either in yourself or through humanity as such!</p>
<p>These writings are made earlier on the Philosophy Now forum, as usual, and they are now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
<p>These are:</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: Is Violence Against Women Wrong But O.K. Against Men? PostPosted: Fri Feb 18, 2011 3:27 am</p>
<p>I just like to support this topic and the author [Frank G. Sterle, Jr.] of it!</p>
<p>There is today a quite dangerous environment in the face of corruption and the rest, that leaves much weight on the men in facing various
threats and being the armor of the family. Men are also most likely to enter the physical fights in light of these deficiencies (of the
democracy), thus as a man you can expect to begin that weightlifting as soon as possible, probably from 14 or 15 yo. So indeed, there are
more blows hitting the armor today and you, as a man, are expected to deal with it which you have to!</p>
<p>It's incredible! It feels like we live in the 21st century technology-wise, yet with the morality of 0 CE, the morality of the original man,
summa summarum, society today.</p>
<p>As I say today, informally and cheeky, of my nation today, that it's despotic with a skin of democracy. This can get more real than you like
when you enter that strange door of society where a man stands in the skin of another, rather bloody!</p>
<p>Eh... cheers...</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: How Can We Prove That Objects Are Not Conscious? PostPosted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 7:03 am</p>
<p>Consciousness is usually associated with organisms that have brains and even these are limited. We remain with the consciousness of people as
sufficiently advanced to make meaning to us, unless you're this professional who is studying animals (with brains) and infer from their
behaviour what they are thinking.</p>
<p>Now, possibly, enter some kind of telepathic connection (you can call it quantum entanglement or contextualism) then, possibly, enters the
condition that you might/may "get some thoughts" from your interaction with stuff in nature that is not normally associated with consciousness,
i.e., the planet, plants, trees, afar animals including sea-life and what have you. I must emphasise, though, that it is up to you to make sense
of it and I don't guarantee a thing in this regard!</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: Government, Democracy, and Multicultural States PostPosted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:38 am</p>
<p>I agree with the OP to this extent: I think a confederation may be good too, in addition to a federation. Note that we also have a wide variety
of international and bilateral agreements in place and that these to some extent remove the (definite) need for confederation or federation, please.
Though, I wonder to what degree UN can play this unifying role to such an end. I'd also like to make the remark that ILO (Intern. Labour Org.) seems
to be organised under the UN umbrella which I find to be almost "romantic".</p>
<p>These writings are made earlier on the Philosophy Now forum, as usual, and they are now reported by RSS. Welcome.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/
<p>These are:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423737/the-atomic-explosion-pure-awe/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423737/the-atomic-explosion-pure-awe/</a> -
The Atomic Explosion - Pure Awe<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423567/advancing-nondogmatic-new-intelligent-design-ndnid/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423567/advancing-nondogmatic-new-intelligent-design-ndnid/</a>
- Advancing Non-Dogmatic New Intelligent Design (NDNID)<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423566/us-american-patriotic-radicalism-in-financial-terms/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423566/us-american-patriotic-radicalism-in-financial-terms/</a> -
U.S. American Patriotic Radicalism - in Financial Terms<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423565/amnesty-internationals-innsats-for-europeisk-rettssystem/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423565/amnesty-internationals-innsats-for-europeisk-rettssystem/</a> -
Amnesty Internationals' innsats for europeisk rettssystem<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423564/norges-demokratiske-248verste-ledere-tvilsomme/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423564/norges-demokratiske-248verste-ledere-tvilsomme/</a> -
Norges demokratiske øverste ledere - tvilsomme?<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423563/korrupsjon-i-politiet-en-fiktiv-fortelling-s229dan/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423563/korrupsjon-i-politiet-en-fiktiv-fortelling-s229dan/</a> -
Korrupsjon i Politiet - en fiktiv fortelling sådan</p>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html</a> -
New writings to the Scribblings webpage, even one as far back as 7. Jul 2010.</p>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#PGE">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#PGE</a> -
A Practical Guide to Ethics: The Pocket and Cell Theory. The addition has been added to the website yesterday.</p>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#TTA">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#TTA</a> -
New writings to the Philosophical Notes page. This time I've added some to The Transmission Argument. It follows:<br>
By false belief status the model splits like this:</p>
<p>Model 1<br>
person A has belief in fact P falsely<br>
fact P (non-existing)<br>
person A is not justified in belief of fact P<br>
(simply because one can NEVER truly justify a false belief)</p>
<p>Model 2<br>
person A has belief in fact F (non-existing)<br>
fact F<br>
person A is not justified in belief of fact F<br>
(simply because one can NEVER truly justify a belief isn't there, that is, far more obvious than model 1)</p>
<p>By mere illusion of belief (possibly not necessary) the model splits like this:</p>
<p>Model 1<br>
person A has belief in fact P by mere illusion (also falsely, thus)<br>
fact P (non-existing)<br>
person A is not justified in belief of fact P<br>
(simply because one can NEVER truly justify a false belief)</p>
<p>Model 2<br>
person A has belief in fact F (non-existing)<br>
fact F of how the illusion arises<br>
person A is not justified in belief of fact F<br>
(simply because one can NEVER truly justify a belief isn't there, that is, far more obvious than model 1 I'd like to add here that
even if the illusion isn't detected by person A, there is most certainly explanatory force in adding this explanation, epistemologically
speaking, as above)</p>
<p>The argument doesn't include the Integrity stuff because it's simplified! Besides, Integrity can also be seen as a part of Justification.</p>
<p>You may think that this argument undermines the Gettier argument and I think so too!</p>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/god.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/god.html</a> -
New writings to the God webpage. I've added 2 writings to the page today.</p>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html</a> -
New writings to on Opinions on Physics concerning the Bending of Light by Gravity and possibly also by electro-magnetic field.</p>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1420534/the-israelpalestine-conflict-seeking-to-solve-it/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1420534/the-israelpalestine-conflict-seeking-to-solve-it/</a> -
New addition/point to the The Israel-Palestine conflict - Seeking to solve it!. I've now added a possible angle to the issue of nuclear weapons in
the Middle East.</p>
<p>These writings have different origins, some are made earlier on the Philosophy Now forum and others have just now been added to the website
only. No guarantee is given for this or that. You should check out the context yourself. They are, at least, now reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/
<p>These are:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423357/forhold-til-amnesty-norge-og-menneskerettighetsbrudd/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423357/forhold-til-amnesty-norge-og-menneskerettighetsbrudd/</a> -
Forhold til Amnesty (Norge) og menneskerettighetsbrudd<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423356/suggestion-for-a-unified-bookchain-in-europe-against-amazon/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423356/suggestion-for-a-unified-bookchain-in-europe-against-amazon/</a>
- Suggestion for a Unified Bookchain in Europe - against Amazon<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423339/the-way-to-stability-and-world-peace-industry/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423339/the-way-to-stability-and-world-peace-industry/</a> -
The Way to Stability and World Peace: INDUSTRY!<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423338/the-massive-universe/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423338/the-massive-universe/</a> -
The Massive Universe<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423146/legal-reality-this-day/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423146/legal-reality-this-day/</a> -
Legal Reality This Day<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423021/business-in-eu-and-usa-phasing-in-a-new-arrangement/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1423021/business-in-eu-and-usa-phasing-in-a-new-arrangement/</a> -
Business in EU and USA: Phasing in a New Arrangement</p>
<p>These writings have different origins, some are made earlier on the Philosophy Now forum and others have just now been added to the website
only. No guarantee is given for this or that. You should check out the context yourself. They are, at least, now reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#CKP
<p>To make the distinction fully between Kuhn and myself and why my description has more use than Kuhn's, beside being true, is
that with my theory of ICT it should be possible to determine the careful steps that lead to a successful theory in a complex picture
of historiography of science rather than the very crude image given by Kuhn and his incomplete work, by his own words,
of The Structure!</p>
<p>This addition has been made earlier on the Philosophy Now forum and has only now been added to the website and
reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html
<p>These are:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html">http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
</a> - some additions.<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html">http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html</a>
- Computing - Idea for Firefox. I've added a comment to it.<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/ReSuReWr.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/ReSuReWr.html</a> - I've added a book to the suggestions and a comment in relation to it.</p>
<p>These additions have been made earlier on the Philosophy Now forum and have only now been added to the website and
reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html
<p>These are:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html">http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
</a> - some additions.<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html">http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html</a>
- Computing - Idea for Firefox.<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html</a> - An addition to "An Attack on Indexicality", but not important.<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/quotes.html">http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/quotes.html</a>
- An additional quote to the Quotes-page.</p>
<p>Note: I've also removed the "poster". It's instead moved to the blog and will remain there with a comment for as long as
the blog exists.</p>
<p>These additions have been made yesterday or earlier and have only now been reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#ToE
<p>Post subject: Re: General Unified Theory PostPosted: Sun Dec 05, 2010 5:13 pm</p>
<p>I hope for a General Unified Theory to be realised, but it's a long shot! I think the best approach is to try to set definite
connections between the various theories!</p>
<p>[Edit, 28.01.2011:] Once these definite connections are made, the next step will be to work inward toward a smaller and smaller
kernel of explanation that is able to maintain, theoretically, all these theories that have been connected. [End of edit.]</p>
<p>This writing has been initially published on the Philosophy Now forum since 5. Dec. 2011 has been added with more writing today and
is also now reported by RSS.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#IoQ
<p>Post subject: Re: Criticism of Quine's Indeterminacy of Language PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:56 pm</p>
<p>A short comment: I've never heard that bilinguists (I know 3 languages to varying degree) report on deficiencies going from one language
to another. The bilinguists must be able to communicate in both languages and be meaningful and respectful to the transition, yet I've never
heard of a single problem about it! What are these problems supposed to be?</p>
<p>Am I supposed to be unable to translate a New York Times article, perfectly meaningful, to fx. Norwegian? This becomes even more obscene
in scientific contexts because one may be forced to say that science in different languages is different, which is absurd!</p>
<p>This has been published on the Philosophy Now forum since 27. Oct. 2011, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#TTA
<p>The Closure Principle, loosely, by example of Sir Alexander Fleming and his discovery of the Penicillin:</p>
<p>1. Rubble takes place with various accidents such that fact of Penicillin obtains</p>
<p>2. By his competence, Sir Alexander Fleming detects some anomaly to be further described</p>
<p>3. Sir Alexander Fleming determines this to be Penicillin</p>
<p>4. Sir Alexander Fleming has made the Penicillin knowledge to the world (and as I see it, it will stand as knowledge
<b>forever!!!</b>)</p>
<p>So how do you want it? I think all knowledge can be expressed through such a chain of entailing descriptions
by this Closure Principle. My Integrity stands thus as a kind of working approach, one that determines the relationship
between the fact P and researcher, person, A for knowledge to irrefutably obtain. I think we are facing the Utopia for Epistemology
in this decade to come!</p>
<p>This has been published on the Philosophy Now forum since 2. Jan. 2011, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#PCAAS
<p>Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 5:28 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>The final death to the Con-side of legalising (assisted) suicide:<br>
The Hippocratic Oath poses in NO way any more charity toward anti-suicide than the charity of those who are in favour because both
sides may equally say that they support the best humanity and the best dignity of it.</p>
<p>Thus, the mere uttering of a certain "devotion" to dignity is <u>no point</u> as such! Therefore, "I claim to follow the Hippocratic
Oath" is just a blow in the air in this sense/relation!</p>
<p>This has been published on my website since 13. Jan. 2011, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#PGE
<p>Post subject: A Practical Guide to Ethics: The Pocket (and Cell) Theory PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 4:27 pm</p>
<p>Here it follows:<br>
First the assumption, if one is uncertain about other people's practice of Ethics, one can move away from relying on assumption and
go to <u>positive confirmation</u> of other people's ethics, by personal acquaintance and relationship.<br>
Thus, a personal ethics erupts and creates "The Pocket (for the group) Ethics and Cells (personal ethics) for these people inside this group"!!!</p>
<p>[Edit:] [Besides, there is a quite good article in the Mind Journal (issue 475) that is named "Practical Equilibrium: A Way of Deciding What
to Think about Morality" by Ben Eggleston, that can be interpreted like this.]</p>
<p>This has been published on my website since 24. Jan. 2011, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#RSSTR
<p>This is the start of the project of writing about the relationship between syntax and semantics for reducing semantics to
only syntax (to a certain point). This may only be a summary of existing literature or my addition to that line of thinking. I think
Searle is inconclusive about syntax at best, but there are good chances that there are others who are more prominent in this sense of
this project that I like to investigate.</p>
<p>This has been published on my website since 21. Jan. 2011, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#PSST
<p>The most general explanation to both of these examples is this: it's the "lawfulness" of nature that is this way! In any
case, it's the same "lawfulness" that is going to prevent these examples to happen as desribed if anything! Thus "lawfulness" is
on both sides (of the available two sides) of the situation and is unavoidable even if you add free will because you can't step
outside the boundaries of nature. I think this clinches the argument.</p>
<p>Just to settle it completely, it should now be obvious that "when I go to bed tonight, I can definitely rely on wakening up
tomorrow without induction"! The issue has really been written above, but I think it's nice to add the state of a night's sleep into
this picture. Thereby, enjoy the new view, surely!</p>
<p>As a tip for both understanding this argument and for seeing a good trick in it, please, take this into account: My view is
that "laws of nature" in this context are more easily sorted out if you use "lawfulness" and to this you still need your thoughts to
come in a row and life to be allowed to live. It's also a recommendation of mine that one doesn't mix "laws of nature" and what these
laws of nature are supposed to be because it quickly gets incredibly complicated and one is still discussing the status of "laws of
nature" in Philosophy of Science as a separate theme, thus underlining the complexity of this issue! Lastly it should be noted that
Helen Beebee in Philosophy Bites points to "necessary connections of nature" in a sentence that really takes out David Hume on this
(in my context, by this, at least).</p>
<p>This has been published on my website since 21. Jan. 2011 or so and to 26. Jan. 2011, but has only now been reported
by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/somatists.html
<p>Various additions have been made to the webpage, the latest on 13.01.2011. Some of the additions are these two webpages:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/signs.html">http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/signs.html</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/warts.html">http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/warts.html</a></p>
<p>This has been published on my website at least since 13. Jan. 2011, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/god.html
<p>Several additions have been made to the webpage, 01.01.2011, 16.01.2011 and 20.012011.</p>
<p>Most importantly this is the following. You can read all of it on the actual webpage.<br>
The symbolisation of this,<br>
(1)<br>
1. (∃x)(Dx) ≡ ◊(∃y)(Gy) A (being the 10. line)<br>
2. (∃x)(Dx) A<br>
------------------------------<br>
3. (∃x)(Dx) R (Reiteration)<br>
------------------------------<br>
C./4. ◊(∃y)(Gy) 2, 3 ≡E (Equivalence Elimination) This is the CONCLUSION of the first element of the foundation (1/4)
(and you have your valid logical deduction).</p>
<p>(2)<br>
[13./1] (∀x)(Cx) ⊃ ◊(∃y)(Gy) A<br>
[2] (∀x)(Cx) A<br>
------------------------------<br>
[3] (∀x)(Cx) R 2<br>
[C1./4] ◊(∃x)(Gy) ⊃E 1, 3 This is the CONCLUSION of the second element of the foundation (2/4) (and you have your valid logical
deduction #2). This interpretation may be complained about, but the words are "when you sit there in heaven, your collateral knowledge/"complete"
knowledge is including God, yet you probably lack the possibility for getting to the computer database of (complete) knowledge".</p>
<p>(1) and (2), formally and possibly better to some, 1 and 2 can be combined into the following:<br>
[1.] (∀x)(Cx) ⊃ [(∃x)(Dx) ⊃ ◊(∃y)(Gy)] A (being the 10. line)<br>
[2.] (∃x)(Dx) A<br>
[3.] (∀x)(Cx) A<br>
------------------------------<br>
4. (∀x)(Cx) R (Reiteration)<br>
5. (∃x)(Dx) ⊃ ◊(∃y)(Gy) ⊃E<br>
6. (∃x)(Dx) R<br>
------------------------------<br>
C./7. ◊(∃y)(Gy) 5, 6 ⊃E (Conditional Elimination) This is the CONCLUSION of the combined elements of the foundation (1+2/4) (and you have your
valid logical deduction). I'd say that this combination hides or obscures the fact that Complete Knowledge can be harder to imagine than a simple
and broad Definition of God. Thus, the two simple parts may be better than this combination of these 2 more elementary parts.<br>
Square brackets put in for separating from the round brackets and for being correct on the "primary connective" which is a formal
requirement in Logics.</p>
<p>(3)<br>
[15./1] (∃x)(Mx) ⊃ ◊(∃y)(Gy) Assumption A<br>
[xx./2] (∃x)(Mx) A<br>
------------------------------<br>
[xx./3] (∃x)(Mx) R - Reiteration of A<br>
------------------------------<br>
[C1./4] ◊(∃y)(Gy) ⊃E (1,3) This is the CONCLUSION of the third element of the foundation (3/4) (and you have your valid logical deduction #3.</p>
<p>(4)<br>
[15./1] (∃x)(Ex) ⊃ ◊(∃y)(Gy) Assumption A<br>
[xx./2] (∃x)(Ex) A<br>
------------------------------<br>
[xx./3] (∃x)(Ex) R - Reiteration of A<br>
------------------------------<br>
[C1./4] ◊(∃y)(Gy) ⊃E (1,3) This is the CONCLUSION of the third element of the foundation (4/4) (and you have your valid logical deduction #4.</p>
<p>Now you have, all in all, all the 4 valid logical deductions that support the possibility of God (◊(∃x)(Gx)) where most faithists don't
care about the possibility and assert the reality/existence of God, straight!</p>
<p>As I write, this has been published on my website on these three occasions, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html
<p>I find one can set password priorities against run-levels, ie. system critical, security, system utilities and so forth.
Classification of programs can be set on a user-preference basis, specifying possibly programs for the upper level passwords.
Higher level user accounts can be set with the default set of processes that are needed for running the system, much like the
user/root system of Linux except that the naming of account groups are set by user levels instead.</p>
<p>This has been published on my website since 18. Nov. 2010, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html
<p>I think there is a possibility for making all the folder names in an operating system generic (and thus enhancing security) by
making a central folder registry that updates on changes in the folder structure. Even this central registry can be placed
arbitrarily by deploying it as a registry with an agent that reports itself to the proper place in the operating system.</p>
<p>I mean, a person new to the Operating System would not have a chance going into this unknown "sea" of folders over the internet
(from where, you know, everything begins with an unknowing starter).</p>
<p>Generative names can applied to the folder tree by the input of some crazy user preferences for names or dates or whatever.</p>
<p>On upgrading or updating, one can simply relay the location of this central registry.</p>
<p>Or if one has lost the position of this registry, one can perform a search for it on beforehand to get its location. It may be
that this registry has to have a certain name or belong to a special kind of files, ie. exe, reg, whatever...</p>
<p>Note: this has first been written by myself under the pseudonym Aetixintro (as usual) on brainstorm.ubuntu.com today, 14.11.2010.</p>
<p>This has been published on my website since 14. Nov. 2010, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html
<p>Let's imagine this can be done in Firestarter, as there already is a fine lockdown option there:<br>
A kind of RULE: on [program/service] exit/completion of download - then lockdown connection [usually the eth0].</p>
<p>[Edit:] Or for that matter, put a lockdown action on any premise like inactivity on port 80 or such... (all the rest).</p>
<p>Note: this has first been written by myself under the pseudonym Aetixintro (as usual) on Ubuntuforums.org, 02.10.2010.</p>
<p>This has been published on my website since 14. Nov. 2010, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
Magma/Lava That Leads to Life in Its Most Basic Form?".</p>
<p>My hunch tells me that it is indeed the lava/magma of the earth itself that may be the cause of abiogenesis. So if one takes this further,
may it be that it only takes this sweet, delicate temperature from a nearby star, adding the life giving light, that supports a fair
temperature on the surface of any planet, allowing the volcanos to erupt and lead to all the life possible on this actual planet, any
planet again, whatsoever?</p>
<p>The onus is if it's possible for lava/magma to generate life in its basic form, shooting speed by nature's evolution. Is it?</p>
<p>The question is: why the h*ll should civilisation start on a meteor rather than from the magma/lava from underneath the planet's crust itself?</p>
<p>Is there indeed a capacity, inherently, for magma/lava to start life by simply ejecting some magma/lava onto the the planet's surface and
then let the atmosphere, whatever this is, do the rest?</p>
<p>Is this the meeting point between physics, chemistry and biology? I think I'm affirmative on all these three!</p>
<p>I've been told there's a difficulty of separating the lowest forms of life versus f.x. mineral structures or mineral kinds of crystals,
having a crystalline nature.</p>
<p>Anyone who may have some more information??? Isn't this peculiar? You know, who can we turn to? All the sciences are hiding something!
They don't want to reveal their deficiencies in knowledge.</p>
<p>There is clearly a mystery here on the real status and capacity of the smallest parts of nature.</p>
<p>Possible experiment: lower a container that's impervious to the high temperatures of the magma/lava into the magma/lava and get a load of
the magma/lava. Have a lid ready to be lowered on top the container, sealing it, relatively, and get the "stuff", magma/lava, poured into
a nearby sterile chamber (through sterile pre-chambers) and then add sterile air and see if bacteria develops or if bacteria can be found
whatsoever!</p>
<p>If it turns out magma/lava contains bacteria then the volcanos may be the answer to abiogenesis! I guess one can also experiment with types
of gases, eg. methane, nitrogen-oxides, all sorts...</p>
<p>First written on the Philosophy Now forum by myself, 15.-16. October, 2010. From the original posts there, this has been edited to some extent.</p>
<p>This has been published on my website since 17. Nov. 2010, but has only now been reported by RSS. Sorry!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/CV_for_Terje_Lea.html
These additions concern what I'm doing (informally) and some notes on my education which has two points that
I've not reported on earlier. Please, remember that the webpage also reads in Norwegian. You can, however, use the
the good translation tools. Have a look, please, if you want.
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html
One for Europe and one for USA. I don't insist on which one you should read, you just read the one you like the best. They
do indeed have different designs.</p>
<p>Link for the Angelfire blog: <a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/</a>. I've added 26 posts to the Angelfire blog and the writings are
as diverse as you probably expect by now.</p>
<p>Link for the One blog: <a id="i100" href="http://blog.t-lea.net/">
http://blog.t-lea.net/</a>. I've added 27 posts to the One blog and the writings are
essentially the same as for the Angelfire blog.</p>
<p>I'm very short on commenting these new writings on the blogs, but I hope you enjoy reading them as they are presented
on the blogs without having had them listed on any RSS. Cheers!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html
<p>I can also mention the two blogs that I now have, one on One.com and the other "original" one on Angelfire.com.
I have recently been updating these with writings that I've made on two open groups on Facebook and I'll complete this shortly.</p>
<p>I apologise that I have taken these turns, but I've been under severe stress (and is currently) so that I haven't had
the surplus yet necessary to report these changes by RSS. This is it for now. I hope you find my website to be of any use.
Enjoy!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#EoF
<p>Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:11 am</p>
<p>I'm not going to diminish B. Russell's "On Denoting" because it has been the forerunner for quantification logics
and in this article, the existential claims. It's thus pioneering work. It also comments on Meinong's logic by its denoting
which is primarily what the article is about. In addition, come these 3/4 articles. Even though, Russell mentions that one
should acquaint oneself with the alleged fact under discussion, the equivalent of my epistemology emphasis, I see the opportunity
to undercut all 4/5 articles by the OP's entry. (Some of the status on Russell's paper has been uttered by my professor in Phil
of Lang., prof. Olav Asheim.)</p>
<p>I'll relate specifically to every article and I'll make the specification univocal!</p>
<p>First out, Russell's:<br>
If there is a king in France, this king is bald -Assumption<br>
There is a confirmation of a king in France (by acquaintance) -Formally Assump.<br>
There is a confirmation that this king is bald (by acquaintance) -Formally Assump.<br>
---------------------------------<br>
The king of France (existing now) is bald -Concl. (rather irrefutably)</p>
<p>I think confirmation can be put as witness or evidence in the UoD if you prefer.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/ethics.html
physically, while maintaining good health, and in compliance with sound ethics, i.e., ethical objectivity. It's
paramount that self-realisation follows integrity in order to be this whole ethical/moral person. Otherwise, it's my
theory that corruption and decadence enter the system.
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/my_own_quotes.html
This aphorism has been added 21.11.2010.
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#PSST
- Contrary to Hume on Induction - The Refutation of the Problem of Induction".</p>
<p>This is added: The most general explanation to both of these examples is this: it's the "lawfulness" of nature that is this way! In any case,
it's the same "lawfulness" that is going to prevent these examples to happen as desribed if anything! Thus "lawfulness" is on both
sides (of the available two sides) of the situation and is unavoidable even if you add free will because you can't step outside the
boundaries of nature. I think this clinches the argument.</p>
<p>This has first been written, essentially, on the Philosophy Now forum.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#RSSTR
Syntax and Semantics in Terms of Reduction".</p>
<p>This is the start of the project of writing about the relationship between syntax and semantics for reducing semantics to only syntax
(to a certain point).<br>
This may only be a summary of existing literature or my addition to that line of thinking. I think Searle is inconclusive about syntax at best,
but there are good chances that there are others who are more prominent in this sense of this project that I like to investigate.</p>
<p>Here we go!</p>
<p>(Interesting books and possibly people:)</p>
<p>This is reported now by RSS, but has been uploaded and published on the website 21.11.2010.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#CACG
<p>As such, this writing is first and foremost a counter action to the notion that ethical and moral standards are
possible to avoid due to inability to express thoroughly what ethics and morals are all about and how ethics can be complied with
more or less without mistake. Implicitly then, this is the definite encouragement to think and act ethically.</p>
<p>This is reported now by RSS, but has been uploaded and published on the website 18.11.2010.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>This is the theory of how Schizophrenia arises in a person. I think it's a matter of Rebound of attitudes that the "soul"
cannot carry without creating a personality fracture on the terms of moral in the type of experience.
So all of these cases in this view have something to do with an outlook that breaches the natural moral of the inner mental life. When these breaches occur,
the "soul" is suppressed by own (sublime) negative view and replaced with externally founded personality from single or multiple people.<br>
Schizophrenia is by this pathologically defined by the functioning level of the case in question, being the functioning that is defined by ALL parts of
a normal life, i.e., social, work, personal, mental and physical.<br>
Schizophrenia, I believe, is
irreversible. If you go down that road, there's no turning back! I think it can be slowed down to some degree by alcohol or drugs, medicine and thereby be
given a better functioning to the social connections, suppressing these tendencies of stupid, bizarre, deviant thoughts (and actions).
I hope you can make good use of it.</p>
<p>This idea of Schizophrenia is partly based on the old criterium that insanity is the incapacity to separate right from wrong!
I set the date of this idea to 2008/2009. Though the somatists web-page has its origin from 2003/2004 due to the disconcerted/chaotic discussion
of psychiatric diagnostication (and the criteria) of mental illnesses, the date of creation of this theory is uncertain. This is in part
because I've seen it as unimportant by its inferiority to integrity and as this old criterium has been expected to
take precedence due to more sophisticated diagnostication technology like video cameras, lie detectors, (f)MRI and better system in the
very treatment facilities. I've been advised lately to add this theory to my scientific ideas and notes and I've done so now!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1420534/the-israelpalestine-conflict-seeking-to-solve-it/
<p>I've written this writing (in Norwegian) to the Committee of Palestine, a Norwegian
committee, I believe, 02:44 AM (night...), Tue 16. Nov.</p>
<p>The writing basically consists in this:<br>
* Why isn't the UN and the EU (among others) on the spot/in the area
with their own, coordinated, observers and work-groups (engineers and
leaders/organisers) on both the Gaza-strip and the West Bank?</p>
<p>* There should be an updated map for the areas of conflict where (as on
the Google maps) one can find check-points, surveillance cameras,
the Wall, the settlements, special conflict-zones, operating UN/EU/others'
activities and all other activity (like "finally" imported goods to the Palestine
areas)!</p>
<p>* I also think there should be a COMMON web-portal for this conflict that is leaded
by UN (in the same fashion as WWF's web-presence). Here I suggest that all activities,
in progress and in planning, are being presented/communicated. One should also emphasise
the importance of transparency (no side "fools"/"undermines" the other).</p>
<p>* One may also have a money-effort surveillance page under this common portal that displays
the actual effort (and direction) to the Palestine areas (and in the long run seriously
undermines any hidden support for the tunnels into the Gaza-strip).</p>
<p>* One may also have a "tally" count on the number of people involved and what they do!</p>
<p>* I may come to add more points as we go, but I must say that I think the quality of the
"engineering" work for ending this conflict could have been far better and had a better
progression! I hope this improves in the immediate future!</p>
<p>[Edit, as extra compared to the email:]<br>
* An addition to this writing on this forum: It should be a standing requirement that the
representatives for Palestine accept Israel as a Jewish state on EQUAL footing as Palestine
probably announces itself/looks upon itself as a Muslim state (i.e., the sound/massive
support of Hamas, a rather (moderately/strongly) Islamic oriented political party).<br>
Poor people also tend to mind religious matters more strongly than fx. the affluent Europeans
without this being a point, but rather a remark one can lends one eye to.</p>
<p>* Also, I think the Israeli rhetoric has improved greatly for the last month or so. Though, it's
seen as quite provoking that they push on these settlements to this degree.</p>
<p>* One report I've read, says that Israelis choose the settlements mostly for economic
reasons and it should be possible to change this incentive or at least highlight it.</p>
<p>* (Loosely with/by Typist:) The world should support both Israel and Palestine as equal/symmetric
states. Hopefully spurring both nations into prosperous, peaceful economic cycles of partnership,
cooperation and to the service and benefit from and to the world.</p>
<p>[Edit, 17.11.2010:]<br>
* In relation to the conflict (I-P), I'm also interested in the status of the Palestinian airport and the arrangement for
Palestinians to communicate with one another between the Gaza strip and the West Bank. I'd also like to know the routines for
moving between these two areas (physically, as the areas are indeed physically apart).</p>
<p>* Communications do include phone connections, mobile and "regular", as well as internet. I'd also include the aspect of communications
from the Palestinian areas and to the world at large!</p>
<p>* It must be pointed out that despite the long coast line of the Gaza strip, the Palestinians have no harbour whatsoever! Even the fishing
vessels have come under fire or harassment from time to time. There is no problem in conceiving an Israeli administration of a Palestinian
harbour during a period of transition!</p>
<p>* There should be no problem in incorporating these concerns into this web-portal if only as static reports or points. [End of edit.]</p>
<p>(Sincerely yours,</p>
<p>Mr. Terje Lea)</p>
<p>PS: [Edit, 16.11.2010:] A comment on the side, pertaining to the settlements. It's a fact that the Swiss have been
addressing the Israelis for making Palestine look like a Swiss cheese (a cheese, as we all know, is known for
for its "holes" (bubbles)). [End of edit.]</p>
<p>PS2: Let's end this together! (Joke?)</p>
<p>PS3: Typist is a user at the Philosophy Now forum. This entire writing has first been written on this forum.</p>
<p>Parts of this RSS post has yet to be written to the blog. This may be a strange twist to some, but so be it. Hopefully, all
will be in line by the end of this week.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1420422/advise-to-india-on-6500-child-deaths-a-day/
<p>There's report of an article in the Lancet that I like to give my opinion on as advise. It's written by a group of med. doctors from India.</p>
<p>The factors to a possible solution:</p>
<p>* Enforce a one-child policy (especially toward the poor and the use of forced adoptions, etc.).<br>
* Public education on family planning.<br>
* Public education on sex.<br>
* Public education on cleanliness.<br>
* Make greater emphasis on procedures at birth incl. birth facilities standards (I reason that hospital/birth clinics are the safest and thus the normative).<br>
* Advocate and publicly promote more use of contraceptives (pills and condoms).<br>
* Possibly set up child houses that are governed so that children to some degree grow up without the extreme (debilitating) effects of poverty
(incl. dirty environment and other health hazards).</p>
<p>(This has first been written on the Philosophy Now forum, 14.11.2010.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/FromBlogScientology.html
peculiarity that's addressed is the fact that Scientology is BIGGER than Humanism.</p>
<p>You can take it to be another barrage of artillery fire against the critics of Scientology who claim it is
a cult! Cheers!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/ethics.html
of Integrity: Loosely from I. Kant, it is that everyone must <i>preserve</i> both the ends of rationality in oneself as well as the
ends of rationality in others. Usually, preserving rationality means preserving the potential for maximal happiness, I think. Both as
the joy for oneself to live and for the opportunity to enjoy life in general, both people and nature, with the science and industry
included. I like you to take nature seriously in the aspect of ecology to support the rationality in yourself and others as nature is
the basis for being able to safely sustain humanity and its prosperity (without breaching exactly this nature's boundaries for being a
healthy nature with its wildlife and free development in it. Note that I write "preserve", please. Because integrity is to <i>maintain</i>
humanity in oneself as well as others, all you need to do is to stay on its course, by duty and job requirement. As long as you carry out
your duties relating to your age and condition, you should preserve your integrity very well. Do not lose rationality out of sight!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>It's with pleasure that I note that "Branching with Uncertain Semantics: Disc. Note by N. Belnap and T. Müller, published by BJPS lies in line
with my writing and that they may have been reading this writing of mine. The future should be exciting!<br>
It's certainly time for the "wave theory" to be demolished as expressing "wave" forming from the future in opposition to my own common sense
sentiment that the past shapes the future. Thus, the "wave" of future possibilities is shaped by the past/history! This has been expressed earlier/above
by the rejection of the Copenhagen Interpretation, except for the one point and the rejection of Schrödinger's (et al.?) theory.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1419961/my-opinion-on-the-likely-outcome-of-the-us-american-midterm-election/
<p>I'm disheartened of the likely outcome of the result of this year's US American midterm election.</p>
<p>USA is usually referred to as "the land of the free", but the outcome of this election is going to make USA "the land of the
rich and the land of the deprived"! The economic analysis of the economic performance under the Republicans and Democrats, respectively,
shows a deeper segregation in income under Republican government.</p>
<p>While I have been encouraging a shift toward VAT along with a CNN anchor (Fareed Zakaria), I find that this choice toward the
Republicans will continue this deep flaw of USA with a relatively large part of the population in varying degrees of poverty.</p>
<p>USA, you have chosen a segregation between the rich and the poor. This is what you want and this is what you get! I will
remain stalwart on the hope of USA becoming the a better option for all, rich and poor, choosing a better humanistic picture. We'll see...</p>
<p>(I'm sorry. I've forgotten to post this writing to the blog in the correct order. Make no mistake about it,
I have good intentions with all my writings and I haven't intended to insult anyone by forgetting this writing!)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#EoF
<p>Posted: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:32 am</p>
<p>When it comes to the epistemological task of acquiring knowledge, primary sources are usually the most sought.
That is very much so by lawyers, historians and journalists.</p>
<p>I find that also the commoner is best provided by primary sources. Thus the corruption of information happens largely due to
sloppiness and lenient attitudes.</p>
<p>This is in relation to these 4 articles, but now that I've reread "On Denoting", I find that most is done by the former posts
and that most lies in being accurate on matching the name/label and the description, yet the famous social play always has its say!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#OQFC
<p>Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2010 12:24 am</p>
<p>If freedom is set by privacy and ignorance of person in cases where crime is not committed, I think this is enough
freedom for all on the planet. That is, crime is first and foremost confined to private space. Crime can also happen in public,
but then at significant risks, by this control regime. (This part is about control!)</p>
<p>The problem arises when dishonest people argue for privacy and absolute freedom (for the sake of possible criminal intent)!
That is, absolute freedom meaning the absence of possibility to get caught when one should very much be caught for crime!</p>
<p>I usually refer to the recipe of society for engage the debate to enter a more realistic picture of crime and not the "pretty"
picture that innocent/naive people have.</p>
<p>So, where are we at? I've been arguing for the Data Storage Directive for a while now, following Singaporean kind of discipline.
The point is that all well-intended people should carry through their business effortlessly and that criminal people should run
significant risk (if not 100%) with the appropriate punishment.</p>
<p>The issue of Police state is <b>not</b> an issue because it's <b>not compatible</b> with democracy! I fail to see how a Police
state can arise with the Democracy being the <i>top</i> premise. The opposition will have to give a credible account for this!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/FromBlogScientology.html
<p>So here you are! The Blog is now presented with embedded pictures and as the information work I've
intended it to be! Enjoy!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/opera_of_oslo.html
Latin word for "new". I also suggest that the word "neo" "rolls" better to the perverts' ears!</p>
<p>The page is still making an issue of a coarse and lewd phenomenon.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1420117/nytt-utseende-downs/
<p>En obskønitet. High Performance. Delivered.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1419800/forslag-til-forbedring-av-politistasjonene/
<p>Det er fra nederst i mitt hjerte/"from the bottom of my heart" som Michael Jackson sier, at jeg ønsker at Politiet burde få
seg "brannstang"/"påle" slik at utrykning kan skje raskere, som brannstasjonene har. Det er jo slik at disse burde gå rett ned i
garasjen, kan du si, he-e-e-lt fra de øverste nivåer! Kos dere, det er jo fredag! :-)</p>
<p>(Mer seriøst, så kan det godt hende at mange politistasjoner rundt omkring i verden faktisk har en type "brannstang" som
brannstasjonene har. Det skjuler seg litt metaforer/sublime poeng i denne lille tekst.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1419798/three-types-of-irrelevantunwanted-journalism/
<p>I think we can talk about Cloud Journalism - it's a type of high society b*llocks content reporting.</p>
<p>Then there is the Facade Journalism - it's a type of shallow reporting that reports that everything is alright and everybody
knows it and Utopia is around the corner - also known as Prozac journalism.</p>
<p>Also, the social pornography journalism - its now known that more people own cats than dogs, Jennifer Lopez has been seen eating
dinner with Bruce Willis, Paris Hilton has been seen carrying a white plastic bag, all the rest of non-sense that has no relevance
to general interest or knowledge. All what you can cook up really.</p>
<p>So the serious question is, is the press itself too much of a status and power hungry entity, almost actuating the goodness in
order to always stay high (a version of "cocaine" high journalism)? I imagine the short thinking, extremely "productive" journalist
in fashion clothing always seeking the hype. It's of course not this radical, but I'd like your response to it.</p>
<p>This has first been written by myself on Philosophy Now forum yesterday. It has also been edited some for this blog. Cheers!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#OQT
<p>Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 8:18 pm UTC; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I'm so irritated at this. First of all, we are discussing water-boarding without being in a real war scenario! There is not a
single nation that has a utilised war-economy as we speak (possibly except Afghanistan and Somalia). There is not a single nation
where the population is set in war-state, that is almost all nations or all nations are bustling with the daily business. One is
certainly hard pressed to call (the expeditionary) force of USA a determinant for USA in war!</p>
<p>Although, I'm deeply against every form of torture in normal civilian life, I think those agencies concerned with terrorism
should be allowed to do it, but I call for some form of transparency on this: number of subjects, eventually names and numbers,
judicially followed and accounted for. In this form water-boarding presents the bottom level, ie. no hot irons and other "medieval"
means.</p>
<p>In proper war-time, I think I could possibly allow almost everything, but one should be able to remain a person after the torture
has been conducted. I wouldn't allow for "monster"-torturers and also there is "decent"/"honest" torture than some other routes one can take.
</p>
<p>Conclusion: torture can be accepted to varying degrees according to situation, but <u>never</u> the ill-conceived
and "evil" options.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/populations_out_of_phonebooks.html
<p>This is the suggestion for a security package for normal homes. I'd say also that this is dearly advised. In relation to science,
information is usually the key to being a scientist whatsoever. This should be the normative in relation to crime as well, especially in
the face of deficient police services (ie. corruption). I've noted that Chicago has a map of crime markers with tags like complaints, type
of crime and so on. Every city should have these! To secure peace and self-realisation/happy living, to be pro-active is demanded.</p>
<p>(Particularly dangerous areas probably require an arsenal of tricks, including weapons and locks.)</p>
<p><b>1.</b> There are good possibilities for setting up self-contained alarm systems that are capable of sending sms messages
to your mobile phone that in turn makes the appropriate Police contact a good choice. You may choose the chains of security firms
if you like, but the aspect of corruption may enter.</p>
<p><b>2.</b> To have a handgun! Many people think that handguns are loud. They're not! People fire shotguns regularly without
sustaining hearing impairment (to any significant degree?). Handguns make a home appear sharp and if you're <u>hard</u> on it, you are
probably left in peace as well. Make sure to lock it up (in your bedroom), though, so there's no danger or access for the young ones.</p>
<p><b>3.</b> You should always have the peep-eye in the door or the chain-and-ball for the door. I prefer the chain-and-ball because then you
have the possibility for shooting directly. Choose a <u>solid</u> chain-and-ball! Abus?</p>
<p><b>4.</b> Have a baseball bat nearby along with pepperspray. It's probably wise to choose both.</p>
<p><b>5.</b> You should have at least two locks on the door (gate-). One that you commonly lock when you leave your home and an one-way-lock
from the inside of your door that's only accessible for locking and unlocking from the inside (as the door is closed). Note: some people think
that the inside lock is unnecessary, but then I can tell about the value of a good night's sleep (where break-ins become obvious).
(Also cover any secondary entrances with the <u>same</u> level of security. If you
don't take this then so be it. It's <u>you</u> who is going to <u>pay!</u></p>
<p><b>6.</b> At night, let the fans, vents, ventilation systems and temperature regulators do the work. Don't keep the windows open!
Also, make sure the windows have the appropriate security standards. I'm not into this so I ask you to check it out yourselves. Perhaps this
is not a point at all.</p>
<p><b>7.</b> Keep the doors <u>normally locked</u>! Don't play around and let open the possibility for intruders to make the assault during
day time! I understand if the family is right outside playing, making barbeque, but regardless, you will have to make the security/threat
assessment. However, I can guarantee that fewer possibilities (for the violators) provide greater security, logically!</p>
<p> End note: don't think people will weep for your lost possibilities because they don't (rather the opposite, they laugh at you)!
If you have a kid, it can be smart to entertain the thought that the neighbour wants it abused (don't be ignorant on this point)!<br>
It's funny I provide this to the public! It should be the plain police work to provide this kind of information. I guess they want customers
from both ends, offenders and victims, sucking up to them! Well, here you have it! Use it well. Good people and naive people are typically the
same people. You never know when crime swoops down on you! Enjoy life. Stay secure.</p>
<p>The direct link to the webpage: <a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/sec_pack.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/sec_pack.html</a>.<br>
Links will be added to all Index100s and Crossroads too.</p>
"< /channel >"
"< /rss >" [First RSS file of 3]
No comments:
Post a Comment