"< 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 Second 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, 1998-2010"
"< webMaster>t.lea@t-lea.net (Terje Lea)"
"< lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Oct 2010 19:00:00 GMT"
"< docs>http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html"
"< image >"
"< title>The White Room Complete - The Second 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/blogT/index.blog/1419745/lovforslag-om-forhold-til-kongehuset-landsforr230deri/
<p>Jeg har sendt følgende epost via nettskjema til Justis- og Politidepartementet:<br>
"Jeg foreslår herved at å besudle eller å involvere Kongefamilien i alvorlig kriminalitet er å begå landsforræderi.
Dette gjelder jo spesielt personer tilknyttet Kongehuset og kan involvere nivået av beskyttelse også.
Jeg foreslår herved at å besudle eller å involvere Kongefamilien i alvorlig kriminalitet er å begå landsforræderi.
Dette gjelder jo spesielt personer tilknyttet Kongehuset og kan involvere nivået av beskyttelse også.
Dette er jo en juridisk teknikalitet og impliserer dessuten at Kongehuset selv IKKE foretar seg noe som tilsier ansvar for alvorlig
kriminalitet. Det må også være implisitt at hvis det kan se ut som om Kongehuset har involvert seg i alvorlig kriminalitet så må personer
tilknyttet Kongehuset være beredt på å ta på seg skylden."<br>
Dette er ment som et hyggelig forslag og som kan være en fin side ved Norge inn i fremtiden. Jeg kan også si at jeg støtter Monarkiet fordi:</p>
<p>- det burde representere minst en normal familie som alle kan se opp til (selvom det sikkert finnes mange som har problemer med ordet
"normal" og dette i motsetning til mange, muligens "fragmenterte" folk i sosial og politisk vitenskap så synes jeg at kjernefamilien/utvidede
familien er en klassisk strålende ide).</p>
<p>- det best representerer tradisjon og kultur på en pen og hyggelig måte, nesten som kronen på samfunnets verdighet (potensielt).</p>
<p>Notis: jeg sier ikke at jeg er imot andre styreformer (først og fremst Republikk) som gjerne kan representere det samme etter å ha vært
etablert i en tilstrekkelig periode. Det kan også være at man kan innordne det samme lovforslag til høye embeter som jo Presidents embete i andre
land. Ha en fortsatt fin uke og god helg. :-)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1419743/slettede-eposter-til-politiet-og-forsvunnet-brev-fra-politiet/
brev fra Politiet.</p>
<p>Situasjon: plutselig så oppdager jeg at alle mine eposter (2) til Politiet er slettet og min epost til Sivilombudsmannen.no (orientering)
også er slettet og at mitt kvitteringsbrev fra Spesialenheten for Politisaker er forsvunnet!</p>
<p>Jeg finner dette underlig og skremmende på samme tid! Vel, vel, vi får se...</p>
<p>Jeg vil også nevne dette er en oppdatering på en juridisk situasjon og forløp til en rettssak (menneskerettighetssak) i den grad det viser seg
nødvendig. Det føles litt grotesk å oppdage at demokratiet er så grundig bakpå når "alle" sier at alt er så fint (dvs. demokratiets
tilstand).</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>My theory of women actually having a different relationship to their bodies in terms of feelings, making women
avoid cancer in greater degrees than men, when indeed I think that most other factors are more or less the same.
One should note that risky behaviour can indicate, also, such an inferior relationship to one's own feelings already
in young age, ie. heavy drinking among young men.</p>
<p>Besides, modern women and men have almost the same patterns when it comes to "smoke, drink and work". Haven't you heard
about "double-working" women? Also, the smoking has come down heavily before 2001 as this set (to which the link points)
is from 2001 to 2007. You should also note that cancer strikes, predominantly, the older scope of the population so the
fact of heavy drinking young men doesn't have any (particular) impact. I agree to "avoiding carcinogenic substances is the
(best/[a significant advise]) you can achieve in the avoidance of cancer" [by chaz wyman]. This is not about the mental concept of "emotions", it's
about neurologic signals, "feelings", in your body before cancer occurs! Thus, this writing is not about some kind of "magic"
cure. No, it's about "Cancer-Prevention Measures"! So, what I try to point out, is the relation a person has to one's own
feelings (in the body) and not some mental size of sensing sadness and so on. The claim is, simply, that when people care
for a "natural" relationship to their feelings, they can in great parts avoid cancer. To internalise a "mechanistic body
image"/"reject natural body feelings" can therefore lead to cancer/increased probability for cancer in my opinion! This
should come in addition to other good advice such as a healthy diet, physical exercise and the avoidance of carcinogenic substances!</p>
<p>I agree to some extent with your [bytesplicer] emphasis on stress, even including possibly that hazardous environment also
puts stress on your body ie. being subject to carcinogenics puts a load on the body to get rid of it, lowering the
"energies"/electricity to sustain the feelings that support your immune system and against abnormalities by cell life (cell
division, cell breathing, cell workings).</p>
<p>So, I'm looking for the best range of feelings, not being below a certain value and not, possibly, being too high either.</p>
<p>(I've been thinking that my writing is on a stage where the next step is to actually enter the field and develop techniques like
making a measuring device that measures the electricity between the fingers with a person who is typically resting and calm (for
steady signals) and so on (making a data bank on these data gathered from "high and low" in society.)</p>
<p>RSS: these words have first been written on the Philosophy Now forum, by myself, and I have only now added them to my website.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1419460/letter-to-amnesty-international-in-norway-notice/
<p>I've sent a letter to Amnesty International's branch in Norway recently, making an inquiry into possible violations of my
rights according to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, articles 3 and 12.</p>
<p>My perception is that my rights are indeed violated on these grounds yet I lack the definite evidence to move further on, also
despite my complaint to the Police on the matter.</p>
<p>It relates, of course, to being a victim of abuses in childhood and youth through a period in the 80s and the 90s. I don't know
what is out there in the world because my life is severely restricted due to security concerns and depression, but there's something
definite.</p>
<p>The articles say:</p>
<p>3.</p>
<p>* Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.</p>
<p>12.</p>
<p>* No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his
honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.</p>
<p>From The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, here: <a id="i100" href="http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/">
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/</a>.</p>
<p>There's also the extra concern, substantial worry, that this may very well have (severe) consequences to my family as a whole as well,
possibly engaging a kind of doctors' game. This has also been noted in my letter to AI in Norway.</p>
<p>We'll see where this is going (unless I suddenly "disappear"/"allegedly kill myself").</p>
<p>(This has first been added to the blog 22nd October this year. It may also be noted that this should have been added to RSS earlier
due to the obvious importance, but for various reasons this has not been done. Sorry.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#CACG
relativists that can overcome Ethical Objectivity (now)! I've been meditating this for quite a while and I'm now
at peace by the preceding sentences. There is simply no chance to refute Ethical Objectivity anymore.<br>
The argument is not finished by these words and remains to be made a paper of academic quality, if not a book.
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/my_own_quotes.html
<p>'Information is good if and only if "information is free in the sense that it enables people to do good and only to this extent!"' TL<br>
Note on Steven Levy as is mentioned above.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#PAN
<p>Posted: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:01 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I've been thinking some more and I come to believe, hypothetically, under the following assumptions/premises that if
we get to know all of the universe, every other universe, and all of science in its utmost precision, we should be able to say
why the laws of nature are this way and not any other way. Thus, even for the most radical "negative", that of proving a
negative natural law, there may be this kind by this description. Obviously, it's at the very far end, one, perhaps, equal to
Heaven, only, possibly, theoretically achievable.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/quotes.html
only corrupt blood." - Kahlil Gibran<br>
It should be noted that this quote has been actually added to the webpage some time ago.
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/InternetTipsandTricks.html
in particular. I've also added some extra comment. I'm sorry I've been misguiding on some of this.
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>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/somatists.html
I believe this word derives from a certain special relationship akin to a telepathic mechanism, either in relation to other people
or aspects from nature itself in the instance of fx. quantum entanglement.<p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#QSID
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html
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>Note: this has first been 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>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#QSID
<p>Post subject: Re: Can you say that the knowledge about downsing is science? PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 12:33 am</p>
<p>By the example of Dowsing, a clear example of pseudo-science, it's important to make the distinction of talking <i>about</i> a
phenomenon that people have believed in or are believing in and <i>the act of considering Dowsing as science by writing</i>, ie. <b>not</b>
pseudo-science. The issue is
that you shouldn't reject anything, but at least consider the issue at hand as a phenomenon that people believe in historically or
otherwise or a phenomenon in itself in this former respect. There is a large step from these two earlier points, to <i>enter</i> the belief
in something by believing in it as science or knowledge of anything valuable in itself. The wisdom is that some scepticism and a good
foundation of knowledge can carry you far!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#IoQ
<p>Post subject: Criticism of Quine's Indeterminacy of Language PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:44 am</p>
<p>I'm about to read a translation of Immanuel Kant's Grounding of the Metaphysics of Morals into English. It strikes me that it's
possible to say that a <u>sufficient or good</u> translation has to stay within a certain scope! This is what I level against
Quine as he appears on my Foe-list. Not only that, but his project of Philosophy seems to be sceptical and of the kind of minimalist
philosophy <i>without</i> connecting him with Paul Horwich in any way...</p>
<p>I'm coming back to this, but this project is now open!</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: Criticism of Quine's Indeterminacy of Language PostPosted: Wed Oct 13, 2010 5:03 pm</p>
<p>I'd also like to add that I also think meaning has to lie within this scope. You can't make a Flying Spaghetti Monster from the
Bible and you can't make the US American constitution support Nazism. There are clear limits to how far you can extrapolate language
before you sound like a lunatic...</p>
<p>So while I am on the limits, Quine is on the possibilities...</p>
<p>I'll see what I get out of it. Until then, my description of Quine stands...</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#EoF
<p>Post subject: PostPosted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 11:16 pm</p>
<p>Epistemology of Logics should be finished at the descriptive level <i>before</i> it enters the logical structure.</p>
<p>Thus a pink Sphinx, being a toy figure for children exists because there is such a toy, while the mythical Sphinx does
not exist other than as a concept (of language, myths).</p>
<p>It's therefore wise to keep the Logical structure apart from the Epistemological task (that's completed before the
assumptions enter the logical structure/argument).</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: Epistemology of Logics PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2010 2:56 pm</p>
<p>The ontology of the toy is <i>definite</i> as opposed to the metaphysical Sphinx which according to the myth may be able
to do a lot of stuff, like flying, very much unlike the Sphinxes of Egypt. Ok?</p>
<p>It's a small task to go from "individuals" to propositions, like "mythical Sphinx" nicely turns to "there is a mythical
Sphinx"! Are you playing with me? Don't you think I understand what I write?</p>
<p>Besides, the OP relates to three articles from AP Martinich's book of Phil. of Lang. and these are B. Russell's "On
Denoting", PF Strawson's reaction to it and K. Donnellan's Reference and Definite Descriptions (1966) in that vein.
I'm uncertain about this third article, but I'll make it clear to you later. [Edit2, 13.08.2010:] You can also add Quine's
(Ch. 1:) On What There Is (from From a Logical Point of View). [End of edit.] [Another edit.] Except Quine, these articles
file under Reference and Descriptions by Martinich. [End edit.]</p>
<p>[Edit, 12.08.2010:] You may also think that Logics is all about symbols, but what I like to point to is the Universe of
Discourse of Logics that may be easily overlooked by some, ie. beginners, popular readers. So the Epistemology point enters
here, UoD. I'll clarify in greater detail as this may look a little confused and blurred. [End of edit.]</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: Epistemology of Logics PostPosted: Fri Aug 13, 2010 7:47 pm</p>
<p>It may very well be the case, but I like to view this in relation to the above mentioned articles...</p>
<p>(PS: I'm about to look over the articles "shortly" to widen the clarification and definitely come across with some point
unless the whole thing proves futile...)</p>
<p>[Edit, Unsp.:] I've added "K. Donnellan's Reference and Definite Descriptions (1966)" and "Except Quine, these articles file under
Reference and Descriptions by Martinich". [End edit.]</p>
<p>[Edit, Unsp.:] (PS2: I'm also wondering whether I'm wrong in thinking it may go into the Logics section, but give me some time and
let me make the attempt/case. (Nevertheless, I do think that most of the lines written so far actually do fit into the Logics
category.) [End edit.]</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.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/various_designs.html
<p>Let's imagine this can be done in Firstarter, 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>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1418902/volden-i-det-norske-samfunnet/
Joda, vi beklager oss... oh, ah, oh, nå er tenåringene våre
voldelige igjen... Også skyter de med VÅPEN! Kan du tenke deg?
Våpen! Og de skal du vite, BRÅKER i en sånn grad at jeg ikke kan
bli lege selv om den sjansen glapp for 20 år siden...</p>
<p>Oh, ah, oh, den volden, den volden...</p>
<p>Joda, det hjelper jo selvsagt når vi forbyr pepperspray, er så
j*vlig begrensende på håndvåpen og er imot noen særlig overvåkning
av bybildet... Oh, ah, oh, den volden, den volden...</p>
<p>Resultatet av den slags lovgivning: joda, vi trer den over hodet
på barna fordi de skal bære våre synder når vi sitter der og leker
"voksenleker", og sugler i det skjulte over all slags f*enskap,
"drikke" som noen sikkert kaller det!</p>
<p>SÃ¥ det er det, volden eksisterer i den grad vi har den i samfunnet
fordi samfunnets ledere, voksne mennesker med makt, er i akkurat den
samme grad noen IDIOTER!</p>
<p>SÃ¥ de sier: personvern... og alt det andre...</p>
<p>Og jeg sier: oh, ah, oh, den volden, den volden... det høres
jo så forferdelig ut, er det noe jeg trenger å bry hodet med? Nei,
folkens, la oss jobbe på noe byråkratisk, noe som helst ikke betyr
noen f*en ting som helst!!</p>
<p>Volden som finnes er velfortjent og den er der på grunn av dobbeltmoral
hos samfunnets ledere, godt voksne mennesker som gjør dustete ting som
Ã¥ forby pepperspray og annet i den grad at vi alle er blitt medlemmer
av f*cking motorsykkelklubber av det tvilsomme slaget og narkonettverk
bare for å være på den sikre siden!</p>
<p>Oh, ah, oh, den volden, den volden...</p>
<p>(Dette har først blitt skrevet på VG (Black) Debatt/Debbath, 2010-10-01, kl. 06:35 - <a id="i100" href="www.vgd.no">
www.vgd.no</a>.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1418756/deletion-of-the-blog-im-sorry-please-forgive-me/
<p>On the other hand, the posts will have the chance to have some spelling errors and perhaps I find new approaches in the process. One word I'd like to correct is the "genious" from The Religious Address post. The right word is, of course, "genius"!!</p>
<p>Please, have some patience, I have a good deal of pages of blog posts to copy to this blog from the old downloaded pages of the deleted blog. I also need, probably, to correct all the RSS posts containing blog posts to have the correct URLs and GUIDs. Uggghhh!! A lot of clerical work is waiting! Cheers!</p>
<p>I've uploaded all the original underlying files for these posts that I've "recovered" to this blog. There are 21 pages, supported by RSS, and show hazy saving, losing 5 comments in the process. Well, well, life is just like that... The files:</p>
<p><a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written2.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written2.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written3.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written3.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written4.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written4.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written5.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written5.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written6.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_written6.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN1.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN1.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN2.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN2.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN3.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN3.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN4.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN4.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN5.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN5.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN6.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN6.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN7.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN7.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN8.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN8.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN9.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN9.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN10.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN10.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN11.htm">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN11.htm</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN12.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN12.html</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN13.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN13.html</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN14.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN14.html</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN15.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/What_is_writtenN15.html</a></p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1416571/197-utsette-befolkningen-for-et-urimelig-trusselbilde-anmeldelse/
Politiet 17. september 2010 22:55 ved kripos@politiet.no og post.askerogbaerum@politiet.no.</p>
<p>Emne: Anmeldelse til Politiet</p>
<p>Her følger teksten på anmeldelse til Politiet: Anmeldelse av Politiet for å tillate systematisk korrupsjon på subkulturelt nivå, type "monkey business" eller
andre alvorlig kriminelle opplegg.
Anmeldelse: Jeg anmelder herved Politiet for å tillate systematisk forfølgelse og muligens grov mishandling og mord av enkeltpersoner på et subkulturelt nivå
og med det motiv å gjennomføre "monkey business", en type aktivitet og oppfatning som støtter ønsket og lysten til å nedverdige og eventuelt drepe folk! Denne
"monkey business" tenker gjerningspersonene seg muligens også som "kritisk" for å vinne konkurranser og annet i forretningsøyemed og andre typer aktiviteter!
Måten denne tillatelsen skjer på, er igjennom beskjeder på ulike plan og til folk som står i kritiske stillinger for å ivareta disse ofrenes, enkeltpersoners, juridiske
vern og medisinsk forsvarlige tjenester hvor på disse kritiske mennesker, hvem de nå enn er, overtales eller presses til å la denne "monkey business" skje på en slik
måte at disse ofrenes, enkeltpersoners, juridiske vern og medisinske tjenester betraktelig svekkes eller bortfaller helt i den
grad disse ofrene, enkeltpersoner, kan utsettes for alt mellom himmel og jord uten at dette noen gang har sjanse for å komme frem i lyset, offentlighetens
bevissthet!</p>
<p>Jeg krever selvsagt en radikal gjennomgang av Politiets rutiner for å sikre 100% at prosedyrer blir fulgt eller at feil i å gjennomføre disse kommer
til syne, spesielt i dette henseende, "monkey business"! Jeg krever videre at korrupsjonsjakten i Politiet blir bedre og at Politiets rapportering og generell
transparens/gjennomsiktighet til offentligheten også blir bedre! Likeverdighetsprinsippet står veldig høyt i det norske samfunnet og skal gjennomsyre alle
offentlige funksjoner og jeg krever selvsagt at det i denne sammenheng også gjennomføres i praksis med 100% sikkerhet eller at feil blir rapportert i et 100%
sikkert system. Det finnes faktisk mange gode systemer i det teknologisk avanserte samfunnet som jo Norge er, for å gjennomføre dette!</p>
<p>I henhold til min status som mulig offer for, i alle fall, eller som faktisk offer for noe sånt en tid tilbake, så mener jeg denne anmeldelsen er helt legitim. Man
får se hva som skjer, men jeg vil gjerne gjøre det fullstendig klart, offentlig, hvor eventuell skyld ligger hen i forhold til denne typen kriminalitet. Nå som dette
er anmeldt så er alle unnskyldninger <u><b>knust!</b></u> Det kan jo også hende at når dette er spilt ut i det åpne så setter man større press på rettsapparatet i menneskerettighetsspørsmål!
Jeg tenker også at befolkningen er bedre beskyttet bare i kraft av at denne informasjonen i den grad den blir tilstrekkelig kjent, juridisk sett.
Ta vare på dere selv!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html
where you can check former writings in the natural/correct order. I hope you find this useful and that you find joy in the relief
over reading <i>only</i> 100 items of writings at a time per RSS feed link. Here you are! Enjoy!
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>In opposition to the Copenhagen Interpretation, I hold that one needs to always take into account the 3 necessary factors of matter, energy and
mathematics. If you don't have matter and energy, there will not be any reality where your mathematics can apply. Thus, mathematics can't
<b>whatsoever</b>
be seen as more fundamental than reality itself, ie. matter and energy, perhaps along with space and time and some other.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#AIS
<p>Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 5:29 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Perhaps, "all truths are subjective" can be written because nobody can check on others' views! I.e. it becomes
a kind of religious views.</p>
<p>On the other hand, "all truths are subjective", I suggest is a kind of Liar's paradox because if you know that
"all truths are subjective" then you know what these views are and you should be able to agree with the most reasonable one.</p>
<p>Or it, "all truths are subjective", is a kind of qualia assertion where it's not possible to determine the judgment
passed, yet it passes as truthful and thus objective, afterall.</p>
<p>[Edit, 13.09.2010:]<br>
Socratic Spelunker writes:<br>
..."all truth is subjective" include itself? Is the statement "all truth is subjective" subjective?"</p>
<p>So in the qualia sense, in so far as the (art, fx.) judgments vary absolutely and are expressed in words
(objectively), thus this sentence above is not true. The sentence should be ""all truth (in this case) is
subjective" doesn't include itself! The statement "all truth (in this case) is subjective" is hereby objective!"</p>
<p>But I believe there are cases where this difference is unexpressed (beyond a certain level) and where the
difference is still perceived, yet in an unexplained way, thus "all truth (in this case) is subjective" does
include itself! The statement "all truth (in this case) is subjective" is hereby subjective!<br>
[End of edit.]</p>
<p>So here you have my 3 versions of your above sentence, more or less based on your OP.</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:11 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Socratic Spelunker writes:<br>
"If it includes itself, it is false, because it is all-inclusive and absolute. You can't have an objective truth saying
"all truths are subjective.""</p>
<p>If you have a fact that says that no views on art are the same, then you do in fact have an objective truth concerning
subjectivity, namely one where you find that no-one has similar views in art!</p>
<p>We can hypothetically imagine some simpletons where this is true, that is, their views about art are so crude that they
never bother to argue about art deeper than agreement or more deep than a certain complexity. This kind goes against the
non-agreement argument of considering arts.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#PAN
<p>Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:47 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Yes you can! By not proving a <b>positive</b>! That is, as far into the work of analysis, you are "proving" a
negative everything you must admit to not finding anything under a certain scope of research, whatever this may
be! The LHC looking for the Higg's boson or something else... Dr Michael V. Antony writes in his article, The
New Atheism - Where’s The Evidence?, that "2. You Can’t Prove A Negative" and I disagree with this, obviously,
in naming a "category"/research "null"/"nothing"/"zero finding". [Edit:] It's as simple as identifying an empty
place! [End of edit.] [I've formerly called this the Casting Principle, ie. that of a piece, something has been
stamped out and that the remaining substance is the very thing.]</p>
<p>Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 6:22 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Should I write down a deduction for you given some premises? Would it help? I am fully aware of the Paradox of Ravens.</p>
<p>Example for your thoughts:<br>
You look for a highly valuable object on a public square. Well, the square is empty. There is nothing
there that's highly valuable to you ie. golden necklace by Gucci or some. So you have <b>proven</b>
by time and place that there is <b>not</b> a highly valuable object for you in this public square! Comprende?</p>
<p>Posted: Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:38 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>...But it definitely means snow doesn't exist where they have been up to this point, ie. there has
not been snow "here", place, in this period, time. And this is indeed proven! However, this "negative"
usually is understood in the context of (natural) laws, but even these must have the possibility to be
"proven", confirmed - so consequently I'd say one should be able to "prove" a negative law as well because
they need to apply to reality and they need a possible set-up of scientific equipment which the absurdly
asserted so-called laws never will have the possibility of because they are simply <b>false!</b></p>
<p>Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2010 5:18 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I come to think of this crime-scene where the investigators <b>prove</b> that a certain person
<b>is not</b> the killer, ie. police investigators prove this negative <b>all the time</b>.</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:28 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Ever heard of the <b><u>elimination process</u></b>? No? You have a set of people who may have committed
this crime and then you investigate until the criminal has been found! You rule out the negatives and clinch the guilty!</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:37 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>That is, this <i>suspect</i> has been proven to not be the offender, ie. to prove a negative! An alibi
enters as a different description and to prove the negative for an alibi is a whole different process, but
you know this, don't you?</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2010 10:10 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I think of proving a negative in a very limited sense, not implying natural laws or generalisations!
What I'm implying, is that in a limited span of time and a limited space, you can prove a negative finding!</p>
<p>F.x. this object in this public space at this time, the suspect who isn't the perpetrator, the finding
of a natural law within this scope and with this research equipment and this, "proving a negative" continues in this fashion!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#PCAAS
<p>Objectively, every possible argument in the discussion of (A)S will take effect and thus be effectuated or denied.</p>
<p>New posts, 2. Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:14 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Following the pattern of abortion that must be said to be very successful if you look closely on the statistics (leading
to more: well being of kids, quality time, time for attention and love and so on), excluding, of course, the Christian
conservatives (for them, we go the Hell all the same), I think this can turn out well for legalised (assisted) suicides
too, that it gets accepted among the greater parts of the population, that for some, suicide by medicines is a good solution
to sickness and other. There's nothing in the way for the possibility that near, dear people can take part in one's departure
from life. The very (A)S can represent dignity in many ways, not to say fill many empty spaces (to make society "complete").</p>
<p>Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 11:24 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I think legalising suicide has the capacity to slash the "doctors'" vile, perverse, gruesome "games" quite heavily to put
it bluntly (despite their, the medical doctors, Hippocratic oath)!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1416244/mark-of-victory-day/
intelligence and character well above you! I have <u><b>no need</b></u> for you in my foreseeable future whatsoever! On the contrary,
your absence and banishment are very much wanted!<br>
Even though the birds have flown south legally speaking regarding some issues in the past, except some formalities in
relation to this, I've experienced a rocket-like ascent to the skies and heavens, in the Arianespace sense, since I've
begun dumping the obstacles and negative factors in my life! This will always be with me!<br>
I've now dearly found the rhythm of my life, unbreakable and unshakeable, the lyrics are presented. Cheers!<br>
Artist: Corona<br>
Title: The Rhythm Of The Night</p>
<p>This is the rhythm of the night<br>
The night, oh yeah<br>
The rhythm of the night<br>
This is the rhythm of my life<br>
My life, oh yeah<br>
The rhythm of my life</p>
<p>You could put some joy upon my face<br>
Oh, sunshine in an empty place<br>
Take me to turn to, and babe I'll make you stay</p>
<p>(And so continues in the writing by this RSS link.)</p>
<p>(From <a id="i100" href="http://www.lyricsmania.com/dancelyrics/corona_the_rhythm_of_the_night_lyrics_168.html">
http://www.lyricsmania.com/dancelyrics/corona_the_rhythm_of_the_night_lyrics_168.html</a>)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1416158/blaze-of-glory-the-lyrics-and-a-comment/
<p>I wake up in the morning<br>
And I raise my weary head<br>
I got an old coat for a pillow<br>
And the earth was last night's bed</p>
<p>I don't know where I'm going <br>
Only God knows where I've been <br>
I'm a devil on the run <br>
A six gun lover <br>
A candle in the wind</p>
<p>When you're brought into this world<br>
They say you're born in sin<br>
Well at least they gave me something<br>
I didn't have to steal or have to win</p>
<p>Well they tell me that I'm wanted <br>
Yeah I'm a wanted man <br>
I'm colt in your stable <br>
I'm what Cain was to Abel <br>
Mister catch me if you can</p>
<p>I'm going down in a blaze of glory <br>
Take me now but know the truth</p>
<p>I'm going down in a blaze of glory <br>
Lord I never drew first <br>
But I drew first blood <br>
I'm no one's son <br>
Call me young gun</p>
<p>You ask about my consience <br>
And I offer you my soul <br>
You ask If I'll grow to be a wise man <br>
Well I ask if I'll grow old</p>
<p>You ask me if I known love <br>
And what it's like to sing songs in the rain <br>
Well,I've seen love come <br>
And I've seen it shot down <br>
I've seen it die in vain</p>
<p>Shot down in a blaze of glory <br>
Take me now but know the truth</p>
<p>'Cause I'm going down in a blaze of glory <br>
Lord I never drew first <br>
But I drew first blood</p>
<p>I'm the devil's son <br>
Call me young gun</p>
<p>Each night I go to bed <br>
I pray the Lord my soul to keep <br>
No I ain't looking for forgiveness <br>
But before I'm six foot deep</p>
<p>Lord, I got to ask a favor <br>
And I'll hope you'll understand <br>
'Cause I've lived life to the fullest <br>
Let the boy die like a man</p>
<p>Staring down the bullet <br>
Let me make my final stand</p>
<p>Shot down in a blaze of glory <br>
Take me now but know the truth</p>
<p>I'm going out in a blaze of glory <br>
Lord I never drew first <br>
But I drew first blood</p>
<p>and I'm no one's son <br>
Call me young gun <br>
I'm a young gun</p>
<p>Comment: the lyrics are not the whole point, but the song is also good in the way you like it on Youtube or somewhere else.<br>
I can recommend Ma Baker, that lies in the same street, but I'm not "the wildest cat of Old Chicago town", which is also
referring to a woman, I can assure you.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1415443/det-er-min-skyld-en-sang-om-skyld-og-skam/
å sammenstille et naturlig forhold til sex og en åpenbar umoralsk kultur som jeg fraskriver meg ethvert ansvar for. Tvertimot, jeg har
vært imot en type "rumpehulls" kultur ifra begynnelsen av, myndig alder. Dette er også et eksempel på en slags politisk aktivisme.
Dette har ikke blitt rapportert ved RSS før nå.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1415442/departementet-for-sjimpanser-og-andre-forsoeksdyr/
oppretter Departementet for sjimpanser og andre forsøksdyr, ergo "monkey business"! Dette er på linje med John Cleese's Department
of Silly Walking og Harald Heide Steen jr.s og Rolv Wesenlunds Supperåd med Balle Klorin så tenker jeg at Statsministeren og co.
allerede har et "Departement for sjimpanser og andre forsøksdyr", en slags varm potet, i tankene. I så måte så håper jeg dette bidrag
kan være forløsende og til emosjonell støtte! Kanskje det også er like om hjørnet i den grad det er utbredt å drive "monkey business"
i Norge.</p>
<p>Ja, hvem kan spå fremtiden? Jeg bare spør og spør! *smil*</p>
<p>Notis. Dette er selvfølgelig politisk aktivisme som et ledd i en kampanje for å dytte opinionen i en retning som får has på
den styggeste type kriminalitet jeg vet om og som i grove trekk er ren og skjær nedverdigelse av mennesker og alt som faller inn under dette.
Det er også ment å heve samfunnets moral i forhold til menneskeverdet på den måten at denne typen skriverier legger større press på <b>
alle</b> som har ansvar i forhold til denne typen kriminalitet. Dette har ikke blitt rapportert ved RSS før nå.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>I've been having this secret dream to create a kind of consciousness from an atom smarter than every
dumbass out there!</p>
<p>So if one sets up this atom in a kind of detector apparatus, reading signals on all the quantum states an atom
can have and set up these quantum states in correlating ways to kinds of linguistic expressions from the input of
a human by means of quantum entanglement, chaos theory, electric signals from the fingertips into the apparatus or
the final possibility, of telepathic interaction (telepathy/electricity by human feelings is usually what is meant
by quantum entanglement, anyhow)! The idea is that eventually one <i><u>might</u></i> establish a kind of communication
and extension by sensor operationalisation that feeds the atom all sorts of signals by webcams or the like. In this
fashion one may be able to create a kind of machine "brain" by this atom (or atom cluster) and possibly also prove a
kind of "monades"/envision of the early stages of consciousness in its universal form! This first part has been posted
on the Philosophy Now forum, today, 22.09.2010.</p>
<p>This may also be seen as an extension from the Princeton University "boxes", hardware drives with processors,
that have been making random "choices" or
calculations in relation to a purported measurement of mass psychology, believe it or not. I don't know how they've been
set up or engineered, but I know of the reports and I think I know what they have been up to. At least, you can correlate
your curiosity from this programme from this renowned university.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1393145/for-africa/
writing, originally written on the Philosophy Now forum.</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: For Africa PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:06 pm</p>
<p>The whole idea with this, is to show how the media coverage is reluctant to give time to the most constructive
efforts in Africa that may lead the way to a better future for the people who live there. Instead, the media covers
the cosmetic such as those first 3 issues. Those 3 issues have always shown to come on <b>top</b> of a good, healthy
business life. In this sense, the media reports are turning the situation upside down, spreading misery reports when
we should have a good incentive to embark on the business opportunities there. This is the point! We learn that
everything is going to Hell in Africa, they can't care for the sick and old, they should not be building industry
there because it pollutes and distorts and glossy picture of Africa and lastly, they should keep their gardens green
and wildlife flourishing so that we can go there and enjoy the <b>nature</b>, primarily, never care or have a positive
recognition of the people there!</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: For Africa PostPosted: Fri Feb 19, 2010 3:05 am</p>
<p>I like to make an update on media coverage of Africa.<br>
BBC:<br>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/2010/02/100204_podcasts_africa.shtml as these are<br>
* Africa Today<br>
* This Week in Africa<br>
* African Perspective<br>
Now it also seems BBC launches Africa Business Report. Information here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/business/africa_business/default.stm. In relation to CNN, I say BBC 1 - 0 CNN.<br>
There's also the initiative stemming from G.W. Bush's days, AGOA, here: http://www.africacncl.org/agoa/default.asp.<br>
Here's a fine intro to African business life: http://allafrica.com/business/. I love to the see the further work of presenting
fine African business opportunities, if not by Europeans/US Americans, then by Africans themselves backed by the power of the
internet and media in general.</p>
<p>Post subject: Re: For Africa PostPosted: Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:54 am</p>
<p>There's been recent developments with CNN in the battle over Africa of BBC vs. CNN. CNN is now launching Marketplace
Africa (http://www.cnn.com/CNNI/Programs/marketplace.africa/). Therefore, the updated score is <b>BBC 1 - 1 CNN</b> today,
22.03.2010. We'll see how efficient the programs are in being given airtime and making impact to Africa in terms of opportunity
in updating the scores, but this is going the <b>right way!</b></p>
<p>Post subject: Re: For Africa PostPosted: Wed May 12, 2010 1:33 am</p>
<p>This has little to do with business of Africa, but the header is still "For Africa"! So:<br>
Why isn't there a dual approach to Africa, promoting <u>both</u> HIV/AIDS medicines <u>and</u> contraceptives. It must be awful
to live in Africa and have the natural biological urges/needs and yet somehow be forced to have children that one can't supply
properly for, who are facing harsh conditions through their lives, bound to repeat the failures of their parents! Why is this
so? Why not <b>both?</b></p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
written to, Philosophy Now forum and Philosophyforums. I'll keep writing philosophy, formal and informal, so you may want to
follow the page in the future. I'm still writing to the Philosophy Now forum, but after being banned from Philosophyforums,
I've been unwilling to make a new username for writing there, rather waiting for an invitation and undoing of banning to
write there again. Cheers!
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#FLS
<p>Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 9:46 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>[Philosophy is hereby suggested to be renamed to Free Linguistic Science]</p>
<p>What are your thoughts on this? On viewing philosophy as science, seriously?</p>
<p>This is in respect to the thread: Scientific vs Philosophical Method.</p>
<p>[Edit:] <a id="i100" href="http://forum.philosophynow.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4502">
http://forum.philosophynow.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4502</a>. I see no difference in the various
"philosophical" investigations to the disciplines of philosophy in contrast to the HDM of the natural sciences.
The "Phd" is also philosophical in a sense, but is not necessarily related to philosophy other than as an honorary
title for significant/"deep" work brought to a subject. We'll see where this will go! Cheers! [End of edit.]</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2010 3:46 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>You should remember that philosophy means just this, love of truth or love of wisdom. Philosophy today is exactly
this, the study of well defined fields/disciplines and I see no need to keep an umbrella that classically denominates
a love of something. No, this seems rather ancient and I think it's time to move on...</p>
<p>The other sciences will have to continue to live their lives...</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#GfC
<p>Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 1:38 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I've earlier written these on Philosophyforums.com where you can find the original writings. I find them
to be so striking that I post them here as well:</p>
<p>[Dead for all foreseeable future?]</p>
<p>Posted Jul 25, 2009 - 11:11 AM:</p>
<p>I find that capitalism is better at controlling corruption than communism. That is, capitalism is more fault
tolerant. While communism almost demands that people are like angels, capitalism can deal with a relatively
large amount of not so good people.</p>
<p>Besides, in capitalism people can settle with less and be pleased with it while those who want it can work
themselves to death and enjoy their fortune from it. This is almost impossible in communism, I think.</p>
<p>Posted Aug 14, 2009 - 7:00 PM:</p>
<p>I want to mention:</p>
<p>- communism focuses on work of people and this can be way harder to make a just issue of in that system</p>
<p>- capitalism focuses on money and money can be made to adjust for all kind of relationships, from capitalisation
of ideas to the amount of stress from work</p>
<p>Who is supposed to kick the hardest work in communism without having advantages for doing it? If workload is
supposed to be equal, should one make elaborate psychologies of work to make sure nobody stresses, carry more
workload, than others? Communism seems to me to be more complex to incorporate.</p>
<p>Posted Feb 6, 2010 - 12:09 PM:</p>
<p>Soviet Union has been marked by two very bad ideas: <u><i>Communism</i></u> and Atheism!</p>
<p>Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 11:20 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>China is not any communist country anymore, mind you. It has officially described itself as socialist
some years ago and even then their communism may just be a kind of "communism" through which their need for
control in overcoming severe problems and a vast population may have called for it.</p>
<p>Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 2:47 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>It's true that China has only one party, but they do elect electives to the "party congress" and I also
happen to believe that there's more than 1 possible candidate in most or all of these elections to the "party
congress" beside having the possibility to vote blank or not to vote at all, going into some kind of system
opposition, trying to change the political machinery, at least!</p>
<p>The elections? You will have to check, but I think the last has been reported within a year or two.
Thanks for asking the question, Wootah. One thing is for certain, China does not fulfill the the communist
ideal of everyone being equally rich or poor, quite the opposite. There are quite large economic differences
in China. It's true though that they have only one party and that this is typical for a communist country,
perhaps even for a social one as they describe themselves as.</p>
<p>Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:59 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>The type of democracy (in case it really is) is one that goes along a line of culture and a certain scope
of politics and it is of this kind, I think a one-party democracy can be effective. That you want progress
and control over this fast and steady and thus the political system is set up as it is. Remember that the
Chinese political system is handling 1,2 Billion people and a good deal of these are quite poor! So what
should one do? I think the Chinese have chosen a fine middle way, preserving own culture and emphasising
the important aims beside of this.</p>
<p>You can look up yourselves the democracies of USA with its 310 million people and downwards...</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1415262/mulig-soekemotor-lov/
henholdsvis ash@kd.dep.no og info@stortinget.no. Jeg presenterer eposten her til offentlig vurdering og diskusjon:</p>
<p>on 08.09.2010 12:06<br>
Mulig vinkling til mulig lov - Søkemotor-loven<br>
"Hei<br>
Jeg vil her gjerne påpeke et mulig demokratisk problem:<br>
hvis folk ikke får tak i den informasjonen de trenger<br>
selv om søket er veldefinert og innenfor moderne<br>
søketeknologi.<br>
Lovforslag: gjør søkemotorene ansvarlige for at folk<br>
får de søkeresultatene de skal ha (gitt at informasjonen<br>
har vært tilgjengelig en viss periode).<br>
Vennlig hilsen<br>
Terje Lea"</p>
<p>Man kan gjerne se dette i lys av en etisk komplett Informasjonsdoktrine jeg har laget:</p>
<p>'Information should be free in the sense that it enables people to do good and only to this extent!' TL<br>
(This is a precision of Steven Levy's '3rd Commandment of the Personal Computer Revolution': 'All information should be free.')</p>
<p>"Sense" er ment å alludere til Gottlob Frege's gåte om forskjellige "senses", slik jeg forstår det fra "On Sense and Reference".</p>
<p>Note. This has not been reported by RSS until now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1415253/between-suicide-and-murder/
possibly from long and painful medically assisted torture, I wonder if it's possible to make a human rights case on this? I mean,
for how long do I bother to tolerate the torments of cold sweating, often failing personal hygiene, in fear for my life? If some
members, as routine, of society are pinpointed for this on a subcultural level, it's devious indeed and should be resolved, a blatant
ethical requirement! Yet I sense psychiatry is easily <u><b>muting</b></u> such claims for being hysteria and "fantasy"! Can I make a case and if so,
how? Please feel free to submit responses! Cheers!</p>
<p>(There are also these possibilities for preparing a body or forging a medical report for making the death appear "gentle" and
"natural", but I guess this is a cloud on the sky!)</p>
<p>The title refers to Søren Kierkegaards "Fear and Trembling", although I remember, falsely or truly, that the title has been
"Between Fear and Trembling" on some editions.</p>
<p>Note. This has not been reported by RSS until now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1415152/lily-allen-and-the-song-fuck-you/
Lily Allen and the lyrics to the song, Fuck You!</p>
<p>Comment: I must say it's polite of Lily Allen to <i>only</i> sing "fuck you" when all you want is
to scream in anger and put these people to death by blowtorches!</p>
<p>Quite on the contrary to the relatively impolite "fuck you", Lily Allen has done great service to society by this song!
Buy it, you too! Cheers!</p>
<p>Note. This has not been reported by RSS until now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1415016/society-and-morality/
sense that one fits in, only that no-one says so. I think this is part of being with a group with a possible, designated hate-object,
a kind of preparedness, yet it's not expressed! I have to ask: is this wanted?</p>
<p>Note. This has not been reported by RSS until now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1415013/two-more-writings-a-joke-and-imaginable-christianity/
A joke - About a Lisa Williams wannabe<br>
Imaginable Christianity - This is about a version or interpretation of Christianity that I can accept if I'm hypothetically to
become a Christian myself.</p>
<p>Note. This has not been reported by RSS until now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1415012/search-engines-and-european-interests-incl-businesses/
controlled and profitted on by U.S. American interests! First, by Yahoo, Google and Bing, but also through U.S. American ownership of
the Ask search service. The others are language specific like Yandex of Russia and Baidu of China!</p>
<p>We should solve this by inviting the excellent Yandex company to include all of Europe or, at least, by making a new European enterprise
in the search market that <b><u>best</u></b> serves European interests (incl. businesses)!</p>
<p>European businesses should dominate Europe!</p>
<p>We should also see to it that the trade balance is good, benefitting the developing world and being level with the developed world!</p>
<p>Cheers! :)</p>
<p>Note. This has not been reported by RSS until now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1414911/fun-with-lyrics-its-about-schizophrenia/
<p>These lyrics are purely artistic. It doesn't give <b>any scientific account</b> of Schizophrenia whatsoever (even though some traits
may apply here and there). The words are chosen basically because they rhyme and I intend to improve on this. You should also know that
<b>insanity</b> is not desirable and that you should <u><b>care</b></u> for your mental health!</p>
<p>You can call this political activism also! Cheers! :-)!</p>
<p>Note. This has not been reported by RSS until now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1414532/opensource-software-and-europe/
otherwise, European-wise, just to qualify the European standard and see to it that the code fulfills the European ideals!</p>
<p>There are also great benefits in hosting and administrate these projects in the sense that we get closer to being tech-savvy
and become able to see the next steps that in turn spin off our next successful (IT-)companies!</p>
<p>We should do this! To EU/Europe!</p>
<p>Note. This has not been reported by RSS until now.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#CBV
escapes reality. So even the philosophical arguments, whatever
they are, need to be plausible (in realistic terms, otherwise they can't obtain a truth value). You can't simply write something,
call it philosophy and think that it applies if it's rubbish, fantasy or whatever... There are indeed quality criteria... Brains
in Vats: even if you envision a brain in a vat in a world in world type of setting, that is, it's possible to construct a brain
in a vat in this world of reality (or some other), you need to show for it's absolute impossibility to always obtain "a natural
death" in case of an intruder who destroys your brain-in-a-vat. Usually, brains in vats come as the idea that some God-like
scientists set up the whole reality in this kind of machine (brains in vats). Further, one should show for how this can be
sustained as life-form and engaging in an illusionary reality in a way that can be perceived as natural without any limitations
whatsoever! I think this is both impossible and implausible and this is my conclusion. "Brains in vats" lacks the virtues to be
convincing!</p>
<p>As for comparison, I must say the Brains in Vats-argument looks as weak as Astrology does in Philosophy of
Science.</p>
<p>This has first been written on the Philosophy Now forum 26th August, 2010.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1414362/to-europe-religious-address-lets-do-it/
in the U.S. American sense by twisting it a little and making an address of "Open Religiousness and Spirituality", making
possible a better relationship between all religious people, but also inviting or remain open to agnostics. I, personally,
find it to be genious to encourage people to be religious (and spiritual) because such people seem more forthcoming in contributing
to society and less egoist in the process! To a more religious and spiritual Europe! Cheers!
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/somatists.html
an alleged, rather dubiously, privacy vulnerability on behalf of the patients. I must say it's implausible given
that they already store medical information, physically or digitally, that's incredibly sensitive and does
represent a significant embarassment to the patient in case in gets into the wrong hands. There are also good
examples of relatively (equal to all other standards, even the existing ones) safe storage and in digital network
like the Police, banking, (health) insurance, communication businesses (telephone and internet companies) and other
places that keep information people like to be private.<p>
<p>(Some information has also been added concerning telepathy and the word "inclination".)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/quotes.html
new things whereas the idiot doesn't." - Metadigital</p>
<p>"Believing in God doesn't make you moral. Not believing in God doesn't make you intelligent." - Metadigital</p>
<p>"There are wise people and there are rude people, and there is very little overlap between the two." - Metadigital<br>
The quotes are provided by Metadigital of the PN forum, forum.philosophynow.org.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#CAE
<p>Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:48 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I've been wondering if Dr. Sam Harris is right about ethics as mere psychology. I think it's plausible that he's at least partly
right! (I'm also wondering if this has been said/written by myself while in the ethics semester at university in 2000.) But here
it goes: If this is not about priorities, ethically, beyond the moment Utopia takes effect, it should be plausible that ethics is
merely psychology and some more! So what does morality mean as expressed by ethics if it all comes down to being a healthy and
happy person? Isn't this the fact in case it is true that the natural sciences (and possibly in combination with the social sciences,
incl. psych) that ethics is "useless"/not necessary as own discipline in philosophy? (I consider psychology/neurology natural science
in this writing, also.) Abolish ethics in philosophy?</p>
<p>Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 6:31 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>My question is however, do you seriously imply that psychology doesn't know what health and happiness is when it's conducted in
normative terms? Turning it a little, I don't think physicists get that much (useful) input from the philosophers these days! As
such I think you fail to address these three issues: Utopia, scientific confirmation of health and happiness. You are therefore
not entirely on the subject, I think.</p>
<p>Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 3:01 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Metadigital wrote: Isn't one of the major points of philosophy to try and figure out what things like happiness are? With
psychology alone, wouldn't any explanation end up being mechanistic or reductionist? Wouldn't it have to attempt to explain
these things in terms of brain chemistry, behavioral patterns, or cognitive mechanisms? Would that give us a complete picture?
I'm skeptical of that. What would guide psychology? Where would it go? How would it benefit us? Why bother with it? It seems to
me like there's a lot of things that psychology can't tackle alone without the help of philosophy. I think this applies to all
the sciences.The question is if science is capable of answering ethics in its entirety until Utopia? If Utopia is achieved,
what does ethics mean beyond that other than considering priorities like whether to go base-jumping or surfing and other
priorities of insignificance (because one lives in Utopia)? Isn't Utopia very much achievable by science, you think? I think
it's plausible we can achieve Utopia even by a severe stagnation in today's science, we have what we need! Now, I'm not going
to speculate if psychology can answer ethics alone because the question isn't principally important to this topic. Perhaps you
can raise it under the Phil. of Science? Where would psychology go? Everywhere that's relevant for psychology to go until
psychology contains a complete explanation or has reached explanatory exhaustion according to possibilities. Subject as such
needs no "guidance", it just needs development! My dear, where is philosophy itself going to go in case it needs "guidance"?
Exactly the same answer again! A subject gives itself once it's clear that it's possible to develop it. You should remember
how much that used to be considered philosophy in the past until it branched out into various scientific disciplines.</p>
<p>Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2010 9:32 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Let me tell it in a different way: Science should by this point be very much able to determine good phyical health and
good mental health. It should also be able to determine if people are happy in a healthy way (not enjoying crime like rapes
and other violations of people).<br>
Now that we are able to do this, by fMRI and all the rest, shouldn't we just stick to the rules and regulations that fulfill
these objectives the best? Of course, we should! Otherwise, we support what we should kill, the crime, the unethical!</p>
<p>If you think about it, everyone likes to discover truth, to develop, to puzzle, to play, to be curious, to make enterprises,
to display themselves by who they are and their skills and knowledge in general. So, is there any mystery in determining what
the obstacle is in achieving this for potentially every single person on the planet? Certainly not! And we don't need ethics
to do it either!</p>
<p>So to end this: give me one example that require ethics to be solved! I'll answer every one of your questions within the scope
of health, both phy. and men., and happiness in the scope of opportunities!</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:08 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Metadigital writes:<br>
"1. America sends a lot of food to countries where starvation is a huge problem. This is done out of concern for the well
being of those people. The populations of the countries that receive this aid constantly grow just above the level of food
available. Is continuing to send food to these rising populations (who are now dependent on aid) ethical?"</p>
<p>I think this kind of problem may be one of the simplest. Without touching the philosophical vocabulary concerning ethics,
I think one should send sufficient food to food deprived populations as well as enter discussion on what is the desired population
level in these areas/countries or this area/country. In addition, one may want to facilitate about changes that get the problem
areas or countries out this cycle. All in all, the area of jurisdiction enter some kind of general vote on the country's future
on a number of issues which are all reasonable, like a key issue of population. According to this, planning takes place to make
permanent and self-sustaining changes. I mean, one has over 260 nations in the world where one country should be a good example
to this area/country in question. Do I need to go further?</p>
<p>Metadigital writes:<br>
"2. In a similar situation, America sends financial aid to foreign countries that have weak infrastructures. This financial aid,
of course, is given on a conditional basis. Because these countries develop an infrastructure that relies on American aid to
avoid an internal collapse, they become dependent this aid to the point of damaging their own sovereignty over their affairs.
Is this an ethical practice for America?"</p>
<p>The aid is all well and good! I think you are unclear on why this money damages their sovereignty. Rather (US) America should
facilitate a richer financial life for this nation in addition, perhaps with the help of other nations as well. It's clear that
countries that receive financial help they become dependent on, are in a situation where more development is needed and to deny
this extra help is to waste resources to a deficient country, obviously! A well working country is a country that usually
generates a surplus in the eyes of the world, in being hospitable, having exciting culture, generating fine industry and minds.
All in all just stays healthy and being a civilised place to the world, including taking deep participation into Res. and Dev.
and knowledge business (incl. education). This is also without any philosophical ethics jargon!</p>
<p>Metadigital writes:<br>
"3. To stop picking on America, and to illustrate a real world event that took place; A hospital is choosing between two
people to receive a new kidney. They have a list that they usually go by, but a private individual has offered $1,000,000 to be
placed at the top of the list. This rich individual is a heavy drinker and will likely die in the next few years anyway, but the
money can be used to upgrade medical facilities and benefit more people (keep in mind that this is the early 20th century!). The
person who is actually at the head of the list is young with many more years of potential life left. What is the ethical decision
to make? (I'll post the decision actually made after your reply.)"</p>
<p>1. It's unknown whether the hospital actually needs more equipment and thus I see no definite use for the extra money: the
kidney goes to the young man.</p>
<p>2. The other way may be that the hospital needs the equipment dearly (in life saving terms and not plastic surgery) and may help
10 extra people every year from dying (far outweighing the young man's extra years). Thus: the kidney goes to the rich man. It
should also be noted that is without corruption and that the transplant list is without absolute rules! This is also without any
philosophical ethics jargon!</p>
<p>There you have them. You may object by saying this is ethics and thereby philosophy, but I say of course that this is ethics
solved by purely scientific considerations! There is not one word that pertains to philosophy, inherently, in them!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
posts on it from Philosophy Forums as well as I've just started to add these.
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#OP
If one ends up in a Liar's paradox in the first place, I suggest there's something wrong with the descriptions or explanations. So
you should improve on these before one give's up on the situation and ends in Liar's paradox. It's also puzzling to me how Liar's
paradox enters Gödel's Incompleteness argument. I'll look more into Gödel's Incompleteness, but this is not important to this writing.
My opinion on Liar's paradox stands!</p>
<p>Paradox of the Ravens: It's clear to me that the Raven paradox is call an "intuitive" paradox, but I say that serious
inquiry doesn't allow for intuitive paradoxes and one should be looking for the deeper solutions to the simple enrichment of
life-experience. I refer you to what I've written on this paradox before.</p>
<p>Zeno's Paradox: This is also meaningless! However, I think the importance of this paradox lies in the way you apply
your tools, being both mathematical descriptions and all other descriptions and concepts you can think of. To refute it is
simply to designate and add units like the meter for the distance in question! As I've written, this is a good example of abuse
of mathematics, philosophy and all else. It's one to learn from in order to provide good skills in whatever subject you like to
involve with!</p>
<p>As for comparison, I must say the Brains in Vats-argument looks as weak as Astrology does in Philosophy of
Science.</p>
<p>This has first been written on the Philosophy Now forum 27th August, 2010 and also published on my website(s) the same day.
However, I first report it by RSS today, excuse me.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#AAI
<p>I've written "Indexical Free" on the examples above and this is not correct (although essentially, it is).
I'm now going to put a lid on this indexical coffin for good!</p>
<p>Here it follows:<br>
(the list from SEP, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/indexicals/, is 'I', 'he', 'she', 'this', and 'that';
'here', 'now', 'actually', 'presently', 'today', 'yesterday', and 'tomorrow'; 'my', 'his', 'her', 'actual', and
'present' (some may include 'given' too))<br>
Indexical free, from before (IF*):<br>
John Perry once followed a trail of sugar on a supermarket floor, pushing John Perry's cart down the aisle on one
side of a tall counter and back the aisle on the other, seeking the shopper with a torn sack to tell the shopper
with a torn sack that the shopper with a torn sack was making a mess. With each trip around the counter, the trail
became thicker. But John Perry seemed unable to catch up. Finally it dawned on John Perry. John Perry was the
shopper John Perry was trying to catch.<br>
John Perry believed at the outset that the shopper with a torn sack was making a mess. And John Perry was right.
But John Perry didn't believe that John Perry was making a mess. That seems to be something John Perry came to
believe. And when John Perry came to believe that, John Perry stopped following the trail around around the counter,
and rearranged the torn sack in John Perry's cart. John Perry's change in beliefs seems to explain John Perry's
change in behaviour.<br>
John Perry is making a mess.</p>
<p>Indexical free, now (IF):<br>
John Perry once followed a trail of sugar on a supermarket floor, pushing John Perry's cart down the aisle
on one side of a tall counter and back the aisle on the other, seeking the shopper with a torn sack to tell
the shopper with a torn sack that the shopper with a torn sack was making a mess. With each trip around the
counter, the trail became thicker. But John Perry seemed unable to catch up. Finally it dawned on John Perry.
John Perry was the shopper John Perry was trying to catch.<br>
John Perry believed at the outset that the shopper with a torn sack was making a mess. And John Perry was
right. But John Perry didn't believe that John Perry was making a mess. <u>The belief of John Perry that John
Perry was making a mess</u> seems to be something John Perry came to believe. And when John Perry came to believe
<u>that John Perry was making a mess</u>, John Perry stopped following the trail around around the counter, and
rearranged the torn sack in John Perry's cart. John Perry's change in beliefs seems to explain John Perry's
change in behaviour.<br>
John Perry is making a mess. (Changes have been underlined.)</p>
<p>IF*:<br>
In the first a professor, who desires to attend the department meeting on time, and believes correctly that
the department meeting begins at noon, sits motionless in the professor's office at the moment of time. Suddenly
the professor begins to move. What explains the professor's action? A change in belief. The professor believed
all along that the department meeting starts at noon; the professor came to believe, as the professor would have
put the words, that the meeting starts at the moment the professor realises the time, noon.</p>
<p>IF:<br>
In the first a professor, who desires to attend the department meeting on time, and believes correctly that the
department meeting begins at noon, sits motionless in the professor's office at the moment of time. Suddenly the
professor begins to move. What explains the professor's action? A change in belief. The professor believed all
along that the department meeting starts at noon; the professor came to believe, as the professor would have put
the words, that the meeting starts at the moment the professor realises the time, noon. (There is actually
<b><u>no</u></b> need for changes to this. Object if you disagree, please.)</p>
<p>IF*:<br>
The author of the book, Hiker's Guide to the Desolation Wilderness, stands in the wilderness beside Gilmore
Lake, looking at the Mt. Tallac trail as the Mt. Tallac trail leaves the lake and climbs the mountain. The author
desires to leave the wilderness. The author believes that the best way out from Gilmore Lake is to follow the Mt.
Tallac trail up the mountain to Cathedral Peaks trail, on to the Floating Island trail, emerging at Spring Creek
Tract Road. But the author does not move. The author is lost. The author isn't sure whether the author is standing
beside Gilmore Lake, looking at Mt. Tallac, or beside Clyde Lake looking at Jack's peak, or beside Eagle Lake looking
at one of the Maggie peaks. Then the author begins to move along the Mt. Tallac trail. If asked, the author would have
explained the crucial change in the author's beliefs in the following way: "The author came to believe that the trail
the author is perceiving is the Mt. Tallac trail and the lake the author is perceiving is Gilmore Lake."</p>
<p>IF:<br>
The author of the book, Hiker's Guide to the Desolation Wilderness, stands in the wilderness beside Gilmore Lake,
looking at the Mt. Tallac trail as the Mt. Tallac trail leaves the lake and climbs the mountain. The author
desires to leave the wilderness. The author believes that the best way out from Gilmore Lake is to follow the
Mt. Tallac trail up the mountain to Cathedral Peaks trail, on to the Floating Island trail, emerging at Spring
Creek Tract Road. But the author does not move. The author is lost. The author isn't sure whether the author is
standing beside Gilmore Lake, looking at Mt. Tallac, or beside Clyde Lake looking at Jack's peak, or beside Eagle
Lake looking at one of the Maggie peaks. Then the author begins to move along the Mt. Tallac trail. If asked, the
author would have explained the crucial change in the author's beliefs in the following way: "The author came to
believe that the trail the author is perceiving is the Mt. Tallac trail and the lake the author is perceiving is
Gilmore Lake." (There is actually <b><u>no</u></b> need for changes to this either. Object if you disagree, please.)</p>
<p>To the uninitiated: there are several meanings of "that" in English. In the indexical sense, one wishes to
take out "pronoun" and "adjective", leaving "adverb" and "conjunction" out because they are not relevant,
simply. Thus only one example has been modified!</p>
<p>An extra note: by this, I supersede both Hans Reichenbach and John Perry so there's no need to pretend.</p>
<p>Perhaps, for those who may have finished "that" before me, I say "I made this" and you reply "I fixed "that""!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/somatists.html
Schizophrenia so that we can more clearly see how the dots connect as time goes by. Cheers!<p>
<p>To the webpage, directly:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/schizophrenia.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/schizophrenia.html</a></p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/scribblings.html
through the crossroads. If you can't stand disorganisation, don't enter it just yet. I have some 1200 (appx.)
posts to write to the page and we'll see how it turns out. The page has already been up for a few days (since 19.).
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#CBV
like in the case of Zeno's paradox, the argument of "Brains in Vats" is
an abuse over what can be said with words analogous to Zeno's mathematics. I'd therefore call "Brains in Vats" a formal
criticism, but one that doesn't have any ontological virtue, it's impossible to make its reality plausible or not!</p>
<p>So how do you know that you are not God or a part of God? This is obviously a "crazy" question in the Epistemological sense
(as of today, most certainly), but it's equally crazy to say that "Brains in Vats" matter in Epistemological terms.</p>
<p>Ontological virtue means it has no bearing on reality, as more charitable people may get the sense of. So how are you going
to prove that "Brains in Vats" has any impact on our relationship to nature? Of how we live, how we discover or how we develop
the next 100 years. This is the key isssue!</p>
<p>Prove to me that "Brains in Vats" means something beyond Zeno's paradox, people! Why shouldn't I be able to gather knowledge
beyond the speculation of God or brain-in-a-vat? Given life's premises, we have no other choice for real! So what if we die
and find ourselves in a brain-in-a-vat, still, given our (likely) past and our development in human history this far, I see no
reason to not keep going the way we've used to, ie. develop science and enjoy knowledge of life!</p>
<p>Another point, if we end up in Heaven, are we really less justified to speak of knowledge! Of course not! Then Brains in Vats"
enters the same... Also, even then, hypothetically and by an extremely charitable interpretation, can we really consider
the value of these "illusionary experiences" null. My answer is, even in this absurd situation, NO because it relates to being
in a certain state of mind, almost as if you retrieve stories or art from people who have been on LSD or other psychotic drugs.
So even then we have to admit that what these beings we have left behind as we're now in this "true" state of being a brain in a
vat or in Heaven, are in fact living lives according to the premises and consequently determine knowledge also accordingly.
The premises give knowledge, undeniably, in the most extreme situation and by an extremely charitable interpretation.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#FFP
<p>Friends:<br>
Bertrand Russell - Service: Principia Mathematica and the attempt to unite Logics and Mathematics<br>
Alfred North Whitehead - Service: Principia Mathematica and the attempt to unite Logics and Mathematics and
Process Philosophy, possibly</p>
<p>Possibly friends also:<br>
Paul Ricoeur - Service: Fine work in Philosophy of language<br>
Jacques Derrida - Service: Fine work in Philosophy of language<br>
Ferdinand de Saussure - Service: Fine work in Philosophy of language</p>
<p>Foe:<br>
Socrates - Crime: Ignorance and "I know nothing!"</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Jun 25, 2010 8:58 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I can add 3 more people "of interest" who are possibly on the Friend part of the list. These are:<br>
Paul Ricoeur<br>
Jacques Derrida<br>
Ferdinand de Saussure</p>
<p>They're all language philosophers and at the present I don't have the knowledge to pass a good judgment
on their efforts other than being fascinated by their work to the extent they are possibly on the Friend list.</p>
<p>Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 5:58 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I'll add Bertrand Russell and Alfred Norman Whitehead for their Principia Mathematica and for trying to
unite Logics and Mathematics as friends! Whitehead also, possibly, for Process Philosophy, although it is
by and large unknown to me presently!</p>
<p>Also another foe: Socrates - Crime: Ignorance and "I know nothing!"</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1413318/to-the-youth-a-warning-about-corruption-and-decadence-with-the-older-people/
myself. I'd like to say that a good start for youth from this day is to be sceptical and inquiring to what those
older, those of greater age than you, say. So if claims are uttered then I'd investigate them if I'm to be you.
I'd first like to warn about what's usually said about law and order, possibly, since it applies to "rightful"
Norway. There is just a lot of corruption! You can expect attempts to be bribed/extortioned for all kinds of
stupid and valuable issues, maybe money, but rather first and foremost a bit more subtle services that one will
say incite/inflame hate and immorality, most likely against a person or people they have in their eyes, but may be
hurtful/injuring to yourselves/yourself. Don't think that the laws are uncontested because they are NOT! It's not
always that the Police do their work and it's not always that lawyers/solicitors, journalists and others do their
work either. I simply don't know how this can be solved, but I can assure you that good routines and a good deal of
attention around personal safety/security and of own moral guarantee you a better life/lives or that it will make it
evident what I write here.</p>
<p>Beware or it will cost you bloody much! I think, of course, that when you first read this, you've come to the right
place for many warnings and may be frightened already, but this is and will be the only that will be written on this
issue, you, the youth! I only give this warning once, 1 time! Here you are, please!</p>
<p>Til Ungdommen av Nordahl Grieg</p>
<p>(To the Youth by Nordahl Grieg)</p>
<p>Translation is by Rod Sinclair (2004)</p>
<p>Faced by your enemies<br>
On every hand<br>
Battle is menacing,<br>
Now make your stand</p>
<p>Fearful your question,<br>
Defenceless, open<br>
What shall I fight with?<br>
What is my weapon?</p>
<p>Here is your battle plan,<br>
Here is your shield<br>
Faith in this life of ours,<br>
The common weal</p>
<p>For all our children’s sake,<br>
Save it, defend it,<br>
Pay any price you must,<br>
They shall not end it</p>
<p>Neat stacks of cannon shells,<br>
Row upon row<br>
Death to the life you love,<br>
All that you know</p>
<p>War is contempt for life,<br>
Peace is creation<br>
Death’s march is halted<br>
By determination</p>
<p>We all deserve the world,<br>
Harvest and seed<br>
Hunger and poverty<br>
Are born of greed</p>
<p>Don’t turn your face away<br>
From needs of others<br>
Reach out a helping hand<br>
To all your brothers</p>
<p>Here is our solemn vow,<br>
From land to land<br>
We will protect our world<br>
From tyrants’ hand</p>
<p>Defend the beautiful,<br>
Gentle and innocent<br>
Like any mother would<br>
Care for her infant.</p>
<p>(This is taken from Wikipedia.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1413315/til-ungdommen-en-advarsel-om-korrupsjon-og-dekadanse-hos-de-eldre/
meg selv. Jeg vil si at et godt utgangspunkt for ungdom fra denne dag vil være å være skeptisk og undersøkende til det de eldre,
de over deg/dere i alder, sier. Så hvis påstander blir uttalt så vil jeg undersøke dem hvis jeg er deg/dere. Jeg vil i første
omgang rette advarselen mot det som er vanligvis sagt om lov og rett i dette landet. Det finnes rett og slett ufattelig mye
korrupsjon. Du/dere kan vente å bli forsøkt utpresset for alle mulige dumme og verdifulle saker, kanskje penger, men heller
først og fremst litt mer subtile tjenester som man vil si forsterker/bringer hat og umoral, helst mot en person/personer de har
i sine øyne, men som også indirekte kan være skadelige for deg/dere selv. Ikke tro at lovene er ubestridte for det er de IKKE!
Det er ikke alltid Politiet gjør jobben sin og det er ikke alltid at advokater, journalister og andre gjør jobben sin de heller.
Jeg vet rett og slett ikke hvordan dette skal løses, men jeg kan forsikre om at gode rutiner og en del oppmerksomhet rundt
personlig sikkerhet og egen moral enten garanterer deg/dere et bedre liv eller så vil det gjøre dette åpenbart hva jeg her
skriver.</p>
<p>Vokt dere ellers blir det verst for dere selv! Jeg tenker jo at hvis du/dere først leser dette så er dere kommet til
rett sted for mange advarsler og kan nok være skremt allerede, men dette er og blir det som burde si alt om denne saken! Jeg
gir bare advarselen en, 1, gang! Værsågod!</p>
<p>Til Ungdommen<br>
av Nordahl Grieg</p>
<p>Kringsatt av Fiender,<br>
gå inn i din tid!<br>
Under en blodig storm -<br>
vi deg til strid!</p>
<p>Kanskje du spør i angst,<br>
udekket, åpen:<br>
hva skal jeg kjempe med<br>
hva er mitt våpen?</p>
<p>Her er ditt vern mot vold,<br>
her er ditt sverd:<br>
troen på livet vårt,<br>
menneskets verd.</p>
<p>For all vår fremtids skyld,<br>
søk det og dyrk det,<br>
dø om du må - men:<br>
øk det og styrk det!</p>
<p>Stilt går granatenes<br>
glidende bånd<br>
Stans deres drift mot død<br>
stans dem med ånd!</p>
<p>Krig er forakt for liv.<br>
Fred er å skape.<br>
Kast dine krefter inn:<br>
døden skal tape!</p>
<p>Elsk og berik med drøm<br>
alt stort som var!<br>
GÃ¥ mot det ukjente<br>
fravrist det svar.</p>
<p>Ubygde kraftverker,<br>
ukjente stjerner.<br>
Skap dem, med skånet livs<br>
dristige hjerner!</p>
<p>Edelt er mennesket,<br>
jorden er rik!<br>
Finnes her nød og sult<br>
skyldes det svik.</p>
<p>Knus det! I livets navn<br>
skal urett falle.<br>
Solskinn og brød og ånd<br>
eies av alle.</p>
<p>Da synker våpnene<br>
maktesløs ned!<br>
Skaper vi menneskeverd<br>
skaper vi fred.</p>
<p>Den som med høyre arm<br>
bærer en byrde,<br>
dyr og umistelig,<br>
kan ikke myrde.</p>
<p>Dette er løftet vårt<br>
fra bror til bror:<br>
vi vil bli gode mot<br>
menskenes jord.</p>
<p>Vi vil ta vare på<br>
skjønnheten, varmen<br>
som om vi bar et barn<br>
varsomt på armen!</p>
<p>(Dette er tatt fra Wikipedia!)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1375583/torture-schemes/
supply this view/speculation.</p>
<p>I think that this is a kind of "energy business", that when life is at stake, some people may perform better. I
sincerely doubt that this is the case, but these people are on the other side of the morality. They seem unable to
separate the energies of a person being threatened by death or tortured while "normal" people will become (severely)
distressed by such energies/this kind of arrangement.</p>
<p>It may have other aims to fulfill as well such as being an explicit or sublime threat to the rest
of the population within "range"/"domain"/jurisdiction.</p>
<p>This threat, I think, is meant to secure a full/forced "cooperation" and "devotion" to the range
of activities it is meant for.</p>
<p>I must say I deeply disagree with any alleged effectivity of this kind of "sh*ttyness" that I think rather
lowers the overall morale/moral of the society to devastating levels. Quite the opposite then, this causes severe
disruptions to effectivity of society in conducting the daily lives, diverting much energy just to stay afloat,
very needlessly and very immoral.</p>
<p>You should remember that people use excess energies to encourage others, help and being kind in numerous
unaccounted ways that surely separate the best societies from the worst. When you cut these energies off, you may
lose more than what you could possibly expect!</p>
<p>In finishing this: you carry it and you <b>will</b> die on it!
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/god.html
assumption side (as opposed to the argument and conclusion sides, the abstract dependent sides of a triangle).
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/ethics.html
mental life, consists of making the utmost of yourself where the starting priorities are yourself, eminently first, and
following proximity thereafter, typically, family, then friends, then contacts, then business connections, then the
friendly strangers, then the neutral strangers and then certainly last, the hostile strangers, the crime-enterprise
crazies and the rest (incl. enemies).
The existential starting in my point of view is from the age of 18 with the actual luggage from upbringing, whatever it is.
This does <i>not</i> mean that you are relieved from your duties before this, but that deficient parents, adverse social and
physical environment can to lesser or greater degree prevent you from, obviously, becoming the best of yourself. Adversity in
this sense is permanent adversity and loss because you lose a combination of time and opportunities.<br>
However, as we proceed, your duties to this are therefore to work reasonably hard with a sound mind
and having good personal security with the objective in mind to advance yourself in recognition and profit, on the
personal side and to be constructive and of service to society, non-corruptively, contributing to justice and morality,
on the other. A fine consequence of this is the advances in science and technology and the very excellent aspects of
culture including the arts, more or less progressive.
Therefore I've made the following drawings that you should associate this with.</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>Note on Universality: it should be unnecessary to mention that objective ethics <i>must</i> be universal if one is to
lead a flawless ethical/moral life. I see <i>no</i> possibility for escaping this and you should not bother with it either.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/my_own_quotes.html
from ours, just like L. Ron Hubbard!' TL</p>
<p>'Maxim of the Role-Player Movement: 'Every child on Earth should have a large set of various Role-Playing Game
books for inspiring creativity and imagination!'' TL</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>This is a telepathic experiment (for all to try), just using the web or email.<br>
I've got an idea for a telepathic experiment and it goes like this:</p>
<p>Poster A posts a few lines of some interest...</p>
<p>Poster B posts some thoughts that Poster A may be planning to write next...</p>
<p>Poster A edits his first post as the answer... and decides on the truth value of B's post by making so in a new post...</p>
<p>Then this is reversed and Poster A speculates over Poster B's next move...</p>
<p>Anyone interested... (At least this is a generative method one can apply over the internet everywhere...)</p>
<p>There is no problem with the confirmation either since Poster A and Poster B will know one another's answers
and the definite truth value to the telepathy and the experiment!<br>
(This is really an angle into the phenomenon of telepathy as much as a scientific method as a kind of research
design, all in all, asserting 3 entities.)</p>
<p>(This is added at the bottom of the webpage until then.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#WPP
<p>I add another position today, Truth Realism, in light of my writing on Truth (metaphysics) both here and on my website.</p>
<p>Maybe I should have added it some time ago, but at least I do it now. Previously, I've seen this as unimportant, but I
think I understand people's definite wishes for clear-cut standing on this issue in particular as well as others.</p>
<p>[Edit, 16.08.2010:] Universalism and Particularism Compatibilist, being possible to see a group of obviously equal
looking objects with no significant differences and also seeing the unique instances like people one by one. I think
there are situations where you are faced with a group of objects that you name for this group and similarly for single
objects that you may eventually group together. [End of edit.]</p>
<p>(Thus, two new positions are added to the list of the first posting on this topic.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#WBB
<p>People have been, IMO, thinking about them more wildly in the past, beyond reality[/less analytic]. I just like to point
out the difference of <i>being</i> a 20 people serial killer and being this serial killer <i>by fantasy</i>. Besides, the mortal lives are
always founded in objective circumstances and their/our fantasies only go that far as I've written.
Novel or not, I don't know...</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/index.html
<p>Here you are, in case there is interest, the proper ways for contact even though the information may travel
through others.<p>
<p>To the webpage, directly:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/ContactInfo.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/ContactInfo.html</a></p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/my_own_quotes.html
<p>'I don't support shitty people! This may be an understatement (as you like it from the English culture)!' TL</p>
<p>The page has now been renamed to "My Own Aphorisms". I hope you like it even better now!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1375583/torture-schemes/
as a national idea in Norway, I suspect. The difference now is that it is "monkey business" for everything to
"monkey business", "monkey science" and "monkey culture" including "monkey sports", being a kind of general "blood sport".</p>
<p>The interpretation for "monkey business" in this sense is the brown, typically, remains of a tortured kid,
also typically, although everyone may be subjects, especially the "good people"/"white (of soul) people".</p>
<p>(Note: White in "the Western" culture is still the colour of innocence. You may want to look up the very nice explanation
from Dictionary.com.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1411751/samfunnet-norge-2010/
ordning, men det er mitt mål å legge <b>press</b> på den <b>dritten</b> av en subkultur/kultur som finnes i Norge i dag og som på mange måter
har <b>fullstendig</b> ødelagt min oppfatning av Norge som et rettferdig samfunn og et samfunn tuftet på lov og menneskerettigheter.
For å si det med Otto Jespersen: demokratiet [i Norge] er en formalitet! Dette er uten å være morsom, antar jeg.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1412176/hvor-mange-mennesker-bor-i-farsund-by/
<p>Jeg vil her legge frem noen demografiske/geografiske tanker om både Farsund by og Farsund kommune.</p>
<p>Jeg vil anslå Farsund <b>by</b> til å være ca. 3000-3500 mennesker. Til sammenlikning så bor det ca. 9400 mennesker i
hele kommunen som er et ganske stort område. 80%(?) av disse menneskene bor i eneboliger med tilhørende garasje, gjerne,
i diverse tvilsomme varianter.</p>
<p>For å sette dette i proporsjoner så er Egersund, en by i Rogaland, på ca. 10400 mennesker, altså en god del over <b>hele</b>
Farsund kommune, målt i innbyggere. Dere kan også huske på at Egersund ligger i Eigersund kommune med ca. 14200 innbyggere. Larvik, byen,
som også er kjent for å være et lite sted, relativt, har ca. 23200 innbyggere mens Larvik kommune har ca. 42400 innbyggere. Selv Stavern,
en by i Larvik kommune har større befolkning enn Farsund "by" med sine 5700 innbyggere.</p>
<p>Jeg håper med dette at Farsund har fått så hatten passer og at Farsund, enten det er byen eller kommunen, er et lite <b>dustested</b>,
i min oppfatning!<br>
(Det riktige er vel kanskje å kalle Farsund for Norges toalett, men jeg har vist litt "vennlighet".)</p>
<p>Så til naturvernerne/organisasjonene: det er bemerkelsesverdig at Norge har så sinnsykt mange eneboliger som legger beslag på så
mye områder. Jeg mener selv at maksimal regional sentralisering og optimal befolkning for jordbruk, akvakultur, gruvevirksomhet og alt
annet er mye bedre løsninger for selv Norge enn den avsindige enebolig-politikken vi har i Norge. Det er klart at jeg går inn for en mye
strengere areal-regulering enn det vi har idag og at vi burde ta vare på naturen som om vi har lite av den selv om vi har mye av den. På
sett og vis så forvalter vi naturen på vegne av hele Europa slik regnskoglandene forvalter regnskog på vegne av hele Verden/Jorden! Ha
en fin dag!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/my_own_quotes.html
(This is a precision of Steven Levy's '3rd Commandment of the Personal Computer Revolution': 'All information should be free.')
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1411752/advice-to-the-eu-on-expansion/
<p>Rather embarrassingly, in deep support of both the Norwegian EU-movement and the Euro, being a part of, more or less
voluntarily, navel obsessed and closed Norway with its 66% opposition to membership of the EU (July, 2010), I write this.</p>
<p>It's my opinion that it can be just as respectable to offer a very good bilateral agreement between EU and Turkey to
secure Turkey's progress to a better and more modern society, while also, hopefully, being religiously moderate to generate more
fluent connections with the rest of the world. One should remember that EU still struggles with relatively high unemployment,
especially in some countries, these being Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain and that we need to secure the Euro area
and stabilise the countries outside of it for making possible Euro entries for these. All in all, differences in the EU imply
further work for spreading knowledge, technology and engineering skills including standards of system and standards of industry
for the whole EU area to rise to an acceptable level throughout! I hope the EU parliament makes the most wise decision on the
matter by showing sensitivity to these issues over the others.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1411751/samfunnet-norge-2010/
noe sånt som disse:<br>
"Her er alt avtalt, alt fra fritid til kriminalitet!"<br>
"Samfunnet kunne ha vært bedre! Prøv å stoppe oss!"</p>
<p>Fakta er, av min oppfatning, at Norge er blitt en forbannet klubb! Det gjør ikke saken særlig bedre at "sosialklientene"
pleier maktelitens underliv med sitt "exotica", tolk det som du vil!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1411505/the-pistoliere-title-killing-one-who-deserves-it/
person should earn the killer the title of Pistoliere. In my case, when or if I get a kill with my registered pistol I become
Mr. Pistoliere Terje Lea. Women likewise become Ms./Mrs. Pistoliere Jane Doe. This can accomodate situations where shots should
have been fired yet haven't because people have been afraid that they would get unfairly punished when the will has been good!
Now on the other hand, people may take the chance to fire if it turns out the person shot and killed is in fact a horrible,
perverse, deviant and cruel person as qualified by ensuing trial. Like it? Cheers! :-)
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/my_own_quotes.html
first been added to the site 13th July this year. As such this is first reported by RSS now, by which I apologise. The old one has been
'Content is King, but Ethics may be God!'
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/disclosure.html
The message is, although, the same and the intention is still a good one.
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/populations_out_of_phonebooks.html
<p>This may be against my better judgment, but I do it still the same.<p>
<p>To the webpage, directly:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/disclosure.html">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/disclosure.html</a></p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#ROS
<p>Metadigital writes: "There ought to be less oughts in the world, ought there?"</p>
<p>Reiteration: An action is defined by a rule. This rule is in relation to a certain condition. This rule
is followed so and so. This rule isn't necessarily fulfilled by the agent who is following this rule.<br>
And so: (1)"An action is defined by a rule. This rule is in relation to a certain condition. This rule is
followed so and so. This rule isn't necessarily fulfilled by the agent who is following this rule." and
(2)such that there are less "actions that are defined by a rule. This rule is in relation to a certain
condition. This rule is followed so and so. This rule isn't necessarily fulfilled by the agent who is
following this rule." and (3)is this "an action is defined by a rule. This rule is in relation to a certain
condition. This rule is followed so and so. This rule isn't necessarily fulfilled by the agent who is
following this rule."?<br>
So this is even more ought-less now, I guess!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#CRDA
of Atheism that goes the absolutely <b>wrong way</b> and it is basically and only this that I want to address! As opposed to
logical, rational thinking, sane observation-making religious people, this kind of atheists don't care and have no <b>implicit</b>
commitment toward human kind and this is the problem. Atheism <b>lacks</b> an inherent obligation toward human kind as opposed
to the much better and normative Humanism!</p>
<p>You may object that a religious person needs no ethical code, but then again, this is a <b>less honest</b>/conman "religious"
person!</p>
<p>If God <b>is</b> Truth (and the ontology of God turns out true as well) and you don't want God, <b>then you have <u>a
problem</u></b>, you!</p>
<p>The objection to the rant and crusade from the atheists is that they are <b>blind</b> to the fine sensitivities religious
people have toward ethics as <i>the</i> way to God (that also is a foundation for meaning)! Thus, atheists and atheism may <b>tear</b>
down very important institutions and intuitions in society that work cohesively and incredibly constructive humans to humans,
in interpersonal relationships! The society may come down if one forces through this <b>headless</b> (to some extent) movement
(by these atheists and atheism)! This is the <i>very</i> concern! Just because you, the atheist, need it "under your microscope"
doesn't make the crusade against religions right!</p>
<p>The baseline of this challenge is:<br>
You say you want logical, rational thinking, sane observation-making religious people to which I (deeply) agree!<br>
AND<br>
I say I want Humanists to which you (probably?) (deeply) agree!</p>
<p>On an end note, it may be that some of the Christian thinking isn't so bad afterall. Fx. a possible
interpretation of the first commandment, "you shall not have any other God than me", may be "you shall worship truth"!</p>
<p>Thus, this is really done before it starts! Clear? To the best for all! Cheers!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#TTA
to and including fact p! If you are to acquire fact p, you do indeed need to also know the necessary underlying
factors. I think this is pointed out by examinations of Entailment in Epistemology. While Entailment should be
logically valid and sound if properly set up in logical structure, it may be alluringly simple to consider Epistemology
<i>only</i> as setting up some logical relations. Therefore, it must be clear that I see epistemology as hard work,
most of the time, being thorough investigation and invention of right words to right contexts and design of apparatus
and approach to closure of examination!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/InternetTipsandTricks.html
<p>Addition to the RSS Feed file:<br>
rss - bla, bla<br>
channel<br>
...<br>
atom:link rel="self" href="http://www.example.com/rss.xml" / !-- RSS "reference"! --"<br>
atom:link rel="alternate" href="http://www.example.com/index.html" / !-- Index-page "reference"! --"<br>
atom:link rel="shortcut icon" href="http://www.example.com/favicon.ico" / !-- Use of Favicon. Can be very nice
to have on your website! --"<br>
image<br>
title - Your special image! (It's recommended that this title is the title of the channel, above.) - /title<br>
url - As before - /url<br>
link - http://www.example.com - /link<br>
width - 120 - /width<br>
height - 120 - /height<br>
/image</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/god.html
<p>Just a remark on (the ontology) of Ethics in this:<br>
If ◊[(∃x)(Ex) ⊃ (∃x)(Gx)] and you don't accept God, but you acknowledge that Ethics, <u>if anything</u>, can lead us to God
<b>then</b> Ethics should be <b>incredibly important</b> in every case!<br>
As it says in the above, this is important, I think!</p>
<p>Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:21 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>The objection to the rant and crusade from the atheists is that they are <b>blind</b> to the fine sensitivities religious
people have toward ethics as <i>the</i> way to God (that also is a foundation for meaning)! Thus, atheists and atheism may
<b>tear</b> down very important institutions and intuitions in society that work cohesively and incredibly constructive humans
to humans, in interpersonal relationships! The society may come down if one forces through this <b>headless</b> (to some extent)
movement (by these atheists and atheism)! This is the <i>very</i> concern! Just because you, the atheist, need it "under your
microscope" doesn't make the crusade against religions right! (This writing has also been added to "A Challenge to..." on the Phil.
Notes page.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/InternetTipsandTricks.html
image<br>
title - Your special image! - title<br>
url - http://www.example.com/spec_image_120pixx60pix.gif - url<br>
image</p>
<p>About the meta-tags</p>
<p>Created: 06.07.2010. Updated: 07.07.2010.</p>
<p>I've removed some code to get it displayed on this RSS.<br>
<br>
"meta name="Keywords" content="Beauty,Nature,Art,Your Name,Title of the page,whatever else""<br>
"meta name="Description" content="This is a sparetime presentation of mine. I'm just beginning to
learn about webpages and other tips and tricks!""<br>
"meta name="Author" content="Your Name""<br>
"meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8""<br>
"meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice.org 3.0 (Win32)" !-- You should probably consult with a generator list! --"<br>
"meta name="CREATED" content="20041010" !-- The date format is just this: yearmmdd - year, month, date. --"<br>
"meta name="CHANGEDBY" content="Your Name""<br>
"meta name="CHANGED" content="20100704""<br>
"meta name="ProgId" content="Gedit" !-- You should probably consult with a ProgId list! --"<br>
"meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-GB""<br>
"link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="name_of_css_file.css" /"<br>
<br>
"!-- The meta-tags are always placed within the head-tags! I've included the link-tag for the stylesheet so that you have a
good idea of the whole thing. Please, don't forget the
title-tag when you set out making the webpage. This is, of course, a suggested standard set for meta-tags, one that I advice you
include on every webpage you make on your website. There is also no need to include this comment with your meta-tags! --"</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#TTA
fact p entering your mind. Thus, the transmission should be very clear!</p>
<p>The Transmission Argument has been my line of thought ever since I've started to investigate epistemological
circumstances and eyeing the possibility to express it in words as I've now done! This is the reason for this writing's
title even today when it may just as well be "Epistemological Integrity as Decisive Property"!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>Let's assume Africa (or one of the other continents) gets "humped" on in an indecent way (fx. by decadent
European and US American interests) then there shouldn't be a problem with it being self-sufficient/self-sustained,
or if not, just in case Africa's deficiencies are compensated for by exports.</p>
<p>I'm thinking of deficiencies of technology, special resources (classically uranium, but now it's about other stuff,
refined?) and finally knowledge! This writing is in fact the theory that every continent is more or less
self-sufficient/self-sustained. Theoretically, there are no deficiencies on any continent by the assumption that
resources are found equally everywhere on earth (by the same statistics)!</p>
<p>As one can expect resources to occur more or less statistically uniformally, being found in equal amounts
everywhere, resources shouldn't be a problem either! So who supposes that there are deficiencies? It's however
important not to be a "dreamer"/"have the head in the clouds" so that you go correctly by the steps! When you want
something, you just find a way to offer something! One can start with natural resources, like agriculture, aquaculture,
timber-industry, tourism, fishing industry, search for/mapping of resources for mining, offer "cheap"/cheap labour or
labour whatsoever (with the commends of the people from this region to those who buy the labour-force,
decently/worker-union-wise) and as one goes, funds accumulate, you probably use them to generate expertise by
education to compensate for lack of technology intensive industry and the knowledge and culture industry (film,
music, books (like fx. JK Rowling), theater). The knowledge industry is, of course, research and consulting and the
making of proprietary hardware/software or whatever technology of proprietary kind! (End)</p>
<p>This is a recipé and I know it! I hope you like it!</p>
<p>(This is added at the bottom of the webpage until then.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#WBB
<p>Clarification: ..., by narrative and of course without actually being there,...</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1410022/the-history-behind-my-webpageswebsites/
present the history of internet hosts here.</p>
<p>The servers for White Room, running track for these webpages/website(s):</p>
<p>www.hio.no/oks/~terjelea/ (1998, autumn, early winter to 1999)</p>
<p>I believe there's been a break here of about a year.</p>
<p>www.c2i.net/~terjelea/ (2000/2001? to 2006?)</p>
<p>www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea (2003 to now!)</p>
<p>www.b-one.com / www.one.com - www.t-lea.net (2006 to now!)</p>
<p>So today, as you probably know, there are two websites with basically the same content that runs
in parallel, a kind of assurance of always having a host there to display my website! Cheers!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1402771/is-the-war-on-terrorism-in-fact-the-war-on-drugs/
to any effective business life. Yes?</p>
<p>Personally, I've liked the Mujahedin in the past, presenting some of the finest Muslim character that I've ever sensed. I
have no deep knowledge of them, but they have been defeated (by the Taliban?) or vanished to my surprise. Perhaps one can study
them and convert their wisdom to modern (Arabic/Muslim) business life much like Sun Tzu of the Chinese in making up Chinese
culture, being peaceful nowadays.</p>
<p>The long term view must be a prosperous world altogether. "Hallelujah", void of any particular religious position!<br>
Now that the war on terrorism is being limited to Afghanistan (with only 8 US American military casualties in Iraq in June), it
should be noted that the <b>war on drugs is a very serious business</b>! Both in Mexico and Colombia where the main problem is exactly
drugs (and drug culture?), the military is fighting alongside the police! Technically, that's a matter of state of emergency or
civil unrest or civil war!</p>
<p>Mexico: Since <b>1989</b> - "...began in earnest after the 1989 arrest of Miguel Angel Felix Gallardo who
ran the cocaine business in Mexico. There was a lull in the fighting during the late 1990s but the violence has steadily
worsened since 2000."</p>
<p>Links:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Drug_War">
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Drug_War</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Mexican_Drug_War">
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Mexican_Drug_War</a></p>
<p>Colombia: Since <b>1964/1966</b> or possibly 1948 - "The direct origins of the current conflict are usually
dated to 1964–1966, while the remote origins would at least go back as far as 1948."</p>
<p>Links:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colombian_armed_conflict_%281964%E2%80%93present%29">
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colombian_armed_conflict_%281964%E2%80%93present%29</a><br>
<a id="i100" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_drug_trade_in_Colombia">
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_drug_trade_in_Colombia</a></p>
<p>I think people easily overlook this fact for some reason!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1410021/the-criticism-and-approach-to-scientology/
you to read Scientology! It's clearly wholly voluntarily!<br>
If there's fraud to it, logically, then it's certainly a self-fraud! I guess people are their own fools!
Besides, to discredit people their own agency is typically to belittle people.<br>
There's some interesting information from this place: <a id="i100" href="http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Xenu">
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Xenu</a>. At least, here it says: "...Earthly events, collectively described
as space opera by Hubbard..."! Isn't space opera in fact space opera because it's fiction?! You should also
take note of L. Ron Hubbard's scientific education of Engineering (but in which he has no degree)! I also take
note of this: "Members of the Church of Scientology widely deny or try to hide the Xenu story." Since when did
a protest or a claim become an evidence of falsehood? And why can't I equally well consider these obsessed people
who write so stupidly about Scientology and are so unwilling to give it any credit whatsoever for fixated and mad?
This for now!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/blogT/index.blog/1404408/greecebashing-end-it-now/
AA). Still, I think you should consider the defaults of Argentina in 2001/2002 (a significantly smaller economy than 327 mill.
Euro-zone and the 175 mill. people who use currencies which are pegged to the euro). Not only that, but corruption has been a
trade-mark of Argentina for quite some time, historically speaking, though it has improved greatly in recent times! The default
before this is Russia in 1998. The same again with the comparison to the Euro. And this is Russia without the oil prices of
147 dollars/75 dollars! Corruption has also been rampant in Russia and is to some extent even yet (with bribes being very common).
As it says from Wikip.: "The economic crisis that struck all post-Soviet countries in the 1990s was nearly twice as intense as
the Great Depression in the countries of Western Europe and the United States in the 1930s.[195][196] Even before the financial
crisis of 1998, Russia's GDP was half of what it had been in the early 1990s.[196] Since the turn of the century, rising oil
prices, increased foreign investment, higher domestic consumption and greater political stability have bolstered economic growth
in Russia.[197]"<br>
There's also been quite some political turmoil in Russia during this period (around 1998) with the Chechnya conflict and the rule
of alcoholic Boris Yeltsin who has been reported to be in such a state that it has been more probable that the Presidency has
been run by the bodyguard for periods of time!<br>
So <b>conclusion</b>: how in the world does this compare to the relative orderly Greece and the mountain of Euro states combined and
economy? I'm still wondering and I'm in no doubt that EU will come through this in style!</p>
<p>Note: More recently, Paul Krugman is predicting the 3rd depression, but you should compare with the wise words of
Jean-Claude Trichet which predicts a continued world growth before you let loose panic. I believe I recently have seen the
World GDP and it has been positive for the last 10 years(?) with levels above 3% and sometimes being about 5%. The future
should look good.</p>
<p>Check this: <a id="i100" href="http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=xx&v=66">
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=xx&v=66</a></p>
Year GDP - real growth rate (%) and graphical from the same link!<br>
2000 3<br>
2001 4.8<br>
2002 2.2<br>
2003 2.7<br>
2004 3.8<br>
2005 4.9<br>
2006 4.7<br>
2007 5.3<br>
2008 5.2<br>
2009 3.1</p>
<p>Just check this run of the Euro: 6th January 1999 at 1.1743 against Dollar and yesterday, 5th July 2010 at 1.2531.
From the ECB: Minimum (26 October 2000): 0.8252 - Maximum (15 July 2008): 1.5990 - Average: 1.1832 (note that the current rate is over this)
The exchange has always run in the boundary of 1.51 and 0.82 in its existence! That's more worth than the Dollar!
Now tell me, please, that there's no solid ground under the Euro, despite your accusations of these accountants and the chaos regime of finance within EU!
Besides, the ECB and Euro/Dollar: <a id="i100" href="http://www.ecb.int/stats/exchange/eurofxref/html/eurofxref-graph-usd.en.html">
http://www.ecb.int/stats/exchange/eurofxref/html/eurofxref-graph-usd.en.html</a>
and RSS too: <a id="i100" href="http://www.ecb.int/rss/fxref-usd.html">
http://www.ecb.int/rss/fxref-usd.html</a></p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#CLPECT
of Causality can't be contradictory (to eachother) because if they are, it becomes patently obvious that God is an untenable
idea. Therefore, the logic of God must align with the logic of Causality and consequently the epistemological contiguity
enters the picture! Further then, Hume must presume the inexistence of God by his presentation of God, even though his logic
actually hits several religious thinkers and writers! To be honest, another target by Hume may be to attack these religious
people's ill perceived views if I'm to be just to Hume. (Some words have also been removed by this update.)
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/Evolution.html
<p>Just in case, every "soul" carries energy, this energy is detectable by infra-red imaging or something thereof
when this is set in a very cold chamber/laboratory and finally the being that's loses its body and becomes a
bare "soul" is a rat or an animal of lower denomination (I like elephants) <b>then</b> it may be possible to
prove the "soul" as an alternative to Dr. Sam Parnia and Dr. Pim van Lommel!</p>
<p>What do you think? There's a clear logical structure to this procedure and it's no problem to set it up! Now,
this probably shouldn't go into the science webpage on my site, but I'm such a daring person! Cheers!</p>
<p>(This is added at the bottom of the webpage.)</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/ethics.html
an action of non-passion using their own bodily sexuality! If an action is global or is affecting only a sector like
a group or a single person, insofar as this is possible, is an open question that may best be answered by psychology.
I do, however, have the suspicion that integrity is always affected globally, all of your relations. This will become
more clear with this writing. I have the sense that every action is "governed" by "the perfect ethical system" because
I believe ethics matter more than just mere taste, whether it is known or not! So when action is committed, it is
mediated or moderated by your own ethical system, very distinct from "the perfect ethical system" unless in perfect
compliance, whether it complies with "the perfect ethical system" or not! Thus, an action of revenge comes across as
better because a certain morality is attached to it as is opposed to a crime of passion. Revenge is also better in
settling an issue with a group or a single person because it carries morality. Unreasonable revenge that's not proportional
to what the revenge concerns, is a different issue! A crime of passion may thus affect you globally while an action of
revenge, <u>if anything</u>, has the possibility of being contained to just this group or person and thereby only affecting
a sector of your integrity. My sense is, however, that this revenge nevertheless must comply with this "perfect ethical
system" and therefore doesn't affect your integrity at all. Thus a wrong action of unjustified revenge may affect your
integrity globally just the same! We are therefore back where we've started! Wrong actions, whether this or that, probably
affect your integrity globally one way or another! Now, behave!
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#TTA
You only need one of the percentages to be 100% and the other two to be to the least degree to have this
certified and irrefutable knowledge! But then again, I've not been wrong in writing 100% on all three of them
and claim the same! That I'm writing this now can't be held against me in my opinion.</p>
<p>You should also note that the two sentences or lines, "2 person a has 100% hunch of fact p" and
"4 person a has 100% data-material to what he is looking for", are redundant in the strict sense and that they
are mostly added for extra sense, explanatory impact, that may enable people to have more use of this information. All
this should be obvious!</p>
<p>Thus this kind of Epistemic Integrity is not a virtue in this context. It's a <i>requirement</i>.</p>
<p>While Frederick F. Schmitt writes about integrity as a kind of virtue, I think of it as kind of (natural)
property about you and your relationship to your data (and to the end-point of investigation, being a kind
of revelation of new data, possibly, a discovery). To formulate a "law" is rather a matter of aptitude to
one's own skill in relation to what you have before you and thus not so much a kind of "Integrity" in my
sense because the propositions, logics and knowledge base are already in your head. Thus I think it's absurd
to speak of Integrity toward what is already in your head and mostly a matter of logics and mathematics to
put together. If you however, become well acqainted with your data, have a great "Integrity", then you may
generate this "law" more easily. Thus this "law"-making may be a kind of "Integrity"-issue in this sense.</p>
<p>Another remark on Schmitt's Epistemic Integrity which I find is used to tear away credibility from the
Perspectivists who most people, I believe, see as unserious people in Epistemology. Therefore Epistemic
Integrity destroys Perspectivism. In Schmitt's perception, by my interpretation, a charge is being made
against unreasonable or dubious epistemologists claiming the Perspectivism position.</p>
<p>Epistemic Integrity then has to be decided among a larger community for it to be credited to a person
or to a proposition that's held by this person. One should remember that Integrity in English most often
equals Honesty and telling the truth. Thus from the ethical Integrity to epistemic Integrity, Integrity
enters the meaning of honesty and reasonability concerning epistemological views/propositions/claims!</p>
<p>Therefore, as Schmitt's Integrity is designed to remove Perspectivism as a credible position, I design
Integrity as a property of your own relation to research data that, in my opinion, leads to certified and
irrefutable knowledge! Not that this is important to write, but it seems to me that Schmitt is using
Integrity differently than I do, hence I cite Merleau-Ponty differently than he does in that same respect.
My description is also significantly different from his and I think it's plausible that these 2 different
interpretations can be given Epistemic Integrity. You can think about this for yourself... I leave it at
that for now, possibly until the purchase of Kornblith's book (2001).</p>
<p>In the future, I may consider to add examples to this The Transmission Argument. We'll see!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#OGTI
both geometry and algebra to be both
complete and consistent. The page seems heavily edited today, 02.07.2010 and it doesn't say so anymore. So, this is a
pause for me and an angle I need to investigate if I'm to get somewhere with my writing on this.</p>
<p>* Geometry - Complete and fulfills all descriptive tasks.<br>
* Algebra - Complete and fulfills all descriptive tasks.<br>
* Arithmetics - Incomplete and fulfills all descriptive tasks (yet missing its Gödel "completeness" by Tarski).<br>
Further:<br>
* Language - Incomplete, I think, and fulfills all descriptive tasks (yet missing its Gödel "completeness" by Tarski).<br>
* HDM and science - Incomplete, I think, and fulfills all descriptive tasks (yet missing its Gödel "completeness" by Tarski).</p>
<p>Also, in the light of all this, we have the issue of computability. Can everything be computed? Can one set up a complete
computer system that replaces the human being as the scientist and what have you, except its functioning of consciousness?
What is "completeness" or "incompleteness" in this regard?</p>
<p>This also goes for the semantic/syntactic divide. If we can replicate the human reasoning by computing, then what
is left of this "semantic" ability?</p>
<p>It should be exciting to see how this develops, but it will demand quite a lot of effort and time.</p>
<p>Well, project is ongoing. Please, be patient. This is one of my weakest writings and I lack (a lot of) knowledge on the issue.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/philosophical_notes.html#CACG
<p>By The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG),</p>
<p>"Fetal Awareness - Review of Research and Recommendations for Practice".</p>
<p>From this link:<br>
<a id="i100" href="http://www.rcog.org.uk/fetal-awareness-review-research-and-recommendations-practice">
http://www.rcog.org.uk/fetal-awareness-review-research-and-recommendations-practice</a></p>
<p>Fetal Awareness</p>
<p>* The fetus cannot feel pain before 24 weeks because the connections in the fetal brain are not fully formed<br>
* Evidence examined by the Working Party showed that the fetus, while in the chemical environment of the womb, is in a state of induced sleep and
is unconscious<br>
* The Working Party concluded that because the 24 week-old fetus has no awareness nor can it feel pain, the use of analgesia is of no benefit<br>
* More research is needed into the short and long-term effects of the use of fetal analgesia post-24 weeks.</p>
<p>The full report: <a id="i100" href="http://www.rcog.org.uk/files/rcog-corp/RCOGFetalAwarenessWPR0610.pdf">
http://www.rcog.org.uk/files/rcog-corp/RCOGFetalAwarenessWPR0610.pdf</a></p>
<p>Article, this particular webpage, is published: 25/06/2010 (summary and more).</p>
<p>The exact same remark has been added to "An Argument in Favour of Abortion" as a separate, full posting here:
<a id="i100" href="http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#AFA">
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#AFA</a></p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#WBB
<p>From Wikip.:<br>
Quote: "Wittgenstein's beetle [referring specifically to §293 of W.'s PI]<br>
Another point that Wittgenstein makes against the possibility of a private language involves the beetle-in-a-box thought
experiment.[21] He asks the reader to imagine that each person has a box, inside of which is something that everyone intends
to refer to with the word "beetle". Further, suppose that no one can look inside another's box, and each claims to know what
a "beetle" is only by examining their own box. Wittgenstein suggests that, in such a situation, the word "beetle" could not
be the name of a thing, because supposing that each person has something completely different in their boxes (or nothing at
all) does not change the meaning of the word; the beetle as a private object "drops out of consideration as irrelevant".[21]
Thus, Wittgenstein argues, if we can talk about something, then it is not private, in the sense considered. And, conversely,
if we consider something to be indeed private, it follows that we cannot talk about it." [The references pertain to the Wikip. page]</p>
<p>While this is true in some sense, we know that the parameters are known for this "Beetle Box"! How much out of life's parameters can
you possibly go? How much can you fantasise and still keep meaning in place/communicate meaning? I believe there are limits to both
meaningful reasoning and that there are unspecified limits to ideas in general too.</p>
<p>When we refer to people and their lives, we commonly think about their backgrounds to make it relevant. The conclusion must be that
the "Beetle Box" is not so mysterious as one likes to think!</p>
<p>Posted: Mon Jun 28, 2010 12:04 am UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Of course, the word "tree"/"park with sculptures" (fx. Vigelandsparken) can be different to everyone. Yet, when two people stand close
to a tree/park with sculptures, they do share the reference, no matter how "private" the impression is. Besides, I think it's conceivable
that both persons are able to re-share this experience of this tree/park with sculptures, if not drawing it!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#AAS
<p>It's both feasible and plausible that human kind is or has been capable of destroying the possibility of human life on Earth
(by nuclear weapons, first and foremost). Such an act must be seen as stupid as it will definitely cut short a future of more
intelligent and brighter situation for all of human kind (extremely: for this evolution or strand of human kind if not the same
evolves around again). Thus stupidity is what possibly brings an end to humanity if anything! You must therefore look to it
that you act intelligently!</p>
<p>Implicitly, by this argument, it is indeed an ethical imperative to be pro-active, to mind for your intelligence and
to stand up to mental challenges so that you rise above the stupid for sure!</p>
<p>Posted: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:50 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>Dictionary.com:<br>
stu·pid·i·ty<br>
* /stuˈpɪdɪti, styu-/ [stoo-pid-i-tee, styoo-]<br>
–noun, plural -ties<br>
1. the state, quality, or fact of being stupid.<br>
2. a stupid act, notion, speech, etc.</p>
<p>Stupidity is certainly not only the acting against one's own intentions! Stupidity is also, <i>commonly</i> to act
against one's own good by some screwed up ideas!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#LaD
<p>The issue of laws and descriptions can be complicated. Sometimes you want the descriptions to have the same power as expressions
(mathematical) of laws and other times, the laws are being used as mere descriptions for something, being less or more accurate.</p>
<p>So instead of being in conflict between laws and descriptions and statistical expressions, it's just to keep an open mind for
everything you want to describe and how you want to do it. Just make certain it is sound work!</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#AtS
<p>Note: you should beware of the differences between statistics, probability and prediction and the possible sets of investigation,
ie. infinite sets (fx. by Cantor), unknown sets and partially known sets, both being possibly finite or possibly infinite, and known, finite sets.</p>
<p>In economy, also, you may think broadly of two scopes of growth, sales and product improvement and the generation/development of new
products. This is only within the existing corporate structure, so in addition...</p>
<p>So both economical analysis and the classical natural science analyses can or will be incredibly hard to get right because of
the unknown factors that may contribute.</p>
http://www.angelfire.com/realm/t_daemon_lea/issues_from_the_internet.html#WPP
<p>It now says: "Philosophy of Science: Scientific Realist, Fallback strategy to heuristic Instrumentalism and Operationalism
which both include Conventionalism".</p>
<p>Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 7:36 pm UTC + 1 hour; forum.philosophynow.org</p>
<p>I also have a fallback strategy in Philosophy of Science to heuristic Instrumentalism and Operationalism which both
include Conventionalism, I think. While this fallback strategy doesn't touch upon my Scientific Realism, I fall back when
I think I'm stuck and yet find there's important description to do that may have a role in future research! This description
can also bring education to the general public and leave it to them to make up their minds.</p>
"< /channel >"
"< /rss >" [Second RSS file of 3]
No comments:
Post a Comment