- 02 Apr 2011 17:13
#13672973
petrkolesnikov wrote:
If a good law is decided by law [the people] and so too of bad law, then is the law [are the people] that decides the distinction, themselves good, bad or neutral, impartial or partial?
Or does the cart get put before the horse when it is reasoned incorectly, that a person who defines a law as good and acts in compliance of that law is themselves a good person? (which is to say, that a person who acts upon a self belief is taken as proof that the belief is true).
our further work would be about legislation mostly. Opposing bad laws, proposing good ones. Helping the country to avoid big mistakes, fine tuning the laws...
If a good law is decided by law [the people] and so too of bad law, then is the law [are the people] that decides the distinction, themselves good, bad or neutral, impartial or partial?
Or does the cart get put before the horse when it is reasoned incorectly, that a person who defines a law as good and acts in compliance of that law is themselves a good person? (which is to say, that a person who acts upon a self belief is taken as proof that the belief is true).
If "t logially deduces p set Kx" and "t +1 logically deduces" that "p logically deduces q" but "t -1 logically deduces p =! q" then "q not set Kx"
Hindsight versus future sight
Hindsight versus future sight