flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > what is stealing

Goto page Previous  1, 2
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
sleepsleep



Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 8903
Location: ˛                             ⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣⁣Posts: 334455
sleepsleep
hopcode wrote:
why the old-ones wrote that "Law".
without rules,it wouldnt be worth the name of "community" or "social group".

this is very true, they need some sort of 'differentiation'
otherwise there would be no different.

this open up a whole big question,
what is justice, how to justify,

let say mr.bean accidentally kill a cow while driving from company to home,
the owner of the cow demand justice from mr.bean,

so, what is the judgement?

hopcode wrote:
they adopt software created from Java programmers. and this is enough to explain how/why banks on their turn are being robbed too.
they learn from Java programmers. in fact their software is legal.

i don't get this, perhaps more elaboration?
Post 15 Jan 2013, 07:06
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
hopcode



Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 563
Location: Germany
hopcode
sleepsleep wrote:
hopcode wrote:
they adopt software created from Java programmers. and this is enough to explain how/why banks on their turn are being robbed too.
they learn from Java programmers. in fact their software is legal.


eeh, that' a lame play Wink i have nothing against Java programming, nor Java programmers (i have good friends too doing exactly that: Java programing on banking).
i built up a valid but false syllogism,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism
then, to let it appear "truly" saying, i strengthened it adopting a tautology,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_%28logic%29
i wouldnt say it is a "nonsense". and there is but a reason i wrote that trick.
about justice,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice#Justice_as_divine_command
there is no proof that God is there behind justice, and generally behind the Law. then browse below to read Plato's "Justice as trickery".
where we find that among ancient Greeks already, they discussed what we are discussing here.

essentially i would rewrite the Law (10 commandments) without
its pyramidal structure, i.e cutting "God's role" from the top of it.

the 1st commandment should sound:
All beings are equal, before justice and before men.
then follows the 2nd commandment: do not steal etc.

note: i say: before justice and men. not law and court.

_________________
⠓⠕⠏⠉⠕⠙⠑
Post 15 Jan 2013, 16:28
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
AsmGuru62



Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 1409
Location: Toronto, Canada
AsmGuru62
justice as a term is an abstract.
without laws and courts -- there is no justice.
Post 15 Jan 2013, 17:19
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Reply with quote
hopcode



Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 563
Location: Germany
hopcode
AsmGuru62 wrote:
justice as a term is an abstract.
without laws and courts -- there is no justice.

justice must be an abstract. because in your land i do not share the same rights with you; so do you in my land. but both lands try to apply justice, in their equality concept.
in fact, one can apply justice for himself, for example using revenge in the form of killing a person. equality here cannot be applied: because the killed person, cannot kill again on his turn (because he is dead!).
equality is an old kaos-ruler-law-concept coming from Hammurabi,not from
the bible or from god,etc...
concretely justice is an equality.
all beings are equal befar justice and before men

_________________
⠓⠕⠏⠉⠕⠙⠑
Post 15 Jan 2013, 19:37
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
hopcode



Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 563
Location: Germany
hopcode
hopcode wrote:
the way they consider democracy, is their way. this doesnt mean they are wrong about democracy.
but the way they consider democracy is one way. it may be "voting" or from "the power of the strongest". also,
you should explain the pros/contras/reasons about that, or better what your meaning is under the term
"democracy".Very Happy
de facto "nature has never been democratic", used to say my teacher at school,
speaking about chemical thresholds to activate a chemical reaction (very few "particles" start the chain reaction), or
referring to spermatozoo as analogy (few of them reach the target).

this drives to a couple of bound paradoxes, because humans believe they inherit equity from the "nature".
and where it may seem they had to adopt justice necessairly because they couldnt contain
anarchy and kaos in the world (Hammurabi), the same justice appears to be a justification (bad excuse)
of this unavoidable/inexplicable absence of equity, being nature chemically and psyically unfair or unjust, say
not-democratic.

human justice also comes to be based upon an illusorial acceptance, an act of not being (read it illusorial).
the core of this act is: by extracting anything from something that is not, you will create "that" something
(you give it a reason of being ! bingo!) but the meaning of the act: stealing something.

the same adoption of it among the human beings expesses the absence of a good reason to adopt it, after presuming
again justice and equity being impossible in the nature. if justice and equity are not there, in the nature, where are
they ? who "stole" them from nature ?, better say, who told men to adopt them ? who/what told the human beings that
equity should consist of a "natural" form of equality ?

to set a rule over what is natural,kaotic,unfair, they used equity, considering it as inherited from the same nature ?

_________________
⠓⠕⠏⠉⠕⠙⠑
Post 02 Feb 2013, 16:13
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
hopcode



Joined: 04 Mar 2008
Posts: 563
Location: Germany
hopcode
hopcode wrote:
...who/what told the human beings that
equity should consist of a "natural" form of equality ?...

the same nature, giving all those particles the same set of rules, one may object, exaclty as during the Olympic race, when runners run on a 5000 meters track.
they all have to respect the same rules. but at a certain moment a little group "flies"; it gains a little distance and detaches itself from the others till to the finish line, requiring less time for that distance.
yes, equality is ok, agreed, if we neglect the two main categories: time+space.
we should speak here also about localization and never forget that nature is subject to physical rules too, considering the non-univocal correspondence of whatever reality to a predetermined physical law.
for this reason (even 100% related to the EPR paradox), what we observe is only the final fair stage of that reality (my opinion).
the initial/previous stage remains till now hidden;
a stage whose main feature might have been chance and randomness.

_________________
⠓⠕⠏⠉⠕⠙⠑
Post 03 Feb 2013, 06:28
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
uart777



Joined: 17 Jan 2012
Posts: 369
uart777
Ron Paul was the only smart presidental candidate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1YjBoHAzhiU
Post 03 Feb 2013, 13:45
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.