-1- wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2018 8:04 pm
JohnDoe7 wrote: Reason, as the act of measurement through the promulgation of balance, is an objective moral code in the respect it forms the measurements which form us and vice versa. To leave this habit of conduct, as the practice of reason is a disciplined art like any other art, is to cast a judgement upon oneself through the scales of proportion inherent within both man, nature, and the creator (considering you are an gnostic you may disagree with the last part). We can see these scales within principles such as "frequency" and "polarity" (alternations) that happen both in physics, the animal kingdom in reproductive/herd-movement/feeding cycles, celestial events, a person's mood, etc where one imbalance cause an extreme in the other. This moral code shows that extremes, results in the very extremes we will be....one could say "judged" by.
"Reason, as the act of measurement through the promulgation of balance, " sorry, but I assert that this phrase makes no senses in any possible universe.
The act of reasoning, in turn gives measurement to the phenomena being observe (as to what constructs and does not construct it) In these respects through the observation of its structure, we are better able to observe it's center point and see the balanced median in both the phenomena itself and our perception of it. In these respect we "promulgate" a further balance by observing the median between ourselves and the percieve phenomena.
Take for example me observing a tiny particle. I am aware that I can only see so much empirically, and that the particle exists because of "x,y,z" argument (which in itself is a phenomena of conscious) hence I develop a "median" (in this case a tool, such as a microscope) to mediate between myself and the phenomena hence achieve a balance where greater clarity and definition is given.
"is an objective moral code in the respect it forms the measurements which form us and vice versa. " Measurements form us, you say. I say no, measurements don't form us.
With measurements strictly being the observation of boundaries and its corresponding absence of boundaries, along with the application of the vary same, by default you gave measurement to the argument by applying boundaries to it...even in the form of a simple yes, no.
"To leave this habit of conduct, as the practice of reason is a disciplined art like any other art, is to cast a judgement upon oneself through the scales of proportion inherent within both man, nature, " Number of things wrong with this quote, one being that other than humans and to a degree some mammals, no part of nature practices a reason of disciplined art like any other art. ETC.
Considering reasoning is the observation of structure, through symmetry, does not a wolf use a degree of reasoning when equating "x" smell with "y" prey? How much more for people?
The other major wrong part of this quote is that again you use two verbs in one sentence.
Yes, I know you blasted me, with examples even, to show me that it is proper to use more than one verb in a sentence. I did not reply, because I am not your grade seven grammar teacher.
According to what you claimed, you are not any teacher at all, and were even fired for not being able to find a common median with several of your students. Add to the fact that language is reflective of certain cultural biases and regions, neither of which we share, and I would consider most of your criticisms void for the circumstances.
Research the subject, you
will find that there
are such things as clauses, sentences.
Invalid according to your standards.
You
will find that sentences can
share a verb,
Invalid according to your standards.
or a sentence can
share many subjects, or a subject can
have many verbs;
but 1 sentence, 1 verb,and you constantly
break that rule,
making your utterances nonsensical, since you
break the laws of syntax, which immediately
robs your utterances of any meaning, of any semantic sense.
You do understand the above was one sentence, correct?
.