Pearl jewelry for bridal and wedding tradition, bridal pearl necklace set for wedding ceremony, pearl jewelry for graduation and wedding celebration
In the diagram we have indicated the direct or immediate adherence to the objects of the predicate, and in this case, is understandable and explainable, their logical connection. But it so happens that trying to include in the notion that a property and an element that has neither one of these concepts. Then you have to go the other way, to include other indirect chain of reasoning, and through them to find something that could be included we are interested in conceptual education. Make it part of this education and give, thereby, the original concept a different meaning. Thus, in the proposition "Socrates is mortal" is missing not one, but a number of intermediate links. And any who heard or read this phrase may doubt its truth, and to ask clarifying question: what kind Of object "Socrates" is it? Therefore, it would be better to say: "the Person who has the property, in addition to all other, "a biological entity", which, in turn, in addition to all other, has the property "mortality", is named Socrates." In this argument, a new object "name" which does not have the property "biological entity" was included in the General course of reasoning by a human object, which has the above properties. This is what we said, and we will return to this subject again and again. Short form offers quite applicable, if it is for the other interacting entity is true, for the solution of their specific problems. But, if some elements of this judgment, acting as axiomatic, or all judgments are questionable in their truth, it applies a detailed judgment as is given above. In this case, the proposal indicates an axiom of the second, underlying level, on which is built the resulting judgment. If it is in this case accepted as true, it becomes an axiom for all subsequent builds, the relationship of judgments. The proposition "humans descended from apes", is not an absolute axiom for many people, and to prove this the short form often turns into a long series of arguments that would prove the truth of many of the original, logically consistent judgment. As you know, on the evidence, however, to refute this position were lots of books with explicit or questionable arguments, and more or less stringent logic, reasoning, and even not adhering to any arguments of logic and evidence.
Post a Comment