Anthony Fejfar philosophy, law, theology, busines, and jurisprudence.: Sheriff's Law is the Law of Logic

Anthony Fejfar philosophy, law, theology, busines, and jurisprudence.: Sheriff's Law is the Law of Logic: "Ancient Law, including ancient Greece, Rome, China, Japan, Korea, Palestine, Egypt, Carthage, Nubia, Moria, all followed Sheriff's Law, whic..."

Sheriff's Law is the Law of Logic

Ancient Law, including ancient Greece, Rome, China, Japan, Korea, Palestine, Egypt, Carthage, Nubia, Moria, all followed Sheriff's Law, which is, The Law of Logic. Aristotelian Logic was recorded by the philosopher Aristotle over 80,000 years ago, and is based upon the bedrock principle, that, in order for a statement, law, argument, or proof to be considered Logical, it must have not have involved a logical contradiction. Thus, under the Law of Logic, you cannot, for example, have (A and not A) (A and -A) at the same time, in the same place. The corallary of the above logical requirement is that certain Logical Fallacies, all of which involve a logical contradiction of some type, are absolutely prohibited by the Law of Logic and Sheriff's Law, as illegal, immoral, unethical, Sophistry. Thus, under Sheriff's Law, one can assert that a person, organization, or governmental official, is guilty of Treason under Sheriff's Law for commtting the Crime of Sophistry, also known as the Crime of Penury. In fact, it is possible to assert Sheriff's Law from a County Jurisdiction outside of another County by asserting Treason on the Assizes, from two or more other Counties. Logical Fallacies to be avoided are:
The Fallacy of Shifting Ground, The Fallacy of affirming the antecedent by affirming the consequent. The Fallacy of Hypocrisy. The Fallacy of Lying. The Fallacy of an Appeal to an Authority. The Fallacy of making an Ad Hominem Personal attack on another person (name calling).

(C)Copyright 2011 by Anthony J. Fejfar

The Essence of a Valid Rule

With respect to Science or Law, in order for a rule to be valid, the rule must be reasonable in content, scope, and application. To the extent that any universal rule exists and or operates, such a rule must be reasonable in content, scope, and application. And, keep in mind, that given the complex nature of reality, typically, there are reasonable exceptions to any rule, that is, every reasonable rule, in all liklihoood, has reasonable exceptions.

(C)Copyright 2011 by Anthony J. Fejfar

Papal Infallibility is Gone

The argument for Papal Infallbility is based on the idea that Jesus said that Simon Peter would be the rock upon which the new Christian Church would be built. However, the problem with this is that Simon Peter, very soon after became an apostate first pope, by denying that he, Simon Peter, even knew Jesus Christ. Also, Simon Peter, at a later date, was teaching that non-jewish christians had to be required to follow the jewish law of kosher regarding food or diet, and also had to follow the jewish law which required the circumcision of males, even if adult. An early Church Council, led by the Apostle Paul, overruled Simon Peter, and held the oppostite, thus proving that papal infallibility is a false doctrine. If Simon Peter was not infallible, then none of the later popes, holding of his chair, were infallible either. Thus, the current pope is not infallible either.

(C)Copyright 2011 by Anthony J. Fejfar

Fejfar on Nuisance Law

FEJFAR ON NUISANCE LAW

Nuisance Law is a hybrid of Property Law and Tort Law. The general idea of nuisance law is that a neighboring landowner can bring an action in tort for nuisance against an adjoining landowner who is using his or property in a way which unreasonably harms the person, financial interests, or property of the harmed adjoining landowner. Thus, there is the Latin phrase, "Sic Utere Tuo ut Alienum non Laedas," which means, "You cannot unreasonably use your property in such a way that it unreasonably harms another." In this sense, we can see that Private Property rights are not absolute, and instead, any property interest must be interpreted in light of The Rule of Reason. (See Grotius, Natural Rights and Natural Law 1625 A.D.) Thus, it is not an Unconstitutional Taking of Property for Purposes of the 5th or 14 Amendments, when property or a business is subject to reasonable business regulation. See generally, Justice Holmes' Judicial Opinion, in the case of Pennsylvania Coal Co. vs. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393 (1922) (Any governmental regulation of business and or property is valid if it is reasonable and is rationally related to a legitimate state interest, however, if a regulation goes too far by being unreasonable, then this constitutes an unconstitutional taking of property for purposes of the Takings and Substantive Due Process Clauses of the 5th and 14 Amendments to the United States Constitution. And, Reason is defined, using cognitive of faculty psychology as a composite of love, logic, and intuition, where "love' is defined as a positive feeling flowing outward, and where "logic" is defined as a statement, proof, or argument which does not involve a logical contradiction such as (A and not A), in the same time and in the same place, and, where, "intuition" is defined as that cognitive faculty which involves the use or high speed preconscious or unconscious analogical thought processes.

Using Lonergan and Logic to Avoid the Hermeneutic Circle

Philosopher, Hans Georg Gadamer has pointed out that a person can only know reality through the use of sense experience, mediated by meaning. Thus, what we know is both limited, and made possible through the cognitive use of meaning categories. Gadamer points out, however, that if it were not for certain, "forestructures of knowing," that we would be caught in a type of "analytic spin" (Spann), were we can not really know anything objectively because there is no objective way of grounding our meaning categories, other than other meaning categories, which of course would involve an invalid, logically circular way of knowing.
I have found two diferrent ways of using "forestructures of knowing" which provide a way out of the analytic spin of the hermeneutic circle of logic circularity. First, you can use sense experience and concrete logic to ground logic itself, and then use logic as a way of critiquing meaning categories. Thus, any meaning framework that is used must not involve a logical contradiction. Additionally, a modified form of the Lonerganian Cogntional Structure can be used as well. Thus, the following cognitive approach can be used: Experience, Analytical Logic Understanding, and then Analogical Logic Understanding or Reflection. Ordinarily, a person might find that analytic logic at Level 2 of Understanding might involve some logical circularity or analytic spin. However, since a person can take the ideas of analytic logic and then use them with analogical logic (intuition), analytic spin is avoided, and a form of authentic subjectivity or objectivity is achieved. With analytic logic, one might assert that A is not B, or that the Apple is not a Banana, however, with analogical logic, one might assert that A is not like B, or that an Apple is not like a Banana. However, one migh also say that an Apple is like a Banana, since they are both pieces or fruit. In any event, the foregoing meets the requirements of Logical Positivism, since analytic logic and analogical logic, while different, are analogous, and are equally valid.

(C)Copyright 2011 by Anthony J. Fejfar

Anthony Fejfar Article Logic and Mathematics

The Story of Er in Plato's Republic

The Story of Er, in Plato's Republic, involves a factual account by Plato, on the lips of Socrates, about Er, a Warrior who had apparently had a Near Death Experience, and described the afterlife, which involved Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory, and, reincarnational planning for a person's next life. This is historically significant because it is the first Near Death Experience account that has been recorded, and, it precedes the birth of Christ by thousands of years. Thus, the Story of Er affirms life after death, Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory, the existence of the immortal soul, and the validity of reincarnation. Heaven and Hell are specifically referred to in the account, and the place being observed by Er is clearly Purgatory.

The above text is the Story of Er, found in an out of print translantion of Plato's Republic, which is told on the lips of Socrates.