Phil Beaver
seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The
comment box below invites readers to write.
"Civic"
refers to citizens who collaborate for individual
happiness with civic integrity more than for the city, state, nation, or
society.
Consider writing a personal
paraphrase of the preamble, which offers fellow citizens mutual equality: For discussion, I convert the preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and
paraphrase it for my interpretation of its proposal as follows: This good citizen practices the U.S. disciplines---integrity, justice,
peace, strength, and prosperity, "in order to” develop responsible
human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity.” I want to improve my interpretation by
listening to other citizens and their interpretations yet would preserve the
original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people.
It seems the
Supreme Court occasionally refers to it, and no one has challenged whether or
not the preamble is a legal statement. The fact that it changed this
independent country from a confederation of states to a union of states
deliberately managed by disciplined fellow citizens convinces me the preamble
is legal. Equity in opportunity and outcome is shared by the people who
collaborate for human justice.
Every citizen
has equal opportunity to either trust-in and collaborate-on the goals stated in
the preamble or be dissident to the agreement. I think 2/3 of citizens try
somewhat to use the preamble but many do not articulate commitment to the
goals. However, it seems less than 2/3 understand that “posterity” implies
grandchildren. “Freedom of religion,” which fellow citizens have no means to
discipline, oppresses freedom to develop integrity.
Selected theme from this week
Can a human being witness for Jesus Christ?
Like Socrates before Jesus was born, Jesus did not write.
St. Luke used hate toward family and self as the cost of discipleship
(14:26). St. John used hate 5 times to express the attitude
of people who are not elected by God to believe Jesus (15:18-23). Matthew wrote
that Jesus said the individual human being who intends-to can perfect their
person before dying (5:48). St. John wrote that Jesus said “before Abraham was
born I
am” (8:58).
These ideas attributed to Jesus by ancient writers are
civically unreliable to me and I would never choose to pit Jesus Christ against
the 1787 U.S. Constitution. I think fellow citizens who do so invite woe.
I think the U.S. Congress placed itself in jeopardy when it
formed a religion-Congress partnership in 1791. More importantly, they have brought
misery and loss to the continuum We the People of the United States. “Ourselves
and our Posterity” of 2021 can revise the First Amendment so as to promote
civic integrity rather than religious opinion before 2022.
Quora
https://www.quora.com/Is-there-such-a-thing-as-an-enemy-of-humanity-Does-humanity-in-unity-or-by-consensus-have-to-consent-to-declaring-a-person-or-organization-as-their-enemy?
by Viktor Bondarchuk
I think competition for a higher power to act as surrogate
for responsible-human-independence is humanity’s enemy.
Neither a God nor a government will usurp the individual’s
obligation to constrain chaos during their life rather than accept infidelity
to their person. When most fellow-citizens accept that they are a human being
and thus have the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual
authority (HIPEA) to develop the-humble-integrity by which to practice
responsible-human-independence will humankind perceive its opportunity to
provide peace on earth by constraining chaos no matter who or what causes it.
It seems to me this principle was expressed 4,000 years ago
in Genesis 1:27-28.
https://www.quora.com/How-can-a-country-be-loyal-to-society?
by Sari Setiawati
A country that coaches and encourages its youth and beyond
to accept being a human being and develop responsible-human-independence is
loyal to the people. However, the people divide into societies that develop
humble-integrity in self-interest and others who develop dependencies---well-fare
players, criminals, tyrants, religious-fundamentalists, and worse.
The 1787 U.S. Constitution specifies such a nation. So far,
the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity” have not accepted the 6 disciplines
specified in the preamble: integrity, justice, peace, strength, prosperity, and
responsible-human-independence. Religion is assigned to privacy, and the
government hubris to-license liberty is constrained by the individual freedom-to
develop humble-integrity.
https://www.quora.com/Are-we-humans-political-by-nature?
by Andrea Bautista
I think a political philosopher expressed it in Genesis
1:27-28: female&male human-being has dominion over the other species and
the earth. In a culture of humble-integrity, the youth are encouraged and
coached to accept being a human-being.
https://www.quora.com/Are-there-limits-to-natural-rights?
by Gary Bulloch
Following the suggestion in Genesis 1:27-28, in 2021
perspective, I think the only valid human right is freedom-to develop the
humble-integrity by which to perfect your person before mind and body stop
functioning.
https://www.quora.com/What-rights-do-we-have-as-people-but-actually-don-t-Why-What-are-they-What-is-an-example?
by Sarah Skopick
Ms. Skopick, your question is well presented, especially
because of “as people”.
I think people divide themselves on whether or not they
accept the opportunity to develop a human being during a complete lifetime. I
think human-being is comprised of body, mind, and person; thus, I use my body
and mind to develop my person: Phil Beaver.
Soul is a mystery that was constructed by civilizations, and
a human-being may choose to live for the mysterious soul or develop their
unique person. I do not oppose and do not hold the opinion that a human-being
can pursue both goals. However, I think it is sufficient to accept that the
person had no action in the origin of their ovum or spermatozoon and therefore
has no responsibility to mystery.
The human-being is responsible to develop humble-integrity
to the-ineluctable-truth, most of which is unknown. Thus, their mantra is: I
accept and witness that I don’t know what I don’t know. For example, I don’t
know if extraterrestrial life exists; I think so, but don’t know. Further, I
don’t know if the-God exists; I think not, yet am humble to whatever controls
the unfolding of the universe, be it physics and its progeny, energy, chaos, a
creator, the-Creator, the-God, or God. I think it is important to conform to
physics and its progeny including psychology. For example, if there’s a tsunami
coming, move to higher ground. Also, never lie, so as to lessen human misery
and loss. It is especially critical not to forsake humility.
In a culture of humble-integrity, most adults coach and
encourage their youth to 1) accept the opportunities afforded the human-being,
2) accept human individual power, individual energy, and individual authority
(HIPEA) to develop humble-integrity toward their person, and 3) to use their
HIPEA to develop responsible-human-independence, intending to perfect their
unique person before body and mind stop functioning. I think the-good is to
trust any actual-soul to its origin. That is to say, have faith in the-origin
rather than a human construct. But I don’t know about souls.
Human rights are an artifact of civilization. That is to
say, rights are licensed by the victor in war, military might being the judge
in human-division. As you suggest in your question, neither military nor
spiritual power usurps fate in the assurance of life, liberty, property, and
the pursuit of happiness. The only valid human-prerogative I imagine is the
opportunity to develop humble-integrity, in order to practice
responsible-human-independence. The agent who would constrain this human
opportunity is a tyrant and ought to lose their
power.
There exists a proffered, unfortunately undeveloped, culture
of humble-integrity. It specifies 6 public disciplines, without standards. Thereby,
the ultimate “ourselves and our Posterity” have minimal obstruction in the path
to humble-integrity. The disciplines, according to the 1787 U.S. Constitution,
in my view, are: integrity, justice, peace, strength, prosperity, and
responsible-human-independence. Notice that religion is not one of the
disciplines, I think both the founders (1776 independence from England) and the
framers (1787 constitution for domestic order) deemed the choice to pursue
religion is private to adults. That is, they were declaring independence from
England’s constitutional church-state-partnership, with 26 bishop-seats in
Parliament.
Many events connect the founders’ 1776 separation of church
and state to an ancient, middle-eastern philosopher’s suggestion in Genesis
1:27-28, in a 2021 view: the-God-of-Genesis-1 assigned to female&male
human-being the independent responsibility to constrain chaos in the universe.
The founders expressed no denigration of England’s Protestant-Trinity as they
cited “Nature and Nature’s God” as the source of human authority. Further, they
appealed to “the good People” to trust their war’s consequence “to the Supreme
Judge of the world” and Providence. Anticipating loss, in 1778, they negotiated
for military providence from France. That is to say, contemplating Genesis 1’s
charge or not, they separated church and state.
The framers, in 1787, declined the suggestion to begin each
day with prayer, and specified a nation that depends upon the continuum
“ourselves and our Posterity” to hold government officials accountable to
Posterities standard of responsible-human-independence. The constitution
specifies that no office will be taken under a religious oath. Some scholars
erroneously or defiantly call the 1787 U.S. Constitution the
godless-constitution rather than the constitution that comports to Genesis 1.
Because of the report that Jesus said, “Before Abraham was born I AM,” for all
I know, Jesus is the author of Genesis 1. I don’t think so, but don’t know.
In conclusion, the only valid human right I have considered
is the right to develop the humble-integrity by which to practice
responsible-human-independence rather that tolerate infidelity to self. This
principle is expressed in Genesis 1, the 1776 Declaration, and the 1787 U.S.
Constitution. It is arrogated in Congress’ 1791 Bill of Rights, especially the
First Amendment’s religion clauses that create a religion-Congress tyranny in
the U.S.
We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” could . . .
should, before 2022, revise the First Amendment from “Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof . . .” to “Elected and appointed officials in the U.S.
shall make no action that constrains civic integrity . . . “ I’m certain a
civic people will develop a better revision, I hope before 2022 arrives.
FB add on: People have the right to develop
humble-integrity, and Congress represses that right by imposing
Congress-partnership with religion, in particular theism, specifically
Christianity, dominantly factional Protestantism in competition with divided
Catholicism, posed as Judeo-Christianity, now under cancellation-attack by the
Ethiopian Tewahedo Church or a competitor perhaps in partnership with other
Abrahamic descendants.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-best-examples-of-United-we-stand-divided-we-fall-in-today-s-society?
by Skye R. Regan
A political philosopher 4 thousand years ago, represented in
Genesis 1:27-28, suggested that (in 2021 language) that female&male
human-beings are charged to independently constrain chaos in the universe.
Since then, rather than establishing
responsible-human-independence, civilizations have divided over how to persuade
the-God, perhaps of the-God of Genesis 1 or another doctrine, to assume
humankind’s responsibility to establish peace.
Only the individual who accepts the power, energy, and
authority of the human being (HIPEA) can develop the humble-integrity to constrain
chaos during their lifetime and thereby influence society to comport with
Genesis 1. Divided individuals tolerate infidelity to themselves.
FB add on: Divided individuals tolerate infidelity to
themselves.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-do-you-think-are-the-aspects-in-society-that-need-change-What-mechanisms-of-collective-behavior-would-you-use-to-improve-society?
by King Barerra
Civic citizens should mutually appreciate,
without inquiry, the other’s higher power. In other words, fellow-citizens should
mutually expect civic behavior, and if it comes, accept that the other is
developing a life of personal-chaos-prevention, for reasons the other perceives
as their person’s unique happiness.
If the other
causes chaos, they have not accepted being human. That is, they have not
accepted the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual
authority (HIPEA) to develop responsible-human-independence in life. They are
yet fellow-citizens, and there is every hope that they will discover HIPEA and
use it to develop humble-integrity. In the meantime, civic citizens are obliged
to constrain them under written law. Further, civic citizens must continually
discover injustices and revise the law in order to approach statutory justice.
Citizens who apply HIPEA to develop crime and other evil nonetheless will not
tolerate or yield to hypocrisy.
These principles
are not new. So far, no nation has established a culture of
responsible-human-independence in order to constrain chaos. However, such a nation
was proffered in 1787 then repressed in 1791. Four documents deliver the
message. The proffered culture can be established in less than a generation,
because of the speed of positive Internet connections by civic people.
Here are the 4
documents. Genesis 1:27-28 suggests responsible-human-independence; separation
of higher power from human duty; separation of church and state.
The founders’ message in the 1776 declaration of independence from England:
Nature’s God from England’s Trinity; “the good People” claiming military power
according “to the Supreme Judge of the world”; and in 1778, negotiating
military providence from France; separation of church and state.
The framers’ message in the 1787 constitution for political order in the United
States: the good People expressed as “We the People of the United States” with
six stated disciplines that leave religion to privacy; exclude religious oaths
of office; separation of church and state. Congress’s tyranny in
1791, codifying a religion-Congress-partnership: defying the first three
documents and each generation since then leaving “ourselves and our Posterity”
of 2021 to establish separation of church and state.
This view of
those 4 documents express the necessity to revise the First Amendment, in order
to promote civic-integrity rather than religious opinion. As a minimum, it
should be changed from “Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise
thereof . . .” to “U.S. Legislatures shall make no law constraining civic
integrity . . . “ I’m certain a civic people will develop a better revision, I
hope before 2022 arrives.
FB add on: The
current “ourselves and our Posterity” should reform from religious opinion to
civic integrity before 2022; later if not then.
https://www.quora.com/How-would-you-rate-your-level-of-free-will-1-you-are-completely-under-the-influence-of-the-media-and-your-peers-10-You-are-a-complete-free-thinker-unafraid-to-alienate-others-and-lose-friends-over-what-you-think?
by Andre Chaisson
My mantra for about 3 decades has been “I don’t know” what I
don’t know. However, I study and write what I think. Many people have said they
like my writing but don’t understand it. Less than a hand-count like my work.
My wife of 51 years smiles when I sing to her and kisses me when I kiss her. My
daughters wish me Happy Valentine. My new niece thanked us for their wedding
gift.
Our lemon tree is covered and so is our blueberry bush for
the 23 F temp in the morning. I feel good and productive.
More and more, I am learning to write or speak then listen
and respond. Most importantly, I work hard to warrant appreciation by
expressing genuine appreciation.
Thank you, Mr. Chaisson, for your question and interest.
https://www.quora.com/If-something-asserted-is-factually-correct-then-its-correct-whether-we-believe-it-or-not-Likewise-with-incorrect-Is-there-anything-thats-factually-correct-or-incorrect-simply-because-it-is-believed-to-be?
by Eric Sweeten
With the modifier “simply because” I feel confident to say
absolutely not.
However, a belief may be
the-ineluctable-truth. For example, I think belief in Jesus Christ as personal
savior can be true if the believer comprehends the historical Jesus’ messages
rather than the mysteries people recorded about him. I’m not about to speculate
what those messages mean to people of responsible-human-independence. But don’t
mistake my point: If belief in Jesus
empowers an individual to perfect their unique person, the belief seems factual
even though the individual effected the perfection.
I am aware of some possibilities about
Jesus. For example, Ralph Waldo Emersion (RWE), in “Divinity School Address”
(1838) said every human has the possibility to perfect their unique person
before death, according to Jesus’ church-repressed suggestion. And Genesis
1:27-28, a political philosophy from 4,000 years ago, suggests female&male
human being is so powerful as to independently flourish, take dominion over the
other living species, and subdue the earth. Perhaps rather than “before Abraham
was born I AM” Jesus really said humankind’s supremacy on earth was evident
long before Abraham.
I can imagine someone who takes Genesis
1:27-28 to mean they can and must constrain chaos in their way of living and
behave accordingly can regard the rest of us as imperfect if not lost,
hopefully with kindness rather than absolute disdain. RWE seemed kind till the
end.
FB add on: Is it possible for an individual to perfect their person
before dying?
https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-situational-examples-of-a-perplexed-conscience/answer/Phil-Beaver-1?
by Patricia Woodbury again, from last week
Article 2, Section 3 of the U.S.
constitution says the president “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully
executed”. When the Supreme Court would not fast-track Trump’s petitions,
Trump’s lawyers proposed that Pence send the disputed electoral votes back to
the states. The U.S. Supreme Court may then have been forced to intervene. The
contested states might have to produce the data they would not turn over to
Trump.
Litigation of these issues is still
possible, and if so, I have no idea the outcome. See February 19 schedule in
Pennsylvania case at US Supreme
Court set to decide in Feb. whether to hear US Rep. Mike Kelly's election case.
Democrats are trying to ignore that
inviting woe often turns out worse than anyone expected.
Once again, your statement, “The
constitution said count the votes” is too easy: It’s count the legal votes and
cast aside the illegal attempts.
If it is proven that the election was
stolen, I’m betting the administration will be changed by the Supreme Court.
To Patricia Woodbury again:
My
topic is responsible-human-independence to constrain chaos during human life,
as stipulated in a 2021 view of Genesis 1:27–28.
Constraining
chaos starts with the developing focus in order to respond to a challenge if
you want to. It seems to me you prefer chaos rather than either challenge or
response. Why?
To Patricia Woodbury again:
It’s
pretty easy to “suppose” but it also expresses uncertainty; failure;
self-debasement.
Starting
from Genesis 1:27–28, I make the case that men and women have had, for 4
thousand years, a political philosopher’s suggestion that a power higher than
humankind holds humankind responsible for peace on earth. In other words, it’s
a separation of church and state on par with Jesus’ statement that a person
should render to both Caesar and to God according to the separate functions:
civic necessity and spiritual happiness.
I
then make the case that Pence may be suffering doubts as to whether he should
hold Jesus above Trump respecting the U.S. Constitution and that if so, he can
restore Pence-greatness by accept the Pence-error and taking action to prevent
it in the future.
For
all we know, Pence’s failure to give the 74 million voters their day, January 6,
2021 caused the pre-planned storming of the capital “if”. Before noon, Pence
announced he would, in effect, no longer be Trump’s VP. He abused my vote for
Pence—-just another Christian who believes Jesus obeys Pence-opinion rather
than Jesus’ message: separate church and state in this case.
You tell me if the crowd would have turned violent under
Pence-decisiveness to separate church and state.
To Patricia Woodbury again:
Switching from supposition to fear doesn’t
help your error respecting my original message.
It’s not one man. It’s a culture of
humble-integrity.
That culture is proffered in the 1787
constitution for domestic discipline in the United States, consistently with
both the 1776 declaration of war against England and Genesis 1 respecting separation
of church and state. So far, We the People of the United States have not
established the intended culture. It is repressed by the 1791, unconstitutional
imposition of a religion-Congress-partnership. It is individually repressed
each time a Christian holds their beliefs about Jesus in higher authority than
Jesus’ messages. The victims of 1791 Congressional hypocrisy are “ourselves and
our Posterity”, now some 12 generations deep.
I have not read one word that instructs me
that Trump agrees with me. In fact, I urge Trump to reform from the traditional
people’s-attempt: to bargain with God to take the
responsible-human-independence that is assigned to female&male
human-beings, according to Genesis 1:27–28, the 1776 Declaration, and the 1787
Constitution.
To Patricia Woodbury again:
Actually, it’s a question of the Senate doing its job rather
than submitting to cancellation opinion under “freedom of religion” instead of
humility under civic integrity.
Two states had contesting electoral votes. Under the Constitution,
the Senate dominated by the GOP and Pence, controversially, could send those
votes back to the states for resolutions of the contests. The Democrats would
file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality, and the Supreme Court would
adjudicate.
This is a matter of state according to the Constitution
rather than Jesus according to the Bible’s mysteries. And it especially is
independent of Pence’s beliefs about Jesus, ineluctable-reality does not
respond to Pence’s opinion.
Not accepting its 1787 intentions to establish 6 public
disciplines is the cause of the chaos we now suffer. The 2021 “ourselves and
our Posterity” should establish at last responsible-human-independence:
separation of church and state.
To Patricia Woodbury again:
The contested states were Arizona, objection presented by Rep. Paul Gosar
(R-Ariz.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and
Pennsylvania, objection presented by Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) and
Sen. Josh
Hawley (R-Mo.). Four other states were partially contested: Georgia,
Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin.
If Pence had not betrayed the U.S. Commander-in-Chief the outcome would be
different. For all we know, Pence would also have comported with Jesus Christ’s
messages (render unto Caesar . . . and Genesis 1) rather than Pence-beliefs.
Also, for all we know, the plan to storm the Capital might have been called
off, with Pence’s promise kept.
If Pence is feeling bad, he can reform and make amends, for example, by
leading revision of the First Amendment in order to promote civic integrity
rather than foment religious tyranny.
To Patricia Woodbury again:
It’s a Senate, constitutional function. I bet you know
Republicans in the contested states had presented electoral votes for
Trump/Pence so that one Congressperson and one Senator could advance their
complaint. I bet you know Pence had promised on January 4 in Georgia that on
January 6, Trump voters would be heard. Your self pretends to know the outcome
if Pence had fulfilled his promise.
In the same speech, Pence witnessed his opinion about Jesus
Christ (with typical humility-privation toward Jesus’s mysterious messages).
For example, Jesus reportedly claimed: non-believers (people not elected by God
to believe Jesus) hate Christians, Jesus, and God (I deny that claim, by St.
John); render to Caesar what is due; “be perfect”; and “before Abraham I AM”
(which I don’t doubt if what Jesus expressed is that the perfectibility
of the living human individual was known before Abraham was born). Perhaps that’s
the meaning of Genesis 1:27-28.
Many Christians ignore Jesus’ mysteries, I think at their person’s
peril; perhaps a soul’s peril.
Stubborn skeptics pretend to ignore ineluctable-evidence
that refutes mysteries they’d like to preserve. The skeptic, like the
Alinsky-Marxist organizer (AMO), can go on forever, never accepting that they
constantly change their topic.
Jesus’ messages are challenging, even for the U.S. Supreme
Court. Tell me: How do you know green-grass is green? Thank you.
To Patricia Woodbury again:
The Supreme Court will
hear some cases and the consequences could change the lame opinion you attempt
to impose on my issues: separation of church and state as recommended by Jesus
Christ and carried out by both the 1776 Declaration and the 1787 U.S. Constitution.
Will the sun come out
tomorrow? Thanks
https://www.quora.com/A-British-judge-ruled-that-freedom-of-expression-without-the-freedom-to-offend-is-not-a-freedom-worth-having-Why-doesnt-Quora-uphold-this-principle?
by Alexander Lovatt
The human individual has no escape from the continuous urge
for freedom-from oppression. In my experience, awareness of this human
condition increases with maturity.
Thus, I don’t know whether to admit naiveté or assert that
we live in a civilization cross-road. Certainly, the Internet has increased
modes of communication. Some individuals have the grammar to function well in
world-wide expression forums. Others, like me, are desperately trying to learn
grammar they never knew.
Communications servants like Quora are at the center of a
revolution. Whereas in the past, some citizens were aware that press-freedom to
lie empowers the individual to discern liars. Discernment is critical to
forming opinion with the-ineluctable-truth is not known (most of the time). So,
the first opinion I offer is that the British judge is correct. Another point,
perhaps his, is equally important: An
individual who expresses an opinion is likely to offend someone, and the
expresser cannot take responsibility for the responses to their opinion.
Another problem Quora faces is that it wants to serve
everyone in the universe, and different laws cover different nations. Yet Quora
is located in the U.S., and must observe U.S. laws according to Quora-lawyers.
Speech and copyright laws differ in countries.
Copyright is another complicated issue. Just about any
thought I can imagine, with skillful use of Internet search will discover a
reference to a related statement. For example, “discipline of, by, and for the
public”. This search finds several articles with that phrase. Different
articles come if you change “public” to “people”. It all reminds me of
Lincoln’s Gettysburg phrase “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall
not perish from the earth”. Yet I feel no obligation to cite past literature
when I write that in my opinion the preamble to the U.S. Constitution proffers
6 public disciplines: integrity, justice, peace, strength, prosperity, and
responsible-human-independence; that is to say, discipline of, by, and for the
people. But a Quora monitor might challenge the originality of my statements.
If so, I can present the above argument:
The Internet empowers readers to independently examine originality.
I
assert that my opinions are founded in my experiences and observations, and the
Internet is more reliable than my memory in recalling past influences, their
context, their syntax, and similarities that could excite a Quora-monitor’s
interest more than mine.
In
my experience, Quora intends to create a forum for free, responsible
conversation wherein fellow-citizens may connect rather than cancel. The one
suggestion I would make is that they carry The human individual has no escape from the
continuous urge for freedom-from oppression. In my experience, awareness of
this human condition increases with maturity.
Thus,
I don’t know whether to admit naiveté or assert that we live in a civilization
cross-road. Certainly, the Internet has increased modes of communication. Some
individuals have the grammar to function well in world-wide expression forums.
Others, like me, are desperately trying to learn grammar they never knew.
Communications
servants like Quora are at the center of a revolution. Whereas in the past,
some citizens were aware that press-freedom to lie empowers the individual to
discern liars. Discernment is critical to forming opinion with
the-ineluctable-truth is not known (most of the time). So, the first opinion I
offer is that the British judge is correct. Another point, perhaps his, is
equally important: An individual who
expresses an opinion is likely to offend someone, and the expresser cannot take
responsibility for the responses to their opinion.
Another
problem Quora faces is that it wants to serve everyone in the universe, and
different laws cover different nations. Yet Quora is located in the U.S., and
must observe U.S. laws according to Quora-lawyers. Speech and copyright laws
differ in countries.
Copyright
is another complicated issue. Just about any thought I can imagine, with
skillful use of Internet search will discover a reference to a related
statement. For example, “discipline of, by, and for the public”. This search
finds several articles with that phrase. Different articles come if you change
“public” to “people”. It all reminds me of Lincoln’s Gettysburg phrase
“government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from
the earth”. Yet I feel no obligation to cite past literature when I write that
in my opinion the preamble to the U.S. Constitution proffers 6 public
disciplines: integrity, justice, peace, strength, prosperity, and responsible-human-independence;
that is to say, discipline of, by, and for the people. But a Quora monitor
might challenge the originality of my statements. If so, I can present the
above argument: The Internet empowers
readers to independently examine originality.
I
assert that my opinions are founded in my experiences and observations, and the
Internet is more reliable than my memory in recalling past influences, their
context, their syntax, and similarities that could excite a Quora-monitor’s
interest more than mine.
In
my experience, Quora intends to create a forum for free, responsible
conversation wherein fellow-citizens may connect rather than cancel.
I
suggest that they carry the original questioner’s name in all subsequent posts.
FB add on: In my limited experience, Quora.com seems
intent on providing a forum whereby fellow-citizens of the universe may
converse to connect rather than to cancel. If I’m mistaken, I hope someone will
inform me.
Phil
Beaver does not “know.” He trusts in and is committed to the-objective-truth which
can only be discovered. Conventional wisdom has truth founded on reason, but it
obviously does not work.
Phil is agent
for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit
corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, and consider essays
from the latest and going back as far as you like.
No comments:
Post a Comment