Political Theory

Re: Thoughts On This Graph:

Jeremiah Dyke — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 17:11:30 GMT

my apologies, when i rush my writing it's not always discernable.

What i'm asking is if based on the graph we can state that every actor is in some form or fashion a cause of a future event? Likewise, if every actor, at some level, has intended an event?

Re: Thoughts On This Graph:

EmperorNero — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 16:35:27 GMT

I don't get it. Can you rephrase it in different language? Be thorough.

Re: Thoughts On This Graph:

Jeremiah Dyke — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 16:18:48 GMT

The writing is somewhat sloppy, but what i meant by factor of intent, is that they have some intent for every action

Thoughts On This Graph:

Jeremiah Dyke — Sat, 29 Jan 2011 16:16:00 GMT

A mere thought experiment trying to establish some things about this graph, any criticisms?

1) From are elaborate collective set of actions, no actor can be without cause in any event. True independence of causality is only apparent in absence of the actor. Once the actor is a part of space-time he is a factor, be it small, of every cause.

a) Thus, no actor rests at the origin of any cause. At best we may say the actor approaches zero within the limit (Limit as c → 0)

2) As Posner states “most accidental injuries are intentional in the sense that the injurer knew that he could have reduced the probability of the accident by taking additional precautions”. From this we draw the conclusion that no actor can be without intent in any event. True independence of intent is only apparent in absence of the actor. Once the actor is a part of space-time he is a factor, be it small, of every intent.

a) Thus, no actor rests at the origin of any cause. At best we may say the actor approaches zero within the limit (Limit as i → 0‎)

3) Likewise, since no actor may have zero cause or intent, by definition, no actor may have infinite cause or intent. At best we may say an actor approaches infinity of cause and intent (Limit as c, i → ∞)