Comment: I could ask, conversely:

(See in situ)


Cyril's picture

I could ask, conversely:

I could ask, conversely: what would make the total absence of any formalized law legitimate, as well, then?

Case in point (analogy):

try to build any new software any useful (i.e., to anyone) by consciously, i.e., purposely, ignoring all along each and every of the few simplest laws of logics which have been accessible to the understanding of most for millennia (if only intuitively), and to a 10 year old, even.

In other words:

what good does it bring to anybody / to any market if, at the same time, nobody can (i.e., nobody bothers / cares) to acknowledge the difference between a software feature(1) vs. a software bug(2)?

Back on topic:

is our bitter, sad experience of the Law Perverted (and for too long, already, easily granted) enough of a necessary and sufficient excuse for denying any formalized law, moving forward, including if such were only meant for reckoning Justice -

(and Justice only) -

as it (the law) should have never departed from?

--

(1) e.g., satisfied contracts / growing businesses and economies
(2) e.g., broken contracts / disputes / frauds / crimes

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius