The elements of Logic, essential to the clear thinking, ordered argument and avoidance
of fallacies in preparing your case in Law.
"Hunt the proposition" for the inconsistencies and contradictions, Look for balking acts (Acts omitted intentionally - Omissions with ‘mens mentis’, Identifying them? Start here).
Your mendacious adversary will invariably commit them.
A Philosophy of Law. Has the meaning of justice been forgotten? Are the law courts and organs of complaints so steeped in sets of rules as to prevent them from recognising & applying justice, or does this belie an agenda? Bureaucracy combines in large bodies, organisations, and institutions, found predominantly in democracies, (less in dictatorships, which should not attract negatively characterised associations to exclude paternal single rulers and monarchies) suffer from the consequence of agenda and template driven procedures. A distanced view of such methodologies reveals invidious practices that undermine democracy to the point of it’s being a worse system than centralised management in paternal single or small cerebral groupings.
The combined tendencies of a large employed workforce, being more disinterested than smaller groupings creates a dependency on sets of rule structured procedures, stipulating increasingly the maxim, don’t think, follow these rules. Complaint procedure rules, like those in court become a pre-determining template that functions like a die through which particulars are forced and extruded where truth, accurate correspondence with reality and other similar concepts suffer. Taking a topological view of the sociological landscape reveals groups of bodies where their well defined frames of reference work to the combining effect of mutual exclusion that gives rise to the general consequences that one body is not empowered to handle problems, and they get shunted around so the complainant gives up in frustration. If he does end up with the relevant institution, he then faces the same problem on a diminished scale, being his particulars are forced through the template to either qualify or not depending on the person controlling the dialogue. Every profound principle at the heart of a small example gets buried under the weight of the template, indifference and a commercial decision. Of course commercial decisions have invariably nothing to do with truth, honour, integrity or sprit of any law .
FLEXIBLE application of rules requires noblesse oblige, and unqualified compassion for understanding truth and usually a single cortex capable of balanced judgement devoid of particular vested interest.
Here are a few cases, that support the views expressed throughout their pages that the most important place in our institutions is suffering a want of proper reasoning, and reaches conclusions based on unjust agendas declared or otherwise, fallacies of reasoning, and a compliance with so many rules as to obscure the proper outcome of justice as we know it to be in our instincts and hearts.
The inability to separate what a company, or person IS from what they POSSESS, in the determination of the individual’s real worth is a singular basis for obscuring judgement of mediocrity in attributes among some wealthier and more powerful, many of whom are wonderful, and many of whom are not. Any person in a position of authority, unable to apologise for errors of conduct, and or listen to reasoned argument without permitting their ‘ blood their safer guides to rule,’ is in my view not worthy of such position, equally, any person unable to answer a simple direct question without answering a different one, should not hold a public office.
The Metropolitan Police and CPS. Transport for London,
The Police Complaints Authority, Local Ombudsman, Amtrak Express Parcels Ltd, A Bank, one of the largest 3 internationally, Telewest Broadband (Illegal harassment by their solicitors), Bedford Court Mansions Ltd., a freehold company of London’s West end apartments, and others.
Click on the two BOXED links above left, for a growing discovery of documents showing perjury, maladministration, breaches of contract, mendacity, fallacious arguments, and other abuses.
Shakespeare on Law and Logic.
he hath resisted law, And therefore law shall scorn him further trial Than the severity of the public power,
Seneca cannot be too heavy, nor Plautus too light. For the law of writ and the liberty, these are the only men.
Is it a lawful trade? POMPEY. If the law would allow it, sir. ESCALUS. But the law will not allow it,
how, how, choplogic? What is this? 'Proud'- and 'I thank you'- and 'I thank you not'- And yet 'not proud'?
Balk logic with acquaintance that you have, And practise rhetoric in your common talk;