The Safety and Security related arguments...a good-intentioned path of self-destruction
Safety and Security related arguments must be done with extreme care and thoughtfulness. These two words have the mathematical power of Indices of 'raise to the power zero'.
2 raise to the power zero is equal to 1, is also equal to 5 raise to the power zero, which is also equal to 1.
One can thereof claim that 2 is equal to 5, based on 'mathematical logic', an apparently correct but highly meaningless and corrupt logic. The mental problem of social democrat also comes from the issue of this meaningless logic when they put the security threat against the State, whether from citizens or from foreign agents, as one and same, thereby destroying the meaningfulness of the concept of Nation as a voluntary commitment of citizens.
One ordinary day-today life example which is running in my head about what length and self-destruction the safety-arguments can reach is that of a Cook not making good chapatis. Naivete might wonder how a cook not making good chapatis can lead to a safety-trip in a workplace. But the experienced oldies know about the intra-group clashes which have happened in the past in the hard work condition places such as merchant naval ships, where the bad food has proved to be the last nail in the coffin for people to revolt up. It is not for passing causes that the cook on board merchant ships is one qualified and certified person for the job. History carries the legacy in the form of 'lessons learnt'.
But the dilemma of a naivete would be due to his unawareness of such historical backgrounds. This might make him to slip into Safety implications of such reports. In the modern times, as it is the meaningfulness of good chapatis made by on-board ship cook is reduced when we have so many alternatives in the packed fast-food industry which are capable of being stored for indefinite times.
But can a man still argue that in modern times the bad-chapaties-complain should be deemed inconsequential ? And then, can another man argue against how free speech to people to make their endless complains is NOT an unsafe act ??
There is never a conclusive answer to first query; rather the answer, as can be seen from the above discussion, is relative to the milieu. The next query illustrates how and what the political implications of the Safety Arguments running into 'meaninglessness' can mean . Meaninglessness is relative to the times prevailing. Statistical intuition of the people awards the meaningfulness credits to such complains. Statistics itself being subject to Free Speech right so to make complains.
In summary, a habitual complain of bad chapatis in modern times has resulted in a generation of people cultivated to believe that the free speech is most dangerous and unsafe act ! In the situation which is under study, the bad-chapatis complains, the civil procedures lessons of historic revolutions have lost currency when Safety-related arguments ran into the time frame relative meaninglessness.
A detailed discussion on the nature of Arguments pertaining to safety and security matters, one will see that :
Safety and security related arguments can destroy the normal Cognitive Ability of Mind. They can
demolish the reasoning power. They can make a person psychometric ship-wrecked. They do,
what we proverbially call, ''Dimag ka Dahi''.
My other friend, argues that:
Mathematics is the numeral interpretation of logical thoughts and like anywhere you do find
absurdity which is also logical. It will definitely take statistical detour for correction in co-
relation between security and Safety. Till then be a party of the evolution.
2 raise to the power zero is equal to 1, is also equal to 5 raise to the power zero, which is also equal to 1.
One can thereof claim that 2 is equal to 5, based on 'mathematical logic', an apparently correct but highly meaningless and corrupt logic. The mental problem of social democrat also comes from the issue of this meaningless logic when they put the security threat against the State, whether from citizens or from foreign agents, as one and same, thereby destroying the meaningfulness of the concept of Nation as a voluntary commitment of citizens.
One ordinary day-today life example which is running in my head about what length and self-destruction the safety-arguments can reach is that of a Cook not making good chapatis. Naivete might wonder how a cook not making good chapatis can lead to a safety-trip in a workplace. But the experienced oldies know about the intra-group clashes which have happened in the past in the hard work condition places such as merchant naval ships, where the bad food has proved to be the last nail in the coffin for people to revolt up. It is not for passing causes that the cook on board merchant ships is one qualified and certified person for the job. History carries the legacy in the form of 'lessons learnt'.
But the dilemma of a naivete would be due to his unawareness of such historical backgrounds. This might make him to slip into Safety implications of such reports. In the modern times, as it is the meaningfulness of good chapatis made by on-board ship cook is reduced when we have so many alternatives in the packed fast-food industry which are capable of being stored for indefinite times.
But can a man still argue that in modern times the bad-chapaties-complain should be deemed inconsequential ? And then, can another man argue against how free speech to people to make their endless complains is NOT an unsafe act ??
There is never a conclusive answer to first query; rather the answer, as can be seen from the above discussion, is relative to the milieu. The next query illustrates how and what the political implications of the Safety Arguments running into 'meaninglessness' can mean . Meaninglessness is relative to the times prevailing. Statistical intuition of the people awards the meaningfulness credits to such complains. Statistics itself being subject to Free Speech right so to make complains.
In summary, a habitual complain of bad chapatis in modern times has resulted in a generation of people cultivated to believe that the free speech is most dangerous and unsafe act ! In the situation which is under study, the bad-chapatis complains, the civil procedures lessons of historic revolutions have lost currency when Safety-related arguments ran into the time frame relative meaninglessness.
A detailed discussion on the nature of Arguments pertaining to safety and security matters, one will see that :
Safety and security related arguments can destroy the normal Cognitive Ability of Mind. They can
demolish the reasoning power. They can make a person psychometric ship-wrecked. They do,
what we proverbially call, ''Dimag ka Dahi''.
My other friend, argues that:
Mathematics is the numeral interpretation of logical thoughts and like anywhere you do find
absurdity which is also logical. It will definitely take statistical detour for correction in co-
relation between security and Safety. Till then be a party of the evolution.
In my response, I say that:
logical correctness is studied through this numerical (mathematical) representations.
Statistics, also a mathematics, is built on Historical experiences. Once the right and wrong
of logical thoughts are identified and documented away as law codes, there is no reason to
confuse oneself and challenge the right and wrong once more. Rights and wrongs have
compiled up as the law codes. Violations of established procedures are like challenging the
correctness of this statistical mathematics. Avoiding undocumented use of Discretion is the
key method of avoiding to challenge the laws.
The concept of "market place of ideas" as the most acceptable reasoning for uphold the Free
Speech to everyone is a kind of celebration of the basic logics involved in the Statistical
Mathematics. That, what is right is not known to anybody, but the method to reach, through a
open market competition of Ideas, to that Right is well-accepted by everyone.
Statistics depends a lot on the data collection. The result of a statistical study is bound to be
affected until the data collection methodology is not robust. The law of stability of large number
holds for the statistics world. Doesn't the Free speech provide for preventing affections in the
data and also the large volume of data for the self-correction of errors.
Comments
Post a Comment