was eating Whether Hummer moral or not is an open question (though I leave your request, the finger of morality, because that is morally, not divide would - I am a little too easy, but maybe that is also just the brandy in my chocolates - then I will understand why you have to find them).
When I run the Total of the Society on the way (Dear Daniel, you are sure that you the Hummer is more of a lost or they are familiar - perhaps? In heat - book) I will be with you in the third Chapter sink. For
me it sounds with the evolution with you more like Axomatik "Evolution always takes place in the system ...".
----- short with morality: the dictatorial character of axioms: do not question but accept it as neither provable nor refutable: it should apply, dass .. "-----
brings me in a tricky position: My question is now whether evolution is an adequate term to describe the system differentiation - and in response I get: Evolution always existed * At the head scratch *
ad schizophrenia 2: Well, clear: the concept of evolution. is a paradox ... but - correct me - put the system in response to the paradox of form and function dar. But that paradox replies a paradoxical concept.
ad primordial soup / Uhrsuppe: That a continuous period of a social organization was, and that can organize it still different (at the same time the linear idea of \u200b\u200ba progressive history, there is indeed circular representations of recurring patterns, such as calendar) is indeed that there is no system-specific need to see a development or evolution as a leading paradigm of social differentiation. So that there should be a big bang (again, there are a cyclical view of the universe), depends on our organization by the time clock and narrative. Somehow I feel the same radically modern system theory and radically unfashionable same time:
Modern because they experience the classic of the modern (development, differentiation, continuity, rationality, Forschrittsnarrativ, increasing complexity, etc.)
unfashionable because they objectify can not be because she claims to be all described from a perspective and to objectify (even if they know that there are various descriptions).
paradox ... but to tie it, I leave Dir
0 comments:
Post a Comment