because it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them [political rights]. The judiciary . . . has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of society .
1. The situation between Palmer, Olds and Crosby is a difficult one to be placed in. At the end of the case, it was already decided that Olds would no longer be working for Palmer. At that point, it did not matter whether or not Palmer still needed him for auditing work or anything else for that matter. Regardless to whether or not he had any reservations about the decision, the fact remains that the decision was conclusive.
However, I do not find the argument to be that convincing. After reading this argument, I did not find it to have stimulated my mental capacities. However, based on what it has presented, the argument is valid and most of all makes sense because it originates from definitions that provide a solid base for the argument. The objections to this argument do raise several valid points to the concept of whether or not the “maximally great” being in question does have a universal position across all the worlds he may or may not exist in. What if there is no level of “maximal greatness” in one world?
He preferred a small scale of military. However, since today the position and the possession of a good leader are always desired by many covetous men, I suppose that a smart leader today should concern war and the preparation thereof, as Machiavelli advised. Through war, he can consolidate his power, and protect his people as well as his territory. Last year, Chinese government declared to take back one of two Vietnamese famous islands, called Hoang Sa, which belonged to Vietnam for many centuries. Being afraid of inferior if a fight really happened, the Vietnam Communist Government hopelessly gave its island up to China.
All written history is partial in two senses. It is partial in that it is only a tiny part of what really happened. That is a limitation that can never be overcome. And it is partial in that it inevitably takes sides, by what it includes or omits, what it emphasizes or deemphasizes.” Zinn’s statement challenges readers to
It voices our opinions, come to think of it, if we never spoke we would have no reason for opinions because we will not be heard nor will we be unable to hear others. On the other end of the spectrum is silence, the one of golden value. The lame man might say, “Silence? What does silence do??? It does not say or express anything!” But fortunately for individuals who have mastered the art of silence that is not the case.
There is no fact that always an order will be obeyed even when that makes sense. As there can be many reasons behind an order not being obeyed. There is a golden saying that is ‘Instruct rather than order’. You may be the boss, but you don't have to be bossy. You'll have more success if your requests are more tactfully delivered.
The “right-minded person” (UOP, p. 532) has no “attachment toward body, feelings, perceptions, activities and thought” (UOP, p. 532-533). This person also performs deeds and makes decisions with the knowledge that such deeds and decisions determine one’s
This something else does not necessarily have to exist or to actually be somewhere at the moment in which a sign stands in for it. Thus semiotics is in principle the discipline studying everything which can be used in order to lie. If something cannot be used to tell a lie, conversely it cannot be used to tell the truth; it cannot in fact be used 'to tell' at all.’ However if we understand
Critical thinking of any kind is never universal in any individual; everyone is subject to episodes of undisciplined or irrational thought. Its quality is therefore typically a matter of degree and dependent on, among other things, the quality and depth of experience in a given domain of thinking or with respect to a particular class of questions. No one is a critical thinker through-and-through, but only to such-and-such a degree, with such-and-such insights and blind