12th Book on Ability to Reason, Right to Consent; Proposition, Problem & Poem No. 234

Most likely to be published later this summer of 2022, my 12th book entitled appropriately; Propositions, Problems & Poems on the Peculiar Human ABILITY to REASON, Singular Human RIGHT to CONSENT & Other Neglected Matters. The following will probably be included upon further editing, and front cover a slightly modified yet appropriate version of the 10th and 11th books...

Note:
For a cleaner version (format, tables, etc.), see the SubStack link.

PROPOSITION, PROBLEM & POEM No. 234

~ Schaefferian Law of Anterior Covetousness / Part 4 ~

To articulate yet another perhaps final time the Law of Anterior Covetousness; if an action disregarding dissent (not consensual), then anterior the covetousness as the initial speculation, presumption, later arrogance the consequential disposition, disrespect next disregard the eventual manifestation.

            Consequently, again consider the following pseudo code (see Proposition, Problem & Poem Nos. 225-230), particularly the addendum inserted…

 

if consensual

then

 unity

else (not consensual)

not unity

if action disregarding dissent

then

ethical dilemma…

 

Addendum; hence logically exposing, deductively proposing the Schaefferian Law of Anterior Covetousness.

 

e = ethical dilemma *

n = not an ethical dilemma

 

c = covetousness (arousing con dissent)

p = presumption (flirting con dissent)

a = arrogance (plotting con dissent)

v = violence (acting con dissent)

 

e = (((n + c) + p) + a) + v

or redundantly…

e = ((c + p) + a) + v

else

                                                not an action disregarding dissent

                                                not an ethical dilemma

                                                (rather ethical continuity)

 

e = ethical dilemma

n = not an ethical dilemma *

 

c = covetousness (arousing con dissent)

p = presumption (flirting con dissent)

a = arrogance (plotting con dissent)

v = violence (acting con dissent)

 

n = c

or

n = c + p

or

n = (c + p) + a

or

n = ((c - c) + (p - p)) + (a – a)

or simply…

n = e - v

done

                        done/exit

 

            To be clear reiteratively, the point of such exercises is to demonstrate the syllogism as logical hence consistent, the logical argument as the critical prerequisite towards proposing then proving further the ethical argument. To reverse engineer, if to propose any consideration as ethical as should any consideration factual and truthful, then paramount during the observation then determination must be consistency as the primary characteristic, dynamic and/or element, else inconsistency then certainly something other than factual, truthful as well ethical.

---

Contrarily thus and then reasoning towards peace, always the choice
Among cities or deserts, civilizations or wildernesses as few voiced
Less so the study, the ponder, lesser still the labor until tomb’s cold lure
Nonetheless the innate drive, outward cry; qui tacet dissentire videtur 

Actus me invito factus non est meus actus, as Individualism’s praxis
Opposed to all other isms’ modus operandi regardless the political axis
Thus observable fact is; if arrogance succeeds, presumption precedes
And covetousness the original seed toward government’s violent deeds 

---

Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Study, Ponder, Labor, till last Breath.

Copyright © 2022 by D.C. Quillan Stone