software as law

online: 4 february 2019
modified: 24 november 2018

21 november 2018 software as law 020020779405003581402077946500020779405003514

i would like to say that law . . . such a brief word has vast implications . . . and although it sounds negative (as in "thou shalt not") it can have a positive effect . . . for instance, "I shall not steal", can have the effect of other people feeling secure and not uneasy about owning property.

giving and taking are very much behind the idea of law . . . and also perhaps the idea of doing good . . . people who write about ethics (the nature of ethics) although sounding negative can become positive . . .

i remember that when i began to study software i suddenly realized that it could indeed be seen as law . . . they are both logical constructions and both depend on books of rules . . .

this sounds to me quite promising and intriguing . . . because it lifts the load of negative thought and action from that of singular to that of plural . . . and then to Edwin Schlossberg's statement:

we are i/we or we are nothing

maybe that morality is plural and not singular . . . and if expressed as singular . . . as solo, as ego, it becomes negative . . .

it is interesting that scientific proof depends not on positive evidence but on negative disproof . . . and F.E. Alexander's theory is that the negative is what holds together the positive . . . in the form of the nervous system . . .

here i feel i am touching the dangerous and the easily mistaken thing . . . but also the precious thing . . . and the ethical one . . .

enough

enough

enough (whispering)

homepage

You may transmit this text to anyone for any non-commercial purpose if you include the copyright line and this notice and if you respect the copyright of quotations.

If you wish to reproduce any of this text commercially please send a copyright permission request to jcj at publicwriting.net