diff --git a/content/theses/metaphysica/on free will/definition.md b/content/theses/metaphysica/on free will/definition.md index 6bbfcbe..9239c51 100755 --- a/content/theses/metaphysica/on free will/definition.md +++ b/content/theses/metaphysica/on free will/definition.md @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ title: "defining free will" --- # trying to define the modes of actions
+ If we accept [the idea of free will existing]({{< relref "/theses/metaphysica/on free will/existence" >}}), we should be able to define it, in order to be able to self reference and call upon to make use of this idea. This also helps in clarifying the meaning, which in everyday speech is muddled, much like most of language, due to the nature of communication (more on that at a later point). Alongside free will, there are two more modes of behaviour in nature, determinism and pure randomness. Discussing these first is necessary to properly define free will, since these are directly observable in the outside world; free will is only directly observable in the inner state of the self, with the admission that others behave similarly. diff --git a/content/theses/metaphysica/on free will/existence.md b/content/theses/metaphysica/on free will/existence.md index 82165e5..1044740 100644 --- a/content/theses/metaphysica/on free will/existence.md +++ b/content/theses/metaphysica/on free will/existence.md @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ title: "the existence of free will" --- # why we are rather than not
+ In order to define and then converse on ideas relating to free will, one must first convince themselves on its existence. Surely one can simply make a definition, as well as talk about the emergent system much like any other metaphysical structure, but for there to be a reason to do so, one must be able to argue for its existence. On this matter, there are many different arguments, however I will focus on the three that I find the strongest; this does not mean that one can prove existence, but these seem to strongly suggest and support that free will is indeed part of reality. diff --git a/content/theses/metaphysica/on logic/axioms.md b/content/theses/metaphysica/on logic/axioms.md index f06d02e..abc8b7b 100644 --- a/content/theses/metaphysica/on logic/axioms.md +++ b/content/theses/metaphysica/on logic/axioms.md @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ title: "the nature of faith" --- # a thesis on the axiomatic foundation of knowledge
+ The words "logic" and "knowledge" are often connected in the minds of humans. In the sciences, logic is used religiously, in an attempt to obtain knowledge, in the same way that it is used in religions. In truth, logic is unable to lead to complete, general knowledge inside of a system, which fully describes the Truth. diff --git a/content/theses/metaphysica/on logic/fallacies.md b/content/theses/metaphysica/on logic/fallacies.md index 216b941..112300d 100755 --- a/content/theses/metaphysica/on logic/fallacies.md +++ b/content/theses/metaphysica/on logic/fallacies.md @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ title: "concerning fallacies" --- # most appeals to logic are appeals to authority
+ To conclude the [discussion on logic](/theses/metaphysica/on-logic/axioms/), I would like to examine in depth the propagation of knowledge, in order to present the greatest result; the fact that most appeals to logic are themselves a logical fallacy. Logical fallacies are, like all named things, characterizations; and they grant a person the ability to understand if a proposition is logically consistent in the broader system of an axiomatic system.