************* The following message is relayed to you by [email protected] ************ Hi Pete or and anyone else who knows this stuff,
Have I got this "to eat " junior goals package worded right? I ask because I see Dennis says different, it is: "to eat " and " to not be eaten" as in the copied quote from the book, below. What he says, does not make sense. 1. Did someone force me from "must not eat" to "must eat"? 1A. Is someone trying to force me from "must not eat" to "must eat" ? 2 Am I forcing someone from "must eat" to "must not eat."? 2A. Did I ever force someone from "must eat" to "must not eat."? 3 Did someone force me from "must eat" to "must not eat"? 3A. Is someone trying to force me from "must eat " to "must not eat" ? 4. Am I forcing someone from "must not eat" to "must eat"? 4A. Did I ever force someone from "must not eat" to "must eat"? 5 Did someone force me from "must not eat " to "must eat"? 5A. Is someone trying to force me from "must not eat" to "must eat"? 6. Am I forcing someone from "must eat" to "must not eat."? 6A . Did I ever force someone from "must eat" to "must not eat"? 7. Did someone force me from "must eat" to "must not eat "? 7A. Is someone trying to force me from "must eat" to "must not eat? 8 Am I forcing someone from "must not eat" to "must eat."? 8A. Did I ever force someone from "must not eat " to "must be eat"? Check that the complementary postulates are indeed complementary, and that the opposing postulates are exact oppositions. This can only be done empirically, on the basis of cold, hard logic. To do it any other way is to court disaster. Once may have a strong ‘gut feeling’ that the goal ‘To eat’ is opposed by the goal ‘To not be edible’, however logic tells us that the correct opposition is ‘To not be eaten’. The difference between the package cleanly erasing and grinding on forever is to be found within such fine shades of meaning. Nowhere in life do you have to be more precise than in this area of composing junior goals packages. Then the " to have " package. Is it " to have" and " to not have" or is it " to not be had" ? I just had a thought; maybe both compositions should be run or could be run? Then there is: " to be had" and " not be had"? 1. Did someone force me from "must not have" to "must have"? 1A. Is someone trying to force me from "must not have" to "must have" ? 2 Am I forcing someone from "must have" to "must not have."? 2A. Did I ever force someone from "must have" to "must not have."? 3 Did someone force me from "must have" to "must not have"? 3A. Is someone trying to force me from "must have " to "must not have" ? 4. Am I forcing someone from "must not have" to "must have"? 4A. Did I ever force someone from "must not have" to "must have"? 5 Did someone force me from "must not have " to "must have"? 5A. Is someone trying to force me from "must not have" to "must have"? 6. Am I forcing someone from "must have" to "must not have."? 6A . Did I ever force someone from "must have" to "must not have"? 7. Did someone force me from "must have" to "must not have "? 7A. Is someone trying to force me from "must have" to "must not have? 8 Am I forcing someone from "must not have" to "must have."? 8A. Did I ever force someone from "must not have " to "must have"? _______________________________________________ Trom mailing list [email protected] http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom
