Changes

<br>

<br>

While I'm on the subject of imperatives and maxims, of how they often come in pairs that appear to strive both pro and con each other, and of how they are able to make a kind of sense, whether in conjunction or in alternation, without having to be logically consistent with one another, ...

While I'm on the subject of imperatives and maxims, of how they often come in pairs that appear to strive both pro and con each other, and of how they are able to make a kind of sense, whether in conjunction or in alternation, without having to be logically consistent with one another, &hellip;

Absent a sense of what is good a creature is lost.  And since this sense is only a feeling, a groping, a hint, an inkling, all in all a wandering shade, it can only be a sign of what is good, and a fallible sign at that.  Does a sense of what's good ever contend with a sense of what's good ?  If the mind is inclined to emphasize the turn of the phrase that it is bound to hold nearer to itself, namely, the mind's own "sense", then it seems to indicate an aesthetic sensibility.  If the mind is disposed to stress the part of speech that it places more dearly in association with its object, namely, the mind's own "good", then it seems to take on an ethical intention.  But this is just shadow play.  The live question is:  What is there in this state of disharmony that speaks to its absence?

Absent a sense of what is good a creature is lost.  And since this sense is only a feeling, a groping, a hint, an inkling, all in all a wandering shade, it can only be a sign of what is good, and a fallible sign at that.  Does a ''sense'' of what's good ever contend with a sense of what's ''good''?  If the mind is inclined to emphasize the turn of the phrase that it is bound to hold nearer to itself, namely, the mind's own &ldquo;sense&rdquo;, then it seems to indicate an aesthetic sensibility.  If the mind is disposed to stress the part of speech that it places more dearly in association with its object, namely, the mind's own &ldquo;good&rdquo;, then it seems to take on an ethical intention.  But this is just shadow play.  The live question is:  What is there in this state of disharmony that speaks to its absence?

====5.2.5. Apparent, Occasional, and Practical Necessity====

====5.2.5. Apparent, Occasional, and Practical Necessity====