لماذا لا نموت ؟

ان قدر المفكر والمبدع ان يعيش وحيدا تائها ..لا يرى الواقع بخطوة الى الامام ,لكن بخطوات , يرى كيف سيكون مستقبلا,او ما يريد له ان يكون ...لكن بما ان الناس دائما على حق ,لهذا فهو لا يرتبط بهم واقعيا ,ولو كانوا السبب في ابداعه ومحنته .ا

ان قدر الانسان المرهف الاحساس الا يتفاعل مع محيطه كما يريد هذا الاخير... فهذه مهنة السياسة
والفنان المبدع قليلا ما احسن التوازن على هكذا وتر حساس .ا

كيف نصفق لمن يطلب منا كثيرا من العمل قليلا من الراحة ..؟
ان هذه الحياة اقسى من تحتمل كما هي ..فكيف بمزيد من العمل وفي هذا ايضا مزيدا من الشقاء .1
ان اول مؤيد ,وبد عدّة من التعب سيرمي برمثيوس باول حجروباول تمرد وباول اتهام ,ا

Hume ´´ doctrine of tacit consent´´

Hume's thinks that poor peasant or artizan has no free choice to leave the country ..that residence alone cannot be construed as consent . 2- There are few cases where his objection is convincing,although some time we have to make very hard distinguish between exception and realty in general. If poor people have no choice to leave the country..then why those emigrants risk there live to reach western country's ? i think people in Europe in general believe that there is no better place to leave what they already have- or nothing that much better, that worth to leave - for so they Tacit Consent ''among the knowledge... '' best of what exist

State of Nature

Hobbes, Locke , Rousseau...in ''what life would be like in the state of nature''

I think it is very interesting to see how much society can provide us with such many different opinions ,although we should notice that even throw deferences, human can point to united subjects ( the aide of equalizations )
but if have to vote for one of them ..ill choose Hobbes ,
even if Hobbes didn't give stat of nature hope to Develop to state , he also cant convince me what well gather human to create social contract ((golden rule ))!!!
although i think Hobbes made it to :understand 'body' or matter of which we entirely composedand more clearly .
that mater throw that vision i think is one of the top, interests to P.P

i think the one of the missing points in hes state of nature the frightens of isolation !!!
which Spinoza had talked about, also he add the in the state of nature right was = power .
I think it still do !
the way i understand the above philosophers with the anarchism theory leads me to the point that all of them seems to share ,which i think had finally ''recreated'' by :
The new wealthy educated Social layer (( Bourgeoisie)) which now seeking equality, against Godly kings and lords.

And thouts kip pop up so should fallowed by

''people always right!!and philosophers always wrong!'' William jeams
throw my understand of William jeams reading...i will continue by this :
If people accept that world is Rotating when they were ready for that not when Galileo had told it ! -i believe also ((Democracy)) ,feminism....etc
Understanding how they lived at certain time throw certain laws, then it is very important ,to understand what they had fond to replace there behaver and believes,

finally one main subject for me ill name it Histromism

HISTOMISM

Humans through history have established a behavior which is relative to their instinct and economic position, Their circumstances create and match, starting from the immediate common sense, which had taken always a different level with the coming tomorrow.
Men and women who set the laws and religions were not unlike from there historical moment. But commence out of it, And match it...