Syenss Fillossuhfee Branch Kyndz

Syenss Fillossuhfee Branch Kyndz

Fillossuhfee Izm Nōrm Spĕld " Philosophyism "

Fohrmul Syenss Nōrm Spĕld " Formal Science "

Fillossuhfee Izm

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

philosophy (n.)

Meaning "system a person forms for conduct of life" is attested from 1771…

c. 1300, "knowledge, body of knowledge,"…

(12c., Modern French philosophie)…

from Old French filosofie "philosophy, knowledge"…

directly from Latin philosophia

and from Greek philosophia "love of knowledge, pursuit of wisdom; systematic investigation,"

from philo- "loving" (see philo-) + sophia "knowledge, wisdom," from sophis "wise, learned;" of unknown origin.

Fillossuhfee Main Branchez

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

Traditional…Five…Main Branches [Uhv] Philosophy

Traditionally, there are five main branches of philosophy.

They are:

Metaphysics, which deals with the fundamental questions of reality.
Epistemology, which deals with our concept of knowledge, how we learn and what we can know.
Logic, which studies the rules of valid reasoning and argumentation
Ethics, or moral philosophy, which is concerned with human values and how individuals should act.
Aesthetics or esthetics, which deals with the notion of beauty and the philosophy of art.

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

Introduction to the Five Branches of Philosophy

Philosophy can be divided into five branches which address the following questions:

Metaphysics Study of Existence What's out there?
Epistemology Study of Knowledge How do I know about it?
Ethics Study of Action What should I do?
Politics Study of Force What actions are permissible?
Esthetics Study of Art What can life be like?

There is a hierarchical relationship between these branches as can be seen..

At the root is Metaphysics, the study of existence and the nature of existence.

Closely related is Epistemology, the study of knowledge and how we know about reality and existence.

Dependent on Epistemology is Ethics, the study of how man should act.

Ethics is dependent on Epistemology because it is impossible to make choices without knowledge.

A subset of Ethics is Politics: the study of how men should interact in a proper society and what constitutes proper.

Esthetics, the study of art and sense of life is slightly separate, but depends on Metaphysics, Epistemology, and Ethics.


Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:


Written By:

Bruce Withington Wilshire A.C. Grayling William Henry Walsh

Metaphysics, the philosophical study whose object is to determine the real nature of things—to determine the meaning, structure, and principles of whatever is insofar as it is. Although this study is popularly conceived as referring to anything excessively subtle and highly theoretical and although it has been subjected to many criticisms, it is presented by metaphysicians as the most fundamental and most comprehensive of inquiries, inasmuch as it is concerned with reality as a whole.

Nature and scope of metaphysics
Origin of the term

Etymologically the term metaphysics is unenlightening. It means “what comes after physics”; it was the phrase used by early students of Aristotle to refer to the contents of Aristotle’s treatise on what he himself called “first philosophy,” and was used as the title of this treatise by Andronicus of Rhodes, one of the first of Aristotle’s editors. Aristotle had distinguished two tasks for the philosopher: first, to investigate the nature and properties of what exists in the natural, or sensible, world, and second, to explore the characteristics of “Being as such” and to inquire into the character of “the substance that is free from movement,” or the most real of all things, the intelligible reality on which everything in the world of nature was thought to be causally dependent. The first constituted “second philosophy” and was carried out primarily in the Aristotelian treatise now known as the Physica; the second, which Aristotle had also referred to as “theology” (because [ Thuh Now Tranz FynyT Shen DeeiTTee ] was the unmoved mover in his system), is roughly the subject matter of his Metaphysica. Modern readers of Aristotle are inclined to take both the Physica and the Metaphysica as philosophical treatises; the distinction their titles suggest between an empirical and a conceptual inquiry has little foundation. Aristotle was not indifferent to factual material either in natural or in metaphysical philosophy, but equally he was not concerned in either case to frame theories for empirical testing. It seems clear, nevertheless, that if the two works had to be distinguished, the Physica would have to be described as the more empirical, just because it deals with things that are objects of the senses, what Aristotle himself called “sensible substance”; the subject matter of the Metaphysica, “that which is eternal, free of movement, and separately existent,” is on any account more [ Abstract ]. It is also evident that the connection marked in the original titles is a genuine one: the inquiries about nature carried out in the Physica lead on naturally to the more fundamental inquiries about Being as such that are taken up in the Metaphysica and indeed go along with the latter to make up a single philosophical discipline.

The background to Aristotle’s divisions is to be found in the thought of Plato, with whom Aristotle had many disagreements but whose basic ideas provided a framework within which much of his own thinking was conducted. Plato, following the early Greek philosopher Parmenides, who is known as the father of metaphysics, had sought to distinguish opinion, or belief, from knowledge and to assign distinct objects to each. Opinion, for Plato, was a form of apprehension that was shifting and unclear, similar to seeing things in a dream or only through their shadows; its objects were correspondingly unstable. Knowledge, by contrast, was wholly lucid; it carried its own guarantee against error, and the objects with which it was concerned were eternally what they were, and so were exempt from change and the deceptive power to appear to be what they were not. Plato called the objects of opinion phenomena, or appearances; he referred to the objects of knowledge as noumena (objects of the intelligence) or quite simply as realities. Much of the burden of his philosophical message was to call men’s attentions to these contrasts and to impress them with the necessity to turn away from concern with mere phenomena to the investigation of true reality. The education of the Platonic philosopher consisted precisely in effecting this transition: he was taught to recognize the contradictions involved in appearances and to fix his gaze on the realities that lay behind them, the realities that Plato himself called Forms, or Ideas. Philosophy for Plato was thus a call to recognize the existence and overwhelming importance of a set of higher realities that ordinary men—even those, like the Sophists of the time, who professed to be enlightened—entirely ignored. That there were such realities, or at least that there was a serious case for thinking that there were, was a fundamental tenet in the discipline that later became known as metaphysics. Conversely, much of the subsequent controversy about the very possibility of metaphysics has turned on the acceptability of this tenet and on whether, if it is rejected, some alternative foundation can be discovered on which the metaphysician can stand.

Tu Reed Thuh Reeemayndr Uhv Thuh Ahrtikkul, Klik:

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Paeej Naeemd " Mehtuhfizzikss ".


Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

First published Wed Dec 14, 2005

Defined narrowly, epistemology is the study of knowledge and justified belief. As the study of knowledge, epistemology is concerned with the following questions: What are the necessary and sufficient conditions of knowledge? What are its sources? What is its structure, and what are its limits? As the study of justified belief, epistemology aims to answer questions such as: How we are to understand the concept of justification? What makes justified beliefs justified? Is justification internal or external to one's own mind? Understood more broadly, epistemology is about issues having to do with the creation and dissemination of knowledge in particular areas of inquiry. This article will provide a systematic overview of the problems that the questions above raise and focus in some depth on issues relating to the structure and the limits of knowledge and justification.

1. What is Knowledge?

1.1 Knowledge as Justified True Belief

There are various kinds of knowledge: knowing how to do something (for example, how to ride a bicycle), knowing someone in person, and knowing a place or a city. Although such knowledge is of epistemological interest as well, we shall focus on knowledge of propositions and refer to such knowledge using the schema ‘S knows that p’, where ‘S’ stands for the subject who has knowledge and ‘p’ for the proposition that is known.[1] Our question will be: What are the necessary and sufficient conditions for S to know that p? We may distinguish, broadly, between a traditional and a non-traditional approach to answering this question. We shall refer to them as ‘TK’ and ‘NTK’.

According to TK, knowledge that p is, at least approximately, justified true belief (JTB). False propositions cannot be known. Therefore, knowledge requires truth. A proposition S doesn't even believe can't be a proposition that S knows. Therefore, knowledge requires belief. Finally, S's being correct in believing that p might merely be a matter of luck.[2] Therefore, knowledge requires a third element, traditionally identified as justification. Thus we arrive at a tripartite analysis of knowledge as JTB: S knows that p if and only if p is true and S is justified in believing that p. According to this analysis, the three conditions — truth, belief, and justification — are individually necessary and jointly sufficient for knowledge.[3]

Initially, we may say that the role of justification is to ensure that S's belief is not true merely because of luck. On that, TK and NTK are in agreement. They diverge, however, as soon as we proceed to be more specific about exactly how justification is to fulfill this role. According to TK, S's belief that p is true not merely because of luck when it is reasonable or rational, from S's own point of view, to take p to be true. According to evidentialism, what makes a belief justified in this sense is the possession of evidence. The basic idea is that a belief is justified to the degree it fits S's evidence. NTK, on the other hand, conceives of the role of justification differently. Its job is to ensure that S's belief has a high objective probability of truth and therefore, if true, is not true merely because of luck. One prominent idea is that this is accomplished if, and only if, a belief originates in reliable cognitive processes or faculties. This view is known as reliabilism.

Tu Reed Full Ahrtikkul, Klik:

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Paeej Naeemd " Eepistehmolluhjee ".


Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

Written By:

Jaakko J. Hintikka

Last Updated: May 21, 2019

Logic [ Iz ] the study of correct reasoning, especially as it involves the drawing of inferences…

Scope and basic concepts

An inference is a rule-governed step from one or more propositions, called premises, to a new proposition, usually called the conclusion. A rule of inference is said to be truth-preserving if the conclusion derived from the application of the rule is true whenever the premises are true. Inferences based on truth-preserving rules are called deductive, and the study of such inferences is known as deductive logic. An inference rule is said to be valid, or deductively valid, if it is necessarily truth-preserving. That is, in any conceivable case in which the premises are true, the conclusion yielded by the inference rule will also be true. Inferences based on valid inference rules are also said to be valid.

Logic in a narrow sense is equivalent to deductive logic. By definition, such reasoning cannot produce any information (in the form of a conclusion) that is not already contained in the premises. In a wider sense, which is close to ordinary usage, logic also includes the study of inferences that may produce conclusions that contain genuinely new information. Such inferences are called ampliative or inductive, and their formal study is known as inductive logic.

Tu Reed Thuh Reemaeendr Uhv This Ahrtikkul, Klik:

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Paeej Naeemd " Lojjik ".

Thow ShoodsT AT LeesT Wuhnss Reed: Wy Praktiss UhgehnsT PuT OwT Smahl T

EThikss Wrd Deskripshuhnz

Thŭ Nĕkst Tĕkst Wŭz Frŭm:

History and Etymology for ethic

Middle English ethik, from Middle French ethique, from Latin ethice, from Greek ēthikē, from ēthikos

Definition of ethic

1 ethics plural in form but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation

2a : a set of moral principles : a theory or system of moral values
—often used in plural but singular or plural in construction

b : ethics plural in form but singular or plural in construction : the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group
: a guiding philosophy

d : a consciousness of moral importance

3 : ethics plural : a set of moral issues or aspects (such as rightness)

Ethics vs Morals: Is there a difference?

Ethics and morals are both used in the plural and are often regarded as synonyms, but there is some distinction in how they are used.

Morals often describes one's particular values concerning what is right and what is wrong:

While ethics can refer broadly to moral principles, one often sees it applied to questions of correct behavior within a relatively narrow area of activity:

In addition, morals usually connotes an element of subjective preference, while ethics tends to suggest aspects of universal fairness and the question of whether or not an action is responsible:

Thow ShoodsT AT LeesT Wuhnss Reed: Wy Praktiss UhgehnsT PuT OwT Smahl T.

RighT to Self Defense

* Uhv RyTs Uhv PolliTTikss Uhv Fillossuhfee Main Branchez Uhv Fillossuhfee Izm
* Uhv Fillossuhfee Uhv Syenss Uhv Syenss Main Branch Kyndz
* Uhv Syehnss Baeesiks Kynd Typs KLasT By Syz Ohrdr Uhv Omnyon Izm.

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

The right to defend yourself is a corollary to the right to life. You must be able to protect what is yours when it is threatened. If you are being attacked the situation leaves the realm of morality - it leaves the realm of the everyday and becomes an emergency. In such an emergency, anything goes. That is the choice that your attacker has made, and he must live with his choice. The government must maintain the right to bear arms so that self defense will be possible.

Ethics Uhv Self Deefenss

Thŭ Nĕkst Tĕkst Wŭz Frŭm:

Self-defense as an ethical ideal

The pacifist dilemma is that non-violence leaves us, as individuals and communities, subject to oppression. One of the favoured examples against non-violence is that Ghandi’s ahimsa only worked because the British were not truly bad people. Ahimsa would never have succeeded against a more brutal regime like that of Nazi Germany. From a spiritual perspective, ahimsa is not about what ‘works’; arguing that non-violence ‘works’ or ‘doesn’t work’ presumes non-violence is about ‘working’, which it is not. Pacifists are generally resolved to embrace the bitter consequences of their philosophy, harbouring no illusions that their path can be both moral and utilitarian.

True pacifists deserve respect, but there is nonetheless a perfectly reasonable ethical distinction to be made between violence and self-defense. If my life and my health are good for me, then I have a right to enjoy these goods. Accordingly, no individual may have a countervailing right to harm these goods or take them away. Unjustified aggression is therefore ethically illegitimate, and the target of that aggression is right to defend against it, to protect their own life and the lives of others.

In defending against unjustified aggression, the target of our defensive actions is not the person, the aggressor, himself. Rather, our aim is the act of aggression, the violence. Hence a legitimate use of defensive force must be constrained by these ethical limits:

– it must be proportional to the threat.

A sense of threat is always somewhat subjective, but in ethics as in law, there is a ‘reasonable person test’ by which defensive actions will be judged. If someone shoves you at a party, it is not – all things being equal – proportional to hit him with a bar stool.

– any injury caused must be an unintended side-effect of self-defense.

In order to stop someone from hurting you or another innocent person, an appropriate use of defensive force may result in injuries to the aggressor. These injuries, though foreseeable, are considered ethically acceptable so long as one’s overriding intention is to defend, not to injure. In medical ethics this is known as the principle of double-effect, the recognition that good actions sometimes have foreseeable yet unintended negative effects.

Some people see self-defense as an excuse for violent retaliation, an opportunity to injure others with moral impunity. This is not true self-defense. If we do not abide by the principles of self-defense, we cannot walk away from a violent confrontation with a clear conscience.

At the same time there is something elegant about this view of self-defense: in merely defending the sphere of your own life and rights, it is the aggressor who bears moral responsibility for the harm and injuries that befall him as a result of his own violent intentions.

Ŏēkēdō Ĭz Wĭθ Ēŋgliʃ LĭsT Ŭv JŭsT Wŭn Ĉŏr Fōr Ēĉ Wŭn Spēĉ Săōnd

* Ănd Ahkeedoh Ĭz Wĭθ FohnehTik Eeng-Glish Speech Sownd Synz

Thŭ Nĕkst Tĕkst Wŭz Frŭm:

The word "aikido" is formed of three kanji:

– ai – joining, unifying, combining, fitting
– ki – spirit, energy, mood, morale
– dō – way, path

Thŭ Nĕkst Tĕkst Wŭz Frŭm:

What is Aikido?

Aikido is a powerful martial art developed throughout the mid 20th century by a Japanese named Morihei Ueshiba.

Aikido differs from most other martial arts in that the practitioner seeks to achieve self-defense without injury to attackers.

Furthermore, there are no competitions or tournaments in Aikido. Therefore, Aikido is non-competitive…

Instead of using potentially crippling kicks or punches, the Aikido student trains to apply various wristlocks, arm pins, or unbalancing throws to neutralize aggressors without injury.

Aikido is a 100% defensive martial art.

The so-called "attacks" taught in Aikido are merely for purposes of learning to defend against those attacks rather than for the purpose of injuring an opponent.

Thuh Mōst Kümmpăshŭnnĕt Străttĕjjē Uhv FyTeeng Iz ( Ŏ-ēēkēēdō = Ahkeedoh = [[[Aikidp]] ) Jĕntül Sĕlf Dēfĕnss ĂttĭTTūd Ănd Sĭstĕm Wĭĉ Myt Ĭnklūd Thŭ Tēchēngz:

1: Try Tū Nŏn-kŏz Sŭfrēēng Tu Ĕnnēē Ŭttăkr.

2: Prĕf Tū Flēē Ðăn Tū Fyt.

3: Prĕf Tū Dŏj Ðăn Tū Blŏk.

4: Prĕf Tū Blŏk Ðăn Tū ŬTTăk.

Thĭs Ĭz Thŭ Lăst Lyn Ŭv Tĕkst Ĭn Thŭ Păēj Năēmd Ahkeedoh.

Justiffyubul Hommissyd

Thuh NeksT TekST Wuhz Fruhm:

The concept of justifiable homicide in criminal law is a defense to culpable homicide (criminal or negligent homicide), and requires exculpatory evidence in the legal defense of justification. In most countries, a homicide is justified when there is sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was reasonable for the subject to believe that there was an imminent and otherwise unavoidable danger of death or grave bodily harm to the innocent. A homicide in this instance is blameless[1] and distinct from the less stringent criteria authorizing deadly force in stand your ground rulings.

Thuh NeksT TekST Wuhz Fruhm:

RCWs > Title 9A > Chapter 9A.16 > Section 9A.16.050

RCW 9A.16.050: Homicide—By other person—When justifiable.

Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:

(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or

(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.


Thuh NeksT TekST Wuhz Fruhm:

Felony Law and Legal Definition

Felonies are serious crimes, such as murder, rape, or burglary, punishable by a harsher sentence than that given for a misdemeanor… In general, a felony is an offense for which a sentence to a term of imprisonment in excess of one year is authorized.

Thĭs Ĭz Thŭ Lăst Lyn Ŭv Tĕkst Ĭn Thŭ Păēj Năēmd Fehluhnee.

Thĭs Ĭz Thŭ Lăst Lyn Ŭv Tĕkst Ĭn Thŭ Păēj Năēmd Justiffyubul Hommissyd.

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Paeej Naeemd " Right to Self Defense ".

Thiss Iz Thuh LasT Lyn Uhv TeksT In Thuh Payj Naymd " EThikss Wrd Deskripshuhnz ".


Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

What is Politics?

Politics is ethics applied to a group of people.

Why is this Impohrtant?

Politics tells you how a society must be set up and how one should act within a society. Except for hermits, this comes up a lot.

What is a rational Politics?

The requirement for a political system is that the individuals within that system are allowed to fully function according to their nature. If that's not the case, they will either rebel, as in Czarist Russia, or the system will eventually collapse, as in Communist Russia.

Reason is man's prime means of survival. A human being can not survive in an environment where reason is ineffective, and will thrive or starve to a degree in proportion to the effectiveness of reason. This means that the prime goal of a political system must be the preservation and enabling of the faculty of reason.

Reason does not function under coercion. A man can be forced to act at the point of a gun, but he can not be forced to think. Likewise, in an environment where might makes right, reason can not function because the fruits of rationality can not be enjoyed. Why plant crops and domesticate animals if any raider can come by and take them from you?

A moral political system must ban coercion. Or put another way, a moral political system must ban the initiation of force, since retaliatory force is both just and necessary. This means there must be some way to keep one person from killing, threatening, or robbing another. This is accomplished by bestowing on government a monopoly on retaliatory force and objectifying laws.



Right To Life

Right To Liberty

Right to Property

Right to the Pursuit of Happiness

Right to Free Speech

RyT Tu ReejekT Kom No Ohr Sinnuhnem And GeT ReespekTed

Right to Self Defense

Right to Bear Arms

Necessity of Government

Proper Role of Government

Laissez Faire Capitalism

Just Taxation

Non-theft sales Tax Iz needed tu pay police tu investigate And Prisons tu prevent And Court Personel tu prosecute and anti-violence psichiatric treatment hospitals tu treat criminal mentality that violates the innocent.

What should get investigated and prosecuted and treated?

1: Mrdr norm miss speld murder
2: Assault
3: sex violation rape
4: theft

See Ahlsoh:

Fohr Leengks Tu Thuh Nekst Toppikss See:


Rule of Law

Lah Syz Ohmz


Separation of Powers

Checks and Balances


Trial by Jury




Financing a Government

The Death Penalty

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Payj Naymd " Pollittikss ".

Baeest Fruhm


Ettimmolluhjee Uhv Asthettikss

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

aesthetics (n.)

1803, from aesthetic (adj.); also see suffix-ics.

Bayst Fruhm


Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

Etymology of Aesthetic…

Let’s start from the beginning, with the Ancient Greek word aisthanomai (αἰσθάνομαι), which means I learn or I understand or I perceive.

This word later spawned another word, aisthesis (αἴσθησις)—meaning perception.

Once more there was an evolution, and aisthesis evolved into the precursor of word aesthetic—the Ancient Greek word aisthetikos (αἰσθητικός), which means perception of the senses.

The word then evolved into the French word esthétique and the German word Ästhetik. These two are the cause of the birth of the word Aesthetic, in 1798.

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

aesthetic (n.)

ultimately from Greek aisthetikos "of or for perception by the senses, perceptive," of things, "perceptible," from aisthanesthai "to perceive (by the senses or by the mind), to feel" …

1798, from German Ästhetisch (mid-18c.) or French esthétique (which is from German)…

Popularized in English by translations of Kant and used originally in the classically correct sense "science which treats of the conditions of sensuous perception"…

As an adjective by 1798 "of or pertaining to sensual perception;"

Kant had tried to reclaim the word after Alexander Baumgarten had taken it in German to mean "criticism of taste" (1750s)… Baumgarten's sense attained popularity in English c. 1830s (despite scholarly resistance) and freed the word from philosophy…

1821 as "of or pertaining to appreciation of the beautiful." …

Walter Pater used it (1868) to describe the late 19c. movement that advocated "art for art's sake," which further blurred the sense. [Whewell had proposed callesthetics for "the science of the perception of the beautiful."]

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Payj Naymd " Asthettik ".

Suhfiks Ikss

Ehtimmolluhjee Uhv Suhfiks Ikss

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:


in the names of sciences or disciplines (acoustics, aerobics, economics, etc.), a 16c.

revival of the classical custom of using the neuter plural of adjectives with Greek -ikos "pertaining to" (see -ic) to mean "matters relevant to" and also as the titles of treatises about them.

Subject matters that acquired their English names before c. 1500, however, tend to be singular in form (arithmetic, logic, magic, music, rhetoric). The grammatical number of words in -ics (mathematics is/mathematics are) is a confused question.

Dikshuhnehree Deskripshuhnz Uhv Suhfiks Ikss

Thuh NekST TekST Wuhz Fruhm:

-ics noun suffix, plural in form but singular or plural in construction

[ Dehskripshuhnz ] of -ics

1 : study : knowledge : skill : practice

  • linguistics electronics

2 : characteristic actions or activities

  • acrobatics

3 : characteristic qualities, operations, or phenomena

  • mechanics

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Payj Naymd " Suhfiks Ikss ".

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

Difference Between Aesthetics and Esthetics

January 15, 2012 Posted by Olivia

Aesthetics vs Esthetics

Aesthetics is often confused with esthetics, which has almost identical meaning and used in some parts of the world. Whenever a critical appraisal of objects in the realm of art, culture and nature is done, words like aesthetics and esthetics come into play…


Aesthetics is a word that is commonly used to describe the outer appearance of an object, person, or an idea. It is talked about the sense of beauty and taste… If there is something that is artistic or looks appealing to our senses, we are quick to use the word aesthetic that concerns itself with outer beauty or appearance, and appreciates the beauty of an object or the taste of a person.

Aesthetics is also a field of philosophy that is related with a sense of beauty, especially appreciation of beauty in nature and art. The word has been derived from a Greek word Aisthetikos, which means ‘sensory’ or ‘sensitive.’ The word is used to describe a sense of beauty by most of the Europeans and the entire commonwealth.


Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

Difference Between Aesthetics and Esthetics

January 15, 2012 Posted by Olivia


In American countries, the spelling of aesthetics has been changed in much the same way as has been done for words like color, especially words that contain ae and oe in British English. Thus, aesthetic becomes esthetic that makes more sense for the Americans…

Esthetics is also a word specifically used for the cosmetic industry that is devoted to beauty and appreciation of human beauty. All beauty treatments, which work to make women more appealing and beautiful, classify under esthetics. For example, waxing, shaping of eyebrow, aromatherapy, facial treatments and plastic surgery to improve upon what one has got since birth, all classify under esthetics.

Esthetics Myt Get Deskrybd Az Sumtymz Yuuzd Interchaynjuhblee With Aesthetics.

Thoh Esthetics Iz Nohrm Yuuzd In Kozmehtiks Espeshullee Tu Reefr Tu Admyreeng And Enhanseeng Human Beeuutee.

Thuss, Asthettikss Mezhrz Thuh Beeuutee Uhv Ehnee Theeng And 1'z Senss Uhv Tayst

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Payj Naymd " Esthetics ".

Thiss Iz Thuh Last Lyn Uhv Tekst In Thuh Payj Naymd " Asthettikss ".

Fohrmul Syenss

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Kwohted Durreeng 1 June 2019 Fruhm:

Formal Science

Formal sciences are formal language disciplines concerned with formal systems

The formal sciences are language tools concerned with characterizing abstract structures described by symbolic systems.

The formal sciences aid the natural and social sciences by providing information about the structures the latter use to describe the world, and what inferences may be made about them.

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Kwohted Durreeng 1 June 2019 Fruhm:

Formal Systems

Formal Systems play an important role in computer science, linguisitics, and logic. What are they? …

A formal system consists of a language over some alphabet of symbols together with (axioms and inference rules) that distinguish some of the strings in the language as theorems…

Components of a Formal System

A formal system has the following components:

  • A finite alphabet of symbols. The alphabet must be finite because if it were not, each symbol could stand for any thought and so what kind of a model would that be? There would be no need to "process" anything. Furthermore, we are finite beings and let's keep in mind what we are trying to model.
  • A syntax that defines which strings of symbol are in the language of our formal system.
  • A decidable set of axioms and a finite set of rules from which the set of theorems of the system is generated. The rules must take a finite number of steps to apply.

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

Each formal system uses primitive symbols (which collectively form an alphabet) to finitely construct a formal language from a set of axioms through inferential rules of formation.

The system thus consists of valid formulas built up through finite combinations of the primitive symbols—combinations that are formed from the axioms in accordance with the stated rules.[3]

More formally, this can be expressed as the following:

1: A finite set of symbols, known as the alphabet, which concatenate formulas, so that a formula is just a finite string of symbols taken from the alphabet.
2: A grammar consisting of rules to form formulas from simpler formulas. A formula is said to be well-formed if it can be formed using the rules of the formal grammar. It is often required that there be a decision procedure for deciding whether a formula is well-formed.
3: A set of axioms, or axiom schemata, consisting of well-formed formulas.
4: A set of inference rules. A well-formed formula that can be inferred from the axioms is known as a theorem of the formal system.

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

Each formal system has a formal language composed of primitive symbols acted on by certain rules of formation (statements concerning the symbols, functions, and sentences allowable in the system) and developed by inference from a set of axioms. The system thus consists of any number of formulas built up through finite combinations of the primitive symbols—combinations that are formed from the axioms in accordance with the stated rules….

From the primitive symbols, certain formulas are defined as well formed, some of which are listed as axioms; and rules are stated for inferring one formula as a conclusion from one or more other formulas taken as premises.

A theorem within such a system is a formula capable of proof through a finite sequence of well-formed formulas, each of which either is an axiom or is inferred from earlier formulas.

A formal system that is treated apart from intended interpretation is a mathematical construct and is more properly called logical calculus; this kind of formulation deals rather with validity and satisfiability than with truth or falsity, which are at the root of formal systems.

In general, then, a formal system provides an ideal language by means of which to abstract and analyze the deductive structure of thought apart from specific meanings. Together with the concept of a model, such systems have formed the basis for a rapidly expanding inquiry into the foundations of mathematics and of other deductive sciences and have even been used to a limited extent in analyzing the empirical sciences.

Included page "fohrmul-syenss-branch-kyndz" does not exist (create it now)

Thuh Nekst Tekst Wuhz Fruhm:

1 Branches of formal science
1.1 Logic
1.2 Mathematics
1.3 Statistics
1.4 Systems science
1.5 Computer science

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License