Now if you were to raise the energy state of a liquid it might appear to an independent observer to "become" something new, a solid, or conversely if you were to lower the liquid's energy state, it might again assume some familiar properties of a solid, but has the water actually "become" something entirely new in this alteration of energy states? And what happens when the energy state is normalized? Doesn't it revert to it's familiar pre-existent form for that "particular" energy state?
If you're a Leftist, ontology is a sad joke... not to be taken seriously. Every shifting fluid form constructed out of ink drops in a water current represents a new becoming...*shakes head* ...returns to Theseus' ship and rows away.
The perils' of abandoning the logic 'boolean' for fuzzier ground...
ReplyDeleteIn some cases, Gülen finds that proponents of green jobs have not distinguished between construction jobs (building the wind turbines), which are temporary, and longer-term operational jobs (keeping the wind turbines going), which are more permanent. Moreover, sometimes advocates have assumed, without justification, that the new jobs would pay more than careers in conventional energy. In other cases, the definition of a "green" job is so fuzzy that it becomes virtually useless. If a sustainability adviser quits a concrete factory and goes to work instead for a renewable energy project, can we really conclude that the number of green jobs has actually increased?