PROSECUTORIAL LAW is ONTOLOGICALLY UNINTELLIGIBLE, HENCE is DEFEASIBLE on the POSITIVIST THEORETICAL PLANE of JURISPRUDENTIAL ILLUSION.

[Bosco]

  

Given that police now, worldwide,  continually murder citizens for alleged infractions, it becomes requisite to reveal the unintelligibility of the notion that law is a determinative  of police/prosecutorial/judicial/legislative conduct. 

 

The following is written for the sake of advancing a sane ilk of existential ontological reasoning, regarding the mode of origination of a human act, completely opposed to a mistaken, overzealous, absolutism of homicidal law enforcement. Law stupidly punishes/injures persons for not being determined to forbear action by law, for, all the while, language of given law does not, cannot, determine persons either to action or inaction.

 

The blindly mistaken, tacit, universal presupposition that published language of law is determinative of human conduct, is defeasible in the light of Sartre’s description of the human ontologicaI modus operandi of the origin of an act:

 

Whatever each and every one of us is thinking at this instant, that thought involves an intention to bring to pass what is not yet accomplished.

We humans are a perpetual engagement in negation/nothing/non-being constituting our absent, lacking, intended future action. I am constantly, ineluctably, making, i.e., nihilating, the nothing which constitutes my prefigured intended future act(s).

All human acts originate within a milieu of nothingness, which is precisely the nihilative operation of intentional consciousness determining itself to act; hence, the 1674 dictum declaring “determinatio negatio est”, i.e., “determination is negation”, authored by Baruch Spinoza (1634 -1677), which  George Wilhelm Hegel ( 1770-1831), restated as “Omnis determinatio est negatio.”, i.e., “All determination is negation.”.

 

Jean Paul Sartre, (1901-1980), via employment of Hegel’s restatement of Spinoza’s dictum, explains that what already exists in the world does not, cannot, participate in the originative upsurge of a human act, thus:

” No factual state whatever it may be (the political and economic structure of society, the psychological “state,” etc.) is capable by itself of motivating any act whatsoever. For an act is a projection of the for-itself toward what is not, and what is can in no way determine by itself what is not.” (Sartre,J.P., Chapter Four, “Freedom”). And, further: “But if human reality is action, this means evidently that its determination to action is itself action. If we reject this principle, and if we admit that human reality can be determined to action by a prior state of the world or itself, this amounts to putting a given at the beginning of the series. Then these acts disappear as acts in order to give place to a series of movements...The existence of the act implies its autonomy...Furthermore, if the act is not pure motion, it must be defined by an intention. No matter how this intention is considered, it can be only a surpassing of the given toward a result to be attained. This given, in fact, since it is pure presence, can not get out of itself. Precisely because it is, it is fully and solely what it is. Therefore it can not provide the reason for a phenomenon which derives all its meaning from a result to be attained; that is, from a non-existent…This intention, which is the fundamental structure of human reality, can in no case be explained by a given, not even if it is presented as an emanation from a given.” (Sartre, J. P., p.nn[ Chapter Four, “Freedom”]).”

 

Human conduct originates ex nihilo and, never on the basis of a given factual state of affairs, extant law being the cardinal factual state of affairs to which we now mistakenly, delusionally, ascribe a determinative efficacy within our sociosphere.

 

Human beings are ontologically barred from being determined to action or inaction by given states of affairs.

 

Only the ''double nihilation'' is the negation, i.e., the negative process, the means, whereby human action originates/upsurges.

 

To ''nihilate'' is to make nothing. Within the double nihilation are contained two negative moments wherein nothing is made such that on the one hand, the present is made nothing by transcending it toward the intended project, and, the intended project, as an absent, lacking, unaccomplished objective, constitutes the other negative moment which is precisely the moment wherein consciousness makes the nothing which is the not yet achieved objective of the intended project.

 

Human existential absurdity designates givens as cause/motive/determinant of one’s action, while, in reality, human action exclusively originates ex nihilo, via consciousnesses’ nihilative capacity. (Sartre, J.P., “Being and Nothingness”, Part Four).

 

Jurisprudential illusion is an instance of human existential absurdity, wherein the illusion consists in blindly, mistakenly, presupposing given language of law to be determinative of human action and inaction; --- jurisprudential illusion is the ontologically unintelligible misconception of mistakenly presupposing given language of law determines one’s acts, and/or, that one determines one’s self to act, or forbear action, by given law.

[Chief Keef]

[CleanHands]

 

[TheMidnightOil]

I assume this post would make sense after three years of legal education and half a bag of hallucinogenic mushrooms.

[Hegdis]

Kids, this is what results when your vocabulary outstrips your comprehension. 
 

Nothing coherent emerges.