Philosophy Now Forum

Can anyone prove that law exists? Can you logically prove that the document supposed to be the "United States Consitution" really is the United States Consitution? If so, how so?

Can you prove that "People" living in each State in the "United States" have rights and laws of any kind? Of course, like the "United States Consitituion" I would expect "People" to logically explain how a State's law binding document is what "People" say it is and that it is legally binding.

If nobody can prove it...then how do we know that any "Person" ever committed a crime if we cannot prove what crime is legally?

Are we ruling with our beliefs?

Please join the following discussion on The Law.com...I could use the help intellectuals.

https://www.thelaw.com/threads/free-all ... rds.80444/

One pro bono gig is enough.

Mattchew83 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 24, 2022 4:15 pm Can anyone prove that law exists? Can you logically prove that the document supposed to be the "United States Consitution" really is the United States Consitution? If so, how so?

Can you prove that "People" living in each State in the "United States" have rights and laws of any kind? Of course, like the "United States Consitituion" I would expect "People" to logically explain how a State's law binding document is what "People" say it is and that it is legally binding.

If nobody can prove it...then how do we know that any "Person" ever committed a crime if we cannot prove what crime is legally?

Are we ruling with our beliefs?

Please join the following discussion on The Law.com...I could use the help intellectuals.

https://www.thelaw.com/threads/free-all ... rds.80444/

In reading your query, I was reminded of a paradigm:


The science of no location merit feeds into the safety of science from Wikipedia activity being a non-harmonious reality.

The first part - science of no location merit - means that all locations are corrupt philosophy, due to symmetry. The second part, means that ultimately innocence is a cynical reality - the African-British teenager, that I saw in town about 10 years ago, breathing in an abrupt way, which got me to think about this paradigm could just as much be a reflection of the cynicism, but in what regard?



The isolated physics of the breathing, outside the Starbucks cafe in Wolverhampton (now a different type of store), is innocent, but, the philosophical ownership of the physics is able to be stained.


This amounts to freeing all prisoners argument being correct, because of the supremacy of just physics over philosophy.