The tribunal of hypocrites - Welcome to the free archives of the philosopher. Please scroll down for original content:

Finally, it must be mentioned, that this body of work does not address the omnipresent legal strange effect-issues arising from living in global overflow, concerning stereotyping intensified proportionally with uncertainty, and the problem of weighing judgement against forgiveness between fully entangled global citizens. When no one is excluded from global entanglement, the disappearance of the difference between effect and (intentional) action undermines our ability to make classical morally sustainable decisions, to decide when to forgive and when to judge and how to punish.

On page 13 in “Spørg” (“Ask”) by Thomas Heide, a brief **preliminary and experimental attempt** to draft the foundation for the most basic human right in a society recognising experience as a function of change and standstill is brought fourth: Since the only property or characteristic shared by all humans is the ability to experience change as standstill, all people should be granted the right and possibility to ask and answer the question “what am I as a relationship between change (that, which is not itself) and standstill (that, which is itself)?” Click text to go to “Spørg”

In global overflow we are all involved in all actions, no matter how far away the action is from our physical bodies and our identified intentions. Omnipresent global entanglement is the source of this strange effect. It is hence of the utmost importance that students of this website begin searching for a theoretical foundation for law-making in a world where it is impossible to designate blame and assign guilt or forgive due to the multiplicity and severity of the crimes in which we all, as a strange effect of global overflow, participate throughout the entirety of our lives. In an inclusive universe where the relationship between cause and effect remains undecided, we are all responsible for all crimes committed. We are, by definition and in a legal sense, all criminals and as such equal members of a tribunal of hypocrites. So: How do we build a system of laws that does not rely on the variable “intention” in conjunction with the variable “action” without invoking a general eternal amnesty for all (in the reversed interpretation global overflow removes responsibility from everyone)? Working with the strange legal consequences of global overflow does not exclude the urgent need to challenge social, cultural, environmental and economic injustice here and now in a 1-1 causal fashion, but simply adds the unavoidable and necessary long term perspective to these struggles as the universe is catapulted from determinism into probability-driven uncertainty.