Deem: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "Deem is of a piece with equivalent, and “an amount equal to”, and across a chasm from that which amends, supplements or modifies It is to take Theseus' ship..." Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[ | {{g}}To [[deem]] is the anti-[[Bob Cunis|Cunis]]; it is to treat one thing ''as'' the other. It is of a piece with the [[equivalent]] the asset you return under a [[stock loan]] that is, but simultaneously is not, the same as the one you borrowed, the fungible security that will form part opf teh and “[[an amount equal to]] the amount that you borrowed”, and across a deep chasm from all that which [[amend]]s, [[supplement]]s or modifies. Deep in the [[abyss]] below, flows the great river of pedantry, which through centuries has carved these magnificent cliffs and canyons. | ||
It is to take | For where to “[[amend]]” is to assert the identity over a period of time — the continued legal existence, even — of something that is in some way ''[[Change|changed]]'', to [[deem]] is to assert the momentary ''non''-identity of something that, in every way, has not. It is to take Theseus’ ship to a whole other realm of [[Ontology|ontological]] [[redundancy]]. | ||
This essential subjunctivity - the hypothetical state of being one would be in were it not for the inconvenient state one actually ''is'' in, is a fundamental part of the [[legal eagle]]’s torturous psyche. | |||
{{sa}} | |||
*[[Amend]] | |||
*[[Fungible]] | |||
*[[]Bob Cunis]] | |||
Revision as of 10:45, 20 July 2020
|
To deem is the anti-Cunis; it is to treat one thing as the other. It is of a piece with the equivalent the asset you return under a stock loan that is, but simultaneously is not, the same as the one you borrowed, the fungible security that will form part opf teh and “an amount equal to the amount that you borrowed”, and across a deep chasm from all that which amends, supplements or modifies. Deep in the abyss below, flows the great river of pedantry, which through centuries has carved these magnificent cliffs and canyons.
For where to “amend” is to assert the identity over a period of time — the continued legal existence, even — of something that is in some way changed, to deem is to assert the momentary non-identity of something that, in every way, has not. It is to take Theseus’ ship to a whole other realm of ontological redundancy.
This essential subjunctivity - the hypothetical state of being one would be in were it not for the inconvenient state one actually is in, is a fundamental part of the legal eagle’s torturous psyche.