Dilbert’s programme: Difference between revisions

Dilbert’s programme (view source)

Revision as of 17:17, 28 September 2021

67 bytes added , 28 September 2021

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,892

edits

Revision as of 17:15, 28 September 2021 (view source) Amwelladmin (talk \| contribs) No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 17:17, 28 September 2021 (view source) Amwelladmin (talk \| contribs) No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{a\|myth\|}}Dilbert’s programme is a legal theory formulated by pioneering German jurist [[Havid Dilbert]]<ref>The programme and its progenitor owe nothing to Scott Adams and everything to [[William Archibald Spooner]], by the way.</ref> in the early part of the 19th century. Dilbert proposed it as a solution to an emerging foundational crisis in [[pedantry]], as various attempts to codify the fundamental essence of punctiliousness had foundered, beset by [[paradox]] and inconsistency. Dilbert proposed to ground all existing theories of quibblery to a finite, complete set of [[definitions]] and legal propositions, and provide a proof that these fundaments of captiousness were consistent.		{{a\|myth\|<br>{{subtable\|<big><big><big>'''Đn ⇔ đn'''</big></big></big>}}}}Dilbert’s programme is a legal theory formulated by pioneering German jurist [[Havid Dilbert]]<ref>The programme and its progenitor owe nothing to Scott Adams and everything to [[William Archibald Spooner]], by the way.</ref> in the early part of the 19th century. Dilbert proposed it as a solution to an emerging foundational crisis in [[pedantry]], as various attempts to codify the fundamental essence of punctiliousness had foundered, beset by [[paradox]] and inconsistency. Dilbert proposed to ground all existing theories of quibblery to a finite, complete set of [[definitions]] and legal propositions, and provide a proof that these fundaments of captiousness were consistent.

	The “Dilbert programme”, as it become known, thus eschews the undefined use of any expression, however banal or self-evident, in any [[legal instrument]], on the grounds that such uncertainty opens the way to an unstable state of [[Cardozo indeterminacy]].		The “Dilbert programme”, as it become known, thus eschews the undefined use of any expression, however banal or self-evident, in any [[legal instrument]], on the grounds that such uncertainty opens the way to an unstable state of [[Cardozo indeterminacy]].