The phrase 'A Law Of Nature' is probably rarer in modern scientific writing than was the case some generation ago. This is partly due to very natural objection to the use of word 'Law' in two different senses. Human societies have laws. I'm primitive society there is no distinction between law and custom. Some things are done others are not. This regarded as a part the of nature of things and generally as an unalterable. If custom change, the change too slow to be observed. Later on kings and prophets could promulgate in laws, but there was no way of revoking old ones. The Greek democracies made the great and revolutionary discovery that a committee could concisely make new laws and repale old ones. So far human law is something which is valid only over a certain number of peoples for a certain period of time. Law of nature, however, are not commands but statements of facts. Other use of the same word is unfortunate.
Write the summary of the above passage on your own words.
Answers
Answer:
ask to conduct interview of a famous scintist who is in your city and frame 8 to 10 interview question with help of the following points 1 early life and education
Answer:
THE PHRASE 'A law Of Nature' is probably rarer in modern scientific writing than was the case some generations ago. This is partly due to a very natural objection to the use of the word 'law' in two different senses. Human societies have laws. In primitive societies there is no distinction between law and custom. Some things are done, others are not. This is regarded as part of the nature of things, and generally as an unalterable fact. If customs change, the change is too slow to be observed. Later on kings and prophets could promulgate new laws, but there was no way of revoking old ones. Thus the unfortunate Jews, if orthodox, stagger under a burden of law which was increased over thousands of years by ingenious rabbis. The Greek democracies made the great and revolutionary discovery that a community could consciously make new laws and
repeal old ones. So for us a human law is something which is valid only over a certain number of people for a certain period of time.
Some people also believe in Divine laws which hold for all men everywhere. The curious can consult a report, Kindred and Affinity as Impediments to Marriage (SPCK), by Anglican bishops and others who have tried to solve the fascinating problem of where human law ends and Divine law begins as regards marriage with relatives. God forbids you to marry your sister, it appears, but it is not so sure whether it is God or man who says you may not marry your niece. So many gods have issued so many different laws in the past that a study of history makes the theory of Divine law a little ridiculous. Just the same applies to the Stoic conception of a natural law incumbent
on all men as men. Even if such laws existed they would not be eternal, for man has evolved and will evolve. Actually they turn out merely to hold for a particular stage of social and economic development.
Laws of Nature, however, are not commands but statements of fact. The use of the same word is unfortunate. It would be better to speak of uniformities of Nature. This would do away with the elementary fallacy that a law implies a law-giver. Incidentally, it might just as well imply a parliament or soviet of atoms. But the difference between the two uses of the word is fundamental. If a piece of matter does not obey a law of Nature it is not punished. On the contrary, we say that the law has been incorrectly stated. It is quite probable that every law of Nature so far stated has been stated incorrectly. Certainly many of them have. Nevertheless, these inaccurately stated laws are of immense practical and theoretical value.
please drop some ❤️❤️❤️
Explanation:
please f-o-l-l-o-w m-e bro please