Philosophical Cookies 1.01


	Philosophical Hacking, how is such a connection possible. Why here in
Millenium Hacking?
	Usually in order to escape the difficulty of an explanation or to
prove the simplicity of a demonstration, it is said that it's no philosophy,
it's simple and convenient.
	We start from the hypothesis that there IS PHILOSOPHY here and that
a philosophical system can be developed as well.
	"Philosophical cookies" the philosophy that follows every
informational phenomenon and which could eventually be the basis of a
philosophical system of the new communication medium - the Internet.
	In this cookie we shall deal with the relationship exception-rule.
	We propose a pentadic scheme of the relationship exception-rule:
1. Exception which confirms the rule.
2. Exception which disproves the rule.
3. Exception as fatality for the rule.
4. Exception as example of another rule we don't know.
5. The rule which disproves the rule.

1) the ordinary case "exception which confirms the rule" and which supposes
that for example certain changes, fluctuations in a system do not have such
a great contribution to change the principles that lie at the basis of its
definition.
2) the exception that disproves the rule is in general an artificial case in
which the rule is false by intention being determined by the obvious truth
of the exception - the case of mathematical induction.
3) the exception as a fatality for the rule. The exception is here
unexpected, unwished for and can produce serious disturbance to the rule.
For example the tyre explosion of a car on the highway; an engine on fire in
a flying plane, and what interests us - the informatic system striving for
perfection and the ordinary bug showing up in its use.
	Usually, the exception in this case is not brought about, it lies
within the rule and shows up spontaneously at certain determinations of the
rule.
	The bug isn't generally created in a system, it is with that system
and acts under certain sometimes accidental conditions.
	In this case we may say that the only ones who participate in
improving a rule are hackers because they find and their mission is to seek
leakages in the system. How many accidents wouldn't have happened if aviation
had had a real "current" of fatality seekers?
4) A case that appears in the natural sciences is Exception as an example of
a rule we do not know yet. An example from the history of physics is the dis
covery of the volume in nuclear physics, i.e. in a certain nuclear reaction
there would always show up an additional feature that couldn't
be explained by the familiar rule. Generally, this relationship
exception-rule is exploited by geniusses of natural sciences and leads
implicitly to the development of science by the discovery of new rules.
5) An unfortunate case is the "rule that disproves the rule", i.e. the rule
applied becomes the exception which disproves the statement of the rule. It
is generally the case of revolutions in history and of totalitarian
governments. Communism which by its statement sets as its aim the forced
welfare of humanity is disproved by terrorism, its practical application that
distroys mankind.


Control-Z (Control_Z12@hotmail.com)

thanx to Ann