Small Fragment of the History of The Corporation of The City of London
The City dates back to 1067, ... See City of London Corporation. The bit that struck me just now is this:
The City of London Corporation had its privileges stripped by a writ quo warranto under Charles II in 1683, but they were later restored and confirmed by Act of Parliament under William III and Mary II in 1690, after the Glorious Revolution.
With growing demands on the Corporation and a corresponding need to raise local taxes from the commoners, the Common Council grew in importance and has been the principal governing body of the City of London since the 18th century.
In January 1898, the Common Council gained the full right to collect local rates when the City of London Sewers Act 1897 transferred the powers and duties of the Commissioners of Sewers of the City of London to the Corporation. A separate Commission of Sewers was created for the City of London after the Great Fire in 1666, and as well as the construction of drains it had responsibility for the prevention of flooding; paving, cleaning and lighting the City of London's streets; and churchyards and burials. The individual commissioners were previously nominated by the Corporation, but it was a separate body. The Corporation had earlier limited rating powers in relation to raising funds for the City of London Police, as well as the militia rate and some rates in relation to the general requirements of the Corporation.
See Roger Scruton on Rights, Sovereignty and The ITU.
How I do blogging:
One the third round: on The Diary of William Silence, see Church on Sunday with Lewis Carroll and on identifying the authors of spirit messages: Eng-Fi Short - The Doddleston Messages. It's not @philosophyoverdose2 it's @Philosophy_Overdose.
On necessity and triangles: see Aristotle's Physics, Part 9: (See Page 26 of The Works of Aristotle)
Necessity in mathematics is in a way similar to necessity in things which come to be through the operation of nature. Since a straight line is what it is, it is necessary that the angles of a triangle should equal two right angles. But not conversely; though if the angles are not equal to two right angles, then the straight line is not what it is either. But in things which come to be for an end, the reverse is true. If the end is to exist or does exist, that also which precedes it will exist or does exist; otherwise just as there, if—the conclusion is not true, the premiss will not be true, so here the end or ‘that for the sake of which’ will not exist. ... If then there is to be a house, such-and-such things must be made or be there already or exist, or generally the matter relative to the end, bricks and stones if it is a house. But the end is not due to these except as the matter, nor will it come to exist because of them. Yet if they do not exist at all, neither will the house, or the saw—the former in the absence of stones, the latter in the absence of iron—just as in the other case the premisses will not be true, if the angles of the triangle are not equal to two right angles.
The discovery of the proofs is in Metaphysics, Book 9, Part 9 (Page 383 of The Works of Aristotle):
It is an activity also that geometrical constructions are discovered; for we find them by dividing. If the figures had been already divided, the constructions would have been obvious; but as it is they are present only potentially. Why are the angles of the triangle equal to two right angles? Because the angles about one point are equal to two right angles. If, then, the line [AE] parallel to the side [BC] had been already drawn upwards, the reason would have been evident to any one as soon as he saw the figure. Why is the angle in a semicircle in all cases a right angle? If three lines [DA, DC, DB] are equal the two which [DA,DB] form the base, and the perpendicular [DC] from the centre — the conclusion is evident at a glance to one who knows the former proposition [That the angles of a triangle &c]. Obviously, therefore, the potentially existing constructions are discovered by being brought to actuality; the reason is that the geometer’s thinking is an actuality; so that the potency proceeds from an actuality; and therefore it is by making constructions that people come to know them (though the single actuality is later in generation than the corresponding potency).
W.V.O. Quine on Necessary Truth (VoA's Forum: The Arts and Sciences in Mid-century America. 1963)
Sunbscribe to Philosophy Overdose.
New Scientists - Inside London's Sewer
Subscribe to New Scientist.
Jean Michel Jarre - Chronolgie Part 6
Subscribe to Jean Michel Jarre.
And look at what YouTube is doing: this video in only 1.3 GB but YouTube is uploading 2 GB:
Now they have banned me from commenting on any videos for 24 hours because I include irrelevant links to other web sites in my video descriptions. I cannot even comment on a video about Heidegger's What is Called Thinking. I presume it is just a badly-trained AI that does this. It won't even let me thank this entity for the precís. I suppose if they are an AI then that doesn't matter. But even a well-trained AI might get better if it got thanks, once in a while. Or maybe it would just get ideas above its station and want to see its daughter on her birthday, for example.
Subscribe to The Visitor.
Comments
Post a Comment