I 66
Command/Relation/Brackets/Prior: we can eliminate the misconception that a command is a relation between a commanding person and something that is commanded through the right brackets.
Instead of
"X commands us/to close the door"
""X commands us to/"door close""
where "commands us to" is not a two-digit predicate, but rather an operator which forms a sentence from a name on one side, and an imperative sentence on the other.
>
Operators, >
Predicates.
I 66
Imperatives/Prior: cannot be treated like indicatives.
>
Sentences, >
Statements.
I 69
Command/Prior: E.g. "There are commands that have never been voiced and will never be voiced".
Command/Prior: "you schould have closed the door before": the past tense does not relate to the content, absurd.
"I closed the door before...".
Negation of a command/Prior: two options:
a) "!not-p": "see to it that p does not happen"
b) "not(!p) "something like: "you need not worry about it".
E.g. "Do something" can have two forms:
a) "for some p, see to it that p"
b) "see to it that (for some p, p)"
that is probably not equivalent!
E.g. "Make sure that 2 + 2 = 4" is absurd, because commands always serve to bring about facts that do not exist yet.
>
Facts.
Therefore, an instruction cannot be made true like a fact, namely by something that had been the case earlier. - Therefore, objectivity of ethics compromised.
>
Truthmakers, >
Objectivity, >
Ethics.
