2013|10|11|12|
2014|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2015|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2016|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2017|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2018|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2019|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2020|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2021|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2022|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2023|01|02|03|04|05|06|07|08|09|10|11|12|
2024|01|02|03|04|05|

2016-06-01 I come to think that this is also almost "non-existing death". [長年日記]

(Continuation from yesterday)

Using not only gastric camera at this time, but also general anesthetic,

"Exchanging consciousness by unconsciousness during zero time"

Even if we can sat aside "getting consciousness again"

(I know that some people blame me for escaping from the condition)

I come to think that this is also almost "non-existing death".

-----

Before arguing this my logic. I want to refuse flatly the "mortuary philosophy" of general manager of extermination camp that I had already talked the other day.

(1)Even if he try to cover a concept of death in whitewash subjectively, it makes clear that an objective death exists there.

(2)Nobody can invade "right to live one's life tomorrow" without reasons enforcedly.

To tell you the truth, the above (2) is going to right and wrong of death penalty,

I want to run away from this argument.

-----

Without running, I have to start the followings.

For example,

According to extermination camp,

Eichmann's apologies were

"The genocide was done on the domestic law of German at that time."

"What I did is to keep my affairs in order"

I have no clear logic to prove his arguments wrong now.

For example,

"If any administrative procedure and laws are under the right to live tomorrow, we should reject any death penalty."

I have no clear logic to reject the argue of death-penalty opponent.

For example,

I know there is an effective counter-argument against the above.

"Any nation is a agent to avenge a grievance"

However,

If this logic is permitted, the foundation of the rule of law is going to be denied (laws do not allow any dual and retaliation),

I have no power to make the reasoning about the paradox.

In conclusion, I want to run away from this issue with saying "I don't know what is what".

(To be continued)