Introduction to Transformative Logic
In this section of Division II of the Critique of Pure Religion, the following is the logical system of combining logic and emotion as it has never been attempted before in the history of philosophy and religion. And, with the combining of logic and emotions there comes the impossible task of transforming concepts of subject(s) and/or object(s) in a logical argument, but there are certain maxims and rules for the construction for the original logical system of the Critique of Pure Religion. The following are qualities and attributes of the logical system - long structured sentences that are prolific in nature, the use of one emotion (perferably the advanced emotions as they contain abstractions of logic) for the structure of the syllogism, a method of construction by prior philosophical systems, the transformation of fixed and concrete ideas - and should be followed in order for the possibility of transforming change in a subject and/or object. The transformation of something fixed and concrete, either philosophical or practical, is not an easy task for the student and/or teacher in and of Religious Studies, as well as those who wish to engage in advancing philosophical or practical canons and doctrines of religion, regardless, if it is any religion.
But, in the field of religion this conceptual and logical system can be utilized to transform canons and doctrines in order to benefit the human race in omni-benevolent practices and intentions for the pure soul who wishes to understand pure religion. It should not be used to promote malevolent canons and doctrines of self-seeking individuals as this is not the intend of this website and religious philosophy. And, to the benevolent religious student and/or teacher of Religious Studies comes the moral duty of the religious imperative to promote happiness and peace of this logical religious system to aide the human race. This religious logical system deals with subject of possiblities, and the combination of what is concrete and what is possible.
Conceptual Mathmetical Formula of Transformative Logic
A (+) or (*) B = C
A=A (Concrete Subject or Object)
B=B (Subject or Object Possiblities)
C = A = B
Conceptual Maxims (Rules) of Transformative Logic
1.) If concept can be imagined and is possible, then follow to next rule, but if it cannot be conceived, then it is impossible and cannot be transformed.
2.) Good rules work and follow Rene Descartes' "Meditations of First Philosophy" to the next step if true.
1.) Good Rules Work
2.) Ascend to the Complex
3.) Simplify, Simplify, Simplify
4.) If something is not 100% true, then it must be called false.
3.) If concept is true and conceivable, then use the method of induction system of Francis Bacon. Then proceed to the next step.
4.) After the method of induction, find the appropiate emotion according to the construction of the possibility.
5.) Construct emotion into the logical system of transforming object and/or subject.
Examples of Emotions Containing Logical Thought
Example of the Transformative Logical Argument
If God stated in the Ten Commandments of prohibiting the termination of human life by intentional or delibrate intent, and the sacrament of the right to human life is the religious precept of the creator, which is instilled in the canon of religious law, then it follows that the religious precept of forbidding the termination of life in the canon of the creator is the failure to adhere to the principals of the religious laws which all should follow, and the disgusting moral choice of the termination of human life is in direct contradiciton as it disobeys the religious precept of God in the delibrate choice of disobidence, henceforth, the termination of human life is the disobidence of the Ten Commandments of the religious law of God within any religious canon and law in the human race, and all termination of human life is the atrocity of complete disregard of the purpose of creation provided by God to those who choose to terminate human life.
Critical Analysis of Transformative Logic
In the logical argumentive example, there are a few components that are vital to the structure of the syllogism as there are certain fixed locations that the insertion of emotions into logic is critical to enhancing this logic. First, all emotion(s) must be in the minor premise and center of the syllogism as it cannot be inserted anywhere else. Secondly, the emotion must be in a present tense to heighten the connection of the emotion to the logical construction. Finally, the surrounding logical constructions must fit into perfect form of the logical argument as the sentences must be all present tense, as well as the whole argumentative structure. And, what we learn from this is that all subject(s) and object(s) must be in the current state and not in past or future states of becoming as the awareness of the emotion is the "intellectual guide" of logical sense.
But what is the reason for the particular state of consciouness?
It is here in the consciouness that construction of the logical system works at it's best since it is normally where construction of logical thought and descisions are made in the state of reasoning. But, although, the state of awareness is the primary and preferred state for the reasoning in all forms of logical systems, the subconscious also contributes to the reasoning state by processing all the processing particulars of objectionable mode. Our reasoning system is designed to clarify the emotions that an individual posses about a subjet or object in order for the logical system to function to it's full potential. In one hand, an object has no conscious and the development for potential is active to the arguer, while on the other hand, an subject has a conscious, and the potential is still active to the subject and aruger.
But, all this is not an easy task as much consideration of what is meant to be presented in an argument of this logical system must be constructed in long durations of thoughts. The construciton of all major premise must be channeled throught the logical systems of Rene Descartes and Sir Francis Bacon as the student and/or teacher of Religious Studies is to learn these system if they care to utilize this original construction of argument. And, the logical system proposed in this section is a conceptual thought as all constructions of it are to be involved in a priori origins, but all intutions of it are to come from the precognitions of the mental faculities and moral reasoning.
Conclusive Analysis of Transformative Logic
In conclusion of Transformative Logic, we see that logic and emotion can be combined into the structure of a logical argument as it's the clarity of "subject - object relationship" that is to be constructed, as well as the construction of the possiblities of it. But, here we find a difficult challenge as the conversion of possiblity and actuality is more of an interdependent relationship that touches on the subjects of apprehension and perception. And, the conversion of it is the critique of all the maxims of the methods of Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon, and the difficult juncture of determining which secondary emotion(s) best suits the syllgoism of the argument. This takes some forethought in all intuitions of the advancement of a particular opinion and/or judgment of a subject. But, yet the determination of such corresponding logical thought and emotion is the assertative processing of the possibility, and the corresponding thought for it as the logical thought must have some form of emotion contained in it for the shaping of the potential of the possibility.
Yet, the difficult task of bridging the two spheres of the human psyche proves very incomprehensible at first, but after long-attention of the mental faculities to the student and/or teacher as it can be achieved in argument. And, although, the logical system of Transformative Logic dictates that the conversion of thought and emotion is a possibility that changes and transforms argument in social and religious issues. The difficult task of developing the correct method to reach the proper conversion is the careful construction of practice and thought. And, all argument is logical in the conscious of objectionable rhetoric as any arugment is made of logical thought, but in the subconscious lies the emotions that corresponds to the major premise being presented in argument. But, the choice to utilize this logical system must be the moral choice of helping transforming social and religious issues for the benefit of Humanity, and not the self-seeking intentions to advance unwarranted arguments as this website and novel is the moral agent for human and religious issues.