Test

2. Relation in which rules of art stand to doctrines of science may be thus characterized: The art proposes to itself an end to be attained, deines the end, and hands it over to the science. The science receives it, considers it as a phenomenon or effect to be studied, and, having integrated its causes and conditions, sends it back to art with a theorem of the combination of circumstances by which it could be produced. Art then examines these combinations of circumstances and, according as any of them are or are not in human power, pronounces the end attainable or not. The only one of the premises, therefore, that art supplies is the original major premise, which assers that the attainment of the given end is desirable. Science then lends to art the proposition (obtained by a series of indunctions or of deductions) that the performance of certain actions will attain the end. From these premise art concludes that the performance of these actions is desirable, and finding it also practicable, converts the theorem into a rule, or precept.

J.S. Mill, A System of Logic, Book V, Chapter IX, Section 2.

Fritz! 

This is a test of BloggerBot. 

This is a another test.

Doe this work?

Sin

The blind hear more keenly.
The mute listen well.
I'm sure I am impaired somehow.
If it pays, I cannot tell.

If deaf to human feeling,
Is intellect more bright?
Are those shuttered to the lovely,
Responsive to the right?

If compensation is a rule,
Each lack a yang to some yin,
I'd have you dead to faithful words
To better know my sin.

From Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus

"Let us insist again on the method: it is a matter of persisting. At a certain point on his path the absurd man is tempted. History is not lacking in either religions or prophets, even without gods. He is asked to leap. All he can reply is that he doesn't fully understand, that it is not obvious. Indeed, he does not want to do anything but what he fully understands. He is assured that this is the sin of pride, but he does not understand the notions of sin; that perhaps hell is in store, but he has not enough imagination to visualize that strange future; that he is losing immortal life, but that seems to him an idle consideration. An attempt is made to get him to admit his guilt. He feels innocent. To tell the truth, that is all he feels--irreparable innocence. This is what allows him everything. Hence, what he demands of himself is to live solely with what he knows, to accommodate himself to what is, and to bring in nothing that is not certain. He is told that nothing is. But this at least is a certainty. And it is with this that he is concerned: he wants to find out if it is possible to live without appeal."