Why should the assumption be correct that exceptions only confirm the rules?

In the socio-political runet, such statements are often found; And they seem to me worthy of trust.

What do you think?

Leave a Reply

GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings

6 Comments

  1. I think that this statement should be assumed correctly if you agree with the arguments of those who expressed it. Freas “Exceptio Probat Regulam in Casibus Non Exceptis” (exclusion confirms the rule {for non -exclusive cases}) attribute to Ciceron. It means that the exception should be from something – if there is an exception, then there is a rule. If “disabled people are served out of turn”, this means that there is a rule by which all the others are served in the order of the queue. The lekikograph Fowler expanded the original meaning of the phrase, adding a few more to it. If we do not consider ironic-humorous, then he has two more: in cases where there is no obvious rule, and the exception is rare, it confirms the overall accuracy of the situation. For example, if the situation “only intelligent people live on our floor” is opposed to the occasion “yesterday at the Ivanovs spent the drunken son-in-law,” the exception confirms the accuracy of the main situation, revealing what is most often happening. The factory analyzed this phrase in English, and In English, Proof in the phrase “The Exception that Proves The Rule” means not only “proves/confirms”, but also “tests”. In this case, the emergence of an exception to tests the rule of truth. But in Russian this interpretation is not very glued.

  2. IMHO this is not an assumption and not a statement, it is rather an idiom. In any rule, if you move, you can find exceptions. But in the context of an objective conversation, these exceptions, in general, are not related to a conversation, it is inappropriate to stipulate in detail. Therefore, such an idiomatic reservation is used. As they say, smart – will understand, a fool – will not ask.

  3. If you understand literally, then the question is already a contradiction: if there are exceptions, then this is no longer a rule, but only a certain pattern under certain conditions, at a certain time and relative to someone, something to understand conditionally, then there are no contradictions : Indeed, exceptions will be confirmed by a certain pattern, and not the general universal rule

  4. I will allow myself to give a correct assessment of the assumption, clothed in the form of the issue, in order to expand the possibilities of practical application of its usefulness for society. It is universality of the rules, laws, requirements, norms and, most importantly, “public interests” that still remain without now suffer from order intelligible definition; At that time, as there are already people who are ready to seriously engage in this most important thing for society?! For Russians, you can see that there are a habit of trusting various kinds of authoritative statements, which can be interpreted as a result of awareness of their incompetence and as an expression of pyatet to the authorities different levels and countless profiles. The first property of Russian citizens is, in my opinion, to classify the positive qualities of our compatriots, while the second feature of their nature seems to be somewhat negatively affecting mass civil consciousness. The nationality of feelings and thoughts, in general , gives the impression of the immaturity of human nature, which does not promise anything in the conditions of unfolding more and wider than the information war in the virtual space. After such an explanation, new opportunities for a consistent and conscious approach to mutual understanding in a communicative environment may appear, which I really hope …

How wide is the border between good and evil, can the acts be neither good, but also not evil at the same time?