life without cars in it? We´d find it to be rather difficult. Probably the fact would blow up our day schedules and most of the plans that are made. In the olden days, a car was a poduct which was ment to be only for the rich ones. To the contrary, nowadays cars are very easily available for everyone (!).Speaking of which, it´s not much to mention that one extremely wierd and sad occasion would be that some people take advantage of haveing a car and tend to take up too high speeds for showing how tough fellows they are. Often boasting like this can cause big devastations, meaning accidents and all kinds of fines, not mentioning times, when a driver might be under influence of the alcohol, which is definitely the worst possibility of all. But that´s the world we live in and when we meet such an unusual situation, we´d have a fair
John ja Edward on ka tuntud oma natuke teist moodi loogika poolest. Ning neil, ona ka omad lemmik tsitaadid milleta nad arvatavasti poleks need kes nad hetkel on. Siin on mõned nende lemmik tsitaadid: ,,oh, you said a bad word!" ,,are you a book? Cuz i'm checking you out" ,, ask them if they have jedward special, ask them if they have the jedward special" ,,he's not my brother i found him on e-bay, when i was looking for a look a like" ,, why would you want to smoke? It's like haveing a fire in your mouth." ,,it's kinda cool to be crazy" Peale oma eriliste tsitaatide teevad nad ka igasuguseid lollusi. Nad on kunagi suutnud hotelli aknast välja loopida kõik padjad ja tekid ja linad. Loomulikult ei olnud hotelli töötajad väga rõõmsad.kuid fännid olid see eest pööraselt õnnelikud et nad said endale poiste voodipesu kuid kahjuks võtsid hotelli töötajad need neilt ära. Edward on ka aknast välja loopinud Johni musta aluspesu. John ei olnud loomulikult selle
Locke: state of nature is peaceful, all men are equal. They treat others as themselves. Rousseau - people in the state of nature were neither good or bad. Man was like an animal not posessing any needs besides the primary ones. The bad habits of men are byproducts of ingaging in a civil society. All men are equal Sovereign Hobbes: can not be overthrown and can do whatever the fuck it wants. The best one is monarch. Locke: can be overthrown, if fails to do the job. Criticises monarch for haveing hereditary power. Prefers election for a term. Democracy? Rousseau: aristocracy, if not hereditary. (monarchy represents particular will) Authority in the social contract Hobbes: the sovereign Locke: The law over the sovereign Rousseau: The general will over the Law and over the sovereign Human life Hobbes: sovereign can take life Locke: life can only be taken to prevent from being killed and after that who takes the life is subjected to the judge. property
annaabi.ee 
