The problematic problem presupposes the solution of a number of problems.

Again, it seems intuitively yes. Both of them know the Lord. If you can not turn your own intuition into a rational image, you are better and ignore your intuition with skepticism. And what if your bearded authority does not really interfere with your intuition? But you really should not compare with political science or with geology simply because we can compare with each other only the so-called comparable or comparable quantities, and we must prove this if we prove that philosophy and political science compare each other then we can compare And if we can not prove this then we can not compare then any comparison will prove to be unfounded and the surface A how to prove There are many different ways to make use of the simplest for the first course I think in a suitable way it is about cognition in order to find species comparable to each other or forms of cognition, this cognition is necessary and the types and forms obtained classify the snag here in what is that any logical classification is always carried out for a certain reason and Here is the presence of one o-the only reason in the process of classification and analysis makes it possible to compare the basis of one. On this basis, within this framework, we can compare, for example, so that we ask ourselves a question. Let's compare with each other and how he has them. How many now sit in front of me in terms of growth and here we have growth as the basis for the classification, and then it becomes clear at once that there are shorties there are normal there are nobles here the colors of hair to go around