<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Kommentaarid EL kavatseb kehtestada üksikisikutele otsesed süsinikdioksiidimaksud kohta	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://motiskleja.ee/el-kavatseb-kehtestada-uksikisikutele-otsesed-susinikdioksiidimaksud/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://motiskleja.ee/el-kavatseb-kehtestada-uksikisikutele-otsesed-susinikdioksiidimaksud/</link>
	<description>Ühes koos me jõuame tõeni!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 18:01:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		Kirjutas Anne Anderson		</title>
		<link>https://motiskleja.ee/el-kavatseb-kehtestada-uksikisikutele-otsesed-susinikdioksiidimaksud/#comment-62</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anne Anderson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 18:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://motiskleja.ee/?p=1456#comment-62</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Võimuahne inimene on loonud kõik kriisid, näljahädad, haigused,  kõik ainult selleks, et saada maailma valitsejaks! Enne ei muutu midagi kui see ahnete jõuk saab troonilt lükatud!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Võimuahne inimene on loonud kõik kriisid, näljahädad, haigused,  kõik ainult selleks, et saada maailma valitsejaks! Enne ei muutu midagi kui see ahnete jõuk saab troonilt lükatud!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		Kirjutas Anne Anderson		</title>
		<link>https://motiskleja.ee/el-kavatseb-kehtestada-uksikisikutele-otsesed-susinikdioksiidimaksud/#comment-61</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anne Anderson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 17:55:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://motiskleja.ee/?p=1456#comment-61</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Miks küll Eesti ei astu välja sellest EL,ist? Kusjuures liitumine EL,ga  on rohkem kui küsitav???]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Miks küll Eesti ei astu välja sellest EL,ist? Kusjuures liitumine EL,ga  on rohkem kui küsitav???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		Kirjutas gate io		</title>
		<link>https://motiskleja.ee/el-kavatseb-kehtestada-uksikisikutele-otsesed-susinikdioksiidimaksud/#comment-44</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[gate io]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2023 05:30:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://motiskleja.ee/?p=1456#comment-44</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Really interesting article, and I think there’s a lot to be said for the balanced view that categorical thinking is on the whole a good thing in it’s capacity to aid understanding by lightening cognitive load. I think you’re on much shakier ground though, when it comes to positing a clear and knowable distinction between divisions that are “true to nature” and those that are “defined by us”. This whole idea seems to me to rest on the a priori belief that we (or our brains at least) somehow sit ‘outside’ nature, so that when we define something we are doing something ‘unnatural’ – and I just think this is a huge problem for much of what passes for ‘naturalistic’ thinking about thinking. Because if our thinking, defining, categorising etc behaviour genuinely was ‘unnatural’, how could we rely on it in any way to tell us what is ‘true to nature’ ?Wonderful article, thank you, this is very helpful!so true – i hope this article was helpful and remember Life is Short:Live It ON Purpose &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.teamstepusa.org/search?q=https://www.gate.io/fr/signup/612995&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow ugc&quot;&gt;gate io&lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Really interesting article, and I think there’s a lot to be said for the balanced view that categorical thinking is on the whole a good thing in it’s capacity to aid understanding by lightening cognitive load. I think you’re on much shakier ground though, when it comes to positing a clear and knowable distinction between divisions that are “true to nature” and those that are “defined by us”. This whole idea seems to me to rest on the a priori belief that we (or our brains at least) somehow sit ‘outside’ nature, so that when we define something we are doing something ‘unnatural’ – and I just think this is a huge problem for much of what passes for ‘naturalistic’ thinking about thinking. Because if our thinking, defining, categorising etc behaviour genuinely was ‘unnatural’, how could we rely on it in any way to tell us what is ‘true to nature’ ?Wonderful article, thank you, this is very helpful!so true – i hope this article was helpful and remember Life is Short:Live It ON Purpose <a href="https://www.teamstepusa.org/search?q=https://www.gate.io/fr/signup/612995" rel="nofollow ugc">gate io</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
