Truth and recursive logic

Good and bad are pretty subjective notions, just as right and wrong. By being truthful and bound to one’s set of ethical values, that are pragmatically flexible, we refrain from hurting a fellow human being physically, mentally, emotionally, and/ or psychologically; this allows one to function within the ambit of society . This might seem as a LOGICALLY SOUND philosophical principle, though truth is not subjective its definition has a dynamically mutating tendency, thus by recursive logic, practice of the aforementioned principle, again on itself would prove it wrong.

Let us say being truthful is a function f. x the variable is a situation you are faced with. f(x) will yield you to respond in a particular way y. Based on your perceptive and cognitive definition at that particular instance t1 in time and societal milieu s1 of what truth is. If the function was to be used recursively at a different instance t2 and and a different societal milieu s2, being truthful can no longer be the same function f as the definition of truth is altering in a dynamic way based on time and the socioeconomic milieu,into f2, hence the practice of recursion would not be possible in principle, but if one were to be immaleable and unmindful of the change in t and s still used the function f instead of f2, which by principle is acting against the first defined philosophical principle, you no longer get the result y but you are shocked at being faced with the result z. Hence recursion would not be possible.

By logical inference, societal semiotics are a chaotic, dynamic system, which make the practice of any form of ethics that is too well defined impossible to practice as recursion would not occur and you shall be shocked at opening a Pandora’s box if you are not mindful of t and s .