[The general term ‘obligations’ contains both ‘responsibility’ and ‘words’.

Responsibility stands in contrast to words.

Both are categorical transitions within the intersection.

Both go with the horizontal nested form:

Thought experiment_3H(my choice_2V and something_2H(___1H))

Here is the arena of free choice, for good or evil.

Here is where the obligation is forged as either responsibility or delusion.]

[Even stranger, do the terms ‘responsibility versus words’ coincide with the terms ‘law^acceptance versus law^denial’?]

Summary of text [comment] page 83

[Obligations parallel the horizontal axis pair:

Law^essential_3H( human thoughts_2V and human actions_2H(__1H))

Or:

Law^essential_3H( what is good and what is bad₂( __1H))

Do these look compatible?

Do obligations parallel the essence of the law?]