Rashami Desai said, "I was just 16 back then and he tried to get me unconscious"

In the Dapoli Assembly Election 2024, MLA Yogesh Kadam is gaining momentum due to his development efforts and the unity within the Grand Alliance. His father, Ramdas Kadam, a prominent Shiv Sena leader in Konkan, has a rich political history. Now,

Soon after the death of South Korean star Song Jae Rim, his last photo, Instagram post, and Insta bio left his fans in shocked.

Wenn im Herbst der Rasenwuchs nachlässt und das Gras das letzte Mal gemäht ist, sollte man den Rasenmäher winterfest machen. Sonst ist im Frühjahr die Überraschung groß, wenn der Rasenmäher im schlechten Zustand ist, nicht sofort startet und vielleicht mit […]

Rasenmäher winterfest machen auf Gartentechnik.de

George Müller (1805-1898) was a German playboy who found Christ and gave his life to serve Christ unreservedly. His mission was to rescue orphans from the wretched street life that enslaved so many children in England during the time of Charles Dickens and Oliver Twist. Müller did rescue, care for, feed, and educate such children by the thousands. The costs were enormous for such a great work. Yet, amazingly, he never asked anyone for money. Instead he prayed, and his children never missed a meal. This docu-drama presents his life story and shows how God answered prayer and met their needs. It is a story that raises foundational questions regarding faith and finances. Also included are two special documentaries on Müller and some of the lives affected by his work.

Youth: Müller was born in Kroppenstaedt (now Kroppenstedt), a village near Halberstadt in the Kingdom of Prussia. In 1810, the Müller family moved to nearby Heimersleben, where Müller's father was appointed a collector of taxes. He had an older brother, Friedrich Johann Wilhelm (1803 - 7 Oct 1838) and, after his widowed father remarried, a half-brother, Franz (b 1822). His early life was not marked by righteousness - on the contrary, he was a thief, a liar and a gambler. By the age of 10, Müller was stealing government money from his father. While his mother was dying, he, at 14 years of age, was playing cards with friends and drinking. Müller's father hoped to provide him with a religious education that would allow him to take a lucrative position as a clergyman in the state church. He studied divinity in the University of Halle, and there met a fellow student (Beta) who invited him to a Christian prayer meeting. There he was welcomed, and he began regularly reading the Bible and discussing Christianity with the others who attended the meetings. After seeing a man praying to God on his knees, he was convinced of his need for salvation. As soon as he got home he went to his bed where he knelt and prayed. He asked God to help him in his life and to bless him wherever he went and to forgive him of his sins. He immediately stopped drinking, stealing and lying, and began hoping to become a missionary. He began preaching regularly in nearby churches and continued meeting with the other churches. -- Early work: In 1828, Müller offered to work with Jews in England through the London Society for Promoting Christianity Amongst the Jews, but upon arriving in 1829, he fell ill, and did not think that he would survive. He was sent to Teignmouth to recuperate and, whilst there, met Henry Craik, who became his life-long friend. When he recovered, however, he dedicated himself to doing the will of God. He soon left the London Society, convinced that God would provide for his needs as he did Christian work. Craik invited him to become a minister with him in Teignmouth and he became the pastor of Ebenezer Chapel in Devon and soon after, married Mary Groves, the sister of Anthony Norris Groves. During his time as the pastor of the church, he refused a regular salary, believing that the practice could lead to church members giving out of duty, not desire. He also eliminated the renting of church pews, arguing that it gave unfair prestige to the rich (based primarily on James 2:1-9). -- Theology: The theology that guided George Müller's work is not widely known, but was shaped by an experience in his mid twenties when he "came to prize the Bible alone as [his] standard of judgement". He records in his Narratives that "That the word of God alone is our standard of judgment in spiritual things; that it can be explained only by the Holy Spirit; and that in our day, as well as in former times, he is the teacher of his people. The office of the Holy Spirit I had not experimentally understood before that time. Indeed, of the office of each of the blessed persons, in what is commonly called the Trinity, I had no experimental apprehension. I had not before seen from the Scriptures that the Father chose us before the foundation of the world; that in him that wonderful plan of our redemption originated, and that he also appointed all the means by which it was to be brought about. Further, that the Son, to save us, had fulfilled the law, to satisfy its demands, and with it also the holiness of God; that he had borne the punishment due to our sins, and had thus satisfied the justice of God. And, further, that the Holy Spirit alone can teach us about our state by nature, show us the need of a Saviour, enable us to believe in Christ, explain to us the Scriptures, help us in preaching, etc. It was my beginning to understand this latter point in particular which had a great effect on me; for the Lord enabled me to put it to the test of experience, by laying aside commentaries, and almost every other book, and simply reading the word of God and studying it. The result of this was, that the first evening that I shut myself into my room, to give myself to prayer and meditation over the Scriptures, I learned more in a few hours than I had done during a period of several months previously. But the particular difference was, that I received real strength for my soul in doing so. I now began to try by the test of the Scriptures the things which I had learned and seen, and found that only those principles which stood the test were really of value."

Imprisonments: As his popularity and notoriety grew, Bunyan increasingly became a target for slander and libel; he was described as "a witch, a Jesuit, a highwayman" and was said to have mistresses and multiple wives. In 1658, aged 30, he was arrested for preaching at Eaton Socon and indicted for preaching without a licence. That same year his wife died leaving him with 4 children, one of which was blind. He continued preaching, however, and did not suffer imprisonment until November 1660, when he was taken to the County gaol in Silver Street, Bedford. In that same year, Bunyan married again, Elizabeth, by whom he had two more children, Sarah and Joseph. The Restoration of the monarchy by Charles II of England began Bunyan's persecution as England returned to Anglicanism. Meeting-houses were quickly closed and all citizens were required to attend their Anglican parish church. It became punishable by law to "conduct divine service except in accordance with the ritual of the church, or for one not in Episcopal orders to address a congregation." Thus, John Bunyan no longer had that freedom to preach which he had enjoyed under the Puritan Commonwealth. He was arrested on 12 November 1660, whilst preaching privately in Lower Samsell by Harlington, Bedfordshire, 10 miles south of Bedford. -- John was brought before the magistrate John Wingate at Harlington House and refused to desist from preaching. Wingate sent him to Bedford County Gaol, to consider his situation. After a month, Bunyan reports (in his own account of his imprisonment) that Wingate's clerk visited him, seeking to get him to change his mind. The clerk said that all the authorities wanted was for Bunyan to undertake not to preach at private gatherings, as it was suspected that these non-conformist meetings were in fact being used by people plotting against the king. In answer to the clerk, John argued that God's law obliged him to preach at any and every opportunity, and refused to consider the suggested compromise. -- In January 1661, Bunyan was brought before the quarter sessions in the Chapel of Herne, Bedford. His prosecutor, Mr. Justice Wingate, despite Bunyan's clear breaches of the Religion Act of 1592, was not inclined to incarcerate Bunyan. But John's stark statement "If you release me today, I will preach tomorrow" left the magistrates - Sir John Kelynge of Southill, Sir Henry Chester of Lidlington, Sir George Blundell of Cardington, Sir Wllm Beecher of Howbury and Thomas Snagg of Milbrook - with no choice but to imprison him. So Bunyan was incarcerated for 3 months for the crimes of "pertinaciously abstaining" from attending mandatory Anglican church services and preaching at "unlawful meetings". -- Strenuous efforts were made by Bunyan's wife to get his case re-heard at the spring assizes but Bunyan's continued assertions that he would, if freed, preach to his awaiting congregation meant that the magistrates would not consider any new hearing. Similar efforts were made in the following year but, again, to no avail. In early 1664, an Act of Parliament the Conventicles Act made it illegal to hold religious meetings of five or more people outside of the auspices of the Church of England. -- It was during his time in Bedford County Gaol that John Bunyan conceived his allegorical novel: The Pilgrim's Progress. (Many scholars however believe that he commenced this work during the second and shorter imprisonment of 1675, referred to below.) Bunyan's incarceration was punctuated with periods of relative freedom - lax gaolers allowing him out to attend church meetings and to minister to his congregation. -- In 1666, John was briefly released for a few weeks before being re-arrested for preaching and sent back to Bedford's County gaol, where he remained for a further six years. During that time, he wove shoelaces to support his family and preached to his fellow prisoners - a congregation of about sixty. In his possession were two books, John Foxe's Book of Martyrs, the Bible, a violin he had made out of tin, a flute he'd made from a chair leg and a supply of pen and paper. Both music and writing were integral to John's Puritan faith. John Bunyan was released in January 1672, when Charles II issued the Declaration of Religious Indulgence.

Bunyan began his work while in the Bedfordshire county gaol [jail] for violations of the Conventicle Act, which prohibited the holding of religious services outside the auspices of the established Church of England. Early Bunyan scholars like John Brown believed The Pilgrim's Progress was begun in Bunyan's second shorter imprisonment for six months in 1675, but more recent scholars like Roger Sharrock believe that it was begun during Bunyan's initial, more lengthy imprisonment from 1660-1672 right after he had written his spiritual autobiography, Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners. -- The English text comprises 108,260 words and is divided into two parts, each reading as a continuous narrative with no chapter divisions. The first part was completed in 1677 and entered into the stationers' register on December 22, 1677. It was licensed and entered in the "Term Catalogue" on February 18, 1678, which is looked upon as the date of first publication. After the first edition of the first part in 1678, an expanded edition, with additions written after Bunyan was freed, appeared in 1679. The Second Part appeared in 1684. There were eleven editions of the first part in John Bunyan's lifetime, published in successive years from 1678 to 1685 and in 1688, and there were two editions of the second part, published in 1684 and 1686.

Let's look at Sir Francis Bacon: The content in the Shakespearian dramas are politically recognized viewpoints of Sir Francis Bacon (His "enemies" are frequently caricatured in the plays.) The religious, philosophic, and educational messages all reflect his personal opinions. Similarities in style and terminology exist in Bacon's writings and the Shakespearian plays. Certain historical and philosophical inaccuracies are common to both (such as identical misquotations from Aristotle.) Sir Francis Bacon possessed the range of general and philosophical knowledge necessary to write the Shakespearian plays. Sir Francis Bacon was a linguist and a composer. (Necessary to write the sonnets.) He was a lawyer, an able barrister and a polished courtier and possessed the intimate knowledge of parliamentary law and the etiquette of the royal court revealed in the Shakespearian plays. Bacon furthermore visited many of the foreign countries forming the background for the plays (Necessary to create the authentic local atmosphere. There is no record of William Shakspere's ever having travelled outside of England). ... Why the secrecy? Manly Palmer Hall writes: "Sir Francis Bacon knew the true secret of Masonic origin and there is reason to suspect that he concealed this knowledge in cipher and cryptogram. Bacon is not to be regarded solely as a man but rather as the focal point between an invisible institution and a world which was never able to distinguish between the messenger and the message which he promulgated. This secret society, having rediscovered the lost wisdom of the ages and fearing that the knowledge might be lost again, perpetuated it in two ways: (1) by an organization (Freemasonry) to the initiates of which it revealed its wisdom in the form of symbols; (2) by embodying its arcana in the literature of the day by means of cunningly contrived ciphers and enigmas."

Rick Warren Clarifies His Position Re: Islam -- Pastor Rick Warren said he does not believe Muslims and Christians worship the same God. "We worship Jesus as God. Muslims don't," he wrote. "Our God is Jesus, not Allah." Source: www.ocregister.com/articles/muslims-343997-warren-christians.html -- {Note: This is a highly deceptive remark by Rick Warren in insinuating that there is more than one God and that Christians simply worship one God that we happen to call Jesus while Muslims simply worship their God that they happen to call Allah. In all it is a very misleading series of events and statements coming from the very deceptive and misleading Pastor Rick Warren. A simpler, better and more accurate comment is "God is Jesus, not Allah" while Rick Warren's convoluted and contrived rebuttal of "Our God is Jesus, not Allah" is simply disinformation that is designed from the start to be misleading in a dangerously deceptive way that is extremely harmful to the truth of Christianity.}

Mäuse gehören zu den wichtigsten Labortieren der Wissenschaft. Um sie noch genauer untersuchen zu können, entwickelten Fachleute nun ein besonderes Werkzeug: eine Brille, die ähnlich wie bei Menschen virtuelle Realitäten (VR) erzeugt.

It is interesting to see how the GOP is struggling to keep the seats in the forthcoming elections. Rush Limbaugh is angry about a GOP pre-mortem comment. The main problem with today's conservatives is that they are not able to defend capitalism in a principled way. It could be the case that they hesitate to support capitalism due to their "pork" addiction... Here is a quote from Gary Shapiro's article, Clemson University Establishes a Think Tank Devoted to Studying the Moral Basis of Capitalism:

The Clemson institute, Mr. Thompson said, faces what he calls an "anti-capitalist bias" among most of the intellectual elite in America. "It began in the last the quarter of the 19th century and picked up steam," he said. "For well over 100 years, the cultural elite in universities have been opposed to capitalism and have set the terms of this debate, which is why the Republican Party in general and conservative intellectuals in particular have not been able to defend capitalism on moral grounds." (NYSun.com, 09/25/06.)

Like the aging hippies of the New Left, compassionate conservatives reject the idea of basing morality on reason and instead embrace a morality grounded in feelings. They reject the possibility of a morality of self-interest and individual rights, and instead embrace a morality of self-sacrifice and governmental coercion. Despite all their loose rhetoric about applying “free-market” solutions to the plight of the poor, compassionate conservatives accept the moral premise of liberal-socialism: that you have a moral duty—a moral duty that will be enforced by the state—to love and support those who have needs greater than your own. (TheObjectiveStandard.com, Fall 206, Vol. 1, No. 3.)

New York City Personal Injury Lawyer Richard M. Kenny received a glowing review on Birdseye from a happy client regarding the firm's services. Reviews like this make us proud to do our job, day in and day out. We believe that those who've been unfairly injured as a result of another party's negligence deserve to be fully and fairly compensated for the damages they've incurred.

AppEsteem has awarded SpyHunter 5 "Deceptor Fighter" Certification under its "Unwanted Software Handling Certification Test." SpyHunter 5 detected and blocked potentially unwanted applications and unwanted software identified by AppEsteem with 100% accuracy.

The celebrity chef announced he was diagnosed with the mental health condition earlier this year.

CERT Polska wydał rekomendacje w związku z obserwowaną zwiększoną liczbę ataków na przemysłowe systemy sterowania (ICS/OT) dostępne bezpośrednio z internetu.

Am 13.11.2024 um 15:30 Uhr gab es seit Mitternacht 0.2l/m² Niederschlag. Innerhalb der letzten 24h waren es 0.2l/m². Im aktuellen Monat waren es bis jetzt 4.2l/m²

Simply uk gadgets vendita casa annuncio immobiliare, download giochi ... Simply UK Gadgets will be back shortly.<br> This is not a ploy to get more hits. ...

“Young man, in mathematics you don’t understand things, you just get used to them.” —John von Neumann¹

This, in a sense, is at the heart of why mathematics is so hard. Math is all about abstraction, about generalizing the stuff you can get a sense of to apply to crazy situations about which you otherwise have no insight whatsoever. Take, for example, one way of understanding the manifold structure on SO(3), the special orthogonal group on 3-space. In order to explain what I’m talking about, I’ll have to give several definitions and explanations and each, to a greater or lesser extent, illustrates both my point about abstraction and von Neumann’s point about getting used to things.

First off, SO(3) has a purely algebraic definition as the set of all real (that is to say, the entries are real numbers) 3 × 3 matrices A with the property A^TA = I and the determinant of A is 1. That is, if you take A and flip rows and columns, you get the transpose of A, denoted A^T; if you then multiply this transpose by A, you get the identity matrix I. The determinant has its own complicated algebraic definition (the unique alternating, multilinear functional…), but it’s easy to compute for small matrices and can be intuitively understood as a measure of how much the matrix “stretches” vectors. Now, as with all algebraic definitions, this is a bit abstruse; also, as is unfortunately all too common in mathematics, I’ve presented all the material slightly backwards.

This is natural, because it seems obvious that the first thing to do in any explication is to define what you’re talking about, but, in reality, the best thing to do in almost every case is to first explain what the things you’re talking about (in this case, special orthogonal matrices) really are and why we should care about them, and only then give the technical definition. In this case, special orthogonal matrices are “really” the set of all rotations of plain ol’ 3 dimensional space that leave the origin fixed (another way to think of this is as the set of linear transformations that preserve length and orientation; if I apply a special orthogonal transformation to you, you’ll still be the same height and width and you won’t have been flipped into a “mirror image”). Obviously, this is a handy thing to have a grasp on and this is why we care about special orthogonal matrices. In order to deal with such things rigorously it’s important to have the algebraic definition, but as far as understanding goes, you need to have the picture of rotations of 3 space in your head.

Okay, so I’ve explained part of the sentence in the first paragraph where I started throwing around arcane terminology, but there’s a bit more to clear up; specifically, what the hell is a “manifold”, anyway? Well, in this case I’m talking about differentiable (as opposed to topological) manifolds, but I don’t imagine that explanation helps. In order to understand what a manifold is, it’s very important to have the right picture in your head, because the technical definition is about ten times worse than the special orthogonal definition, but the basic idea is probably even simpler. The intuitive picture is that of a smooth surface. For example, the surface of a sphere is a nice 2-dimensional manifold. So is the surface of a donut, or a saddle, or an idealized version of the rolling hills of your favorite pastoral scene. Slightly more abstractly, think of a rubber sheet stretched and twisted into any configuration you like so long as there are no holes, tears, creases, black holes or sharp corners.

In order to rigorize this idea, the important thing to notice about all these surfaces is that, if you’re a small enough ant living on one of these surfaces, it looks indistinguishable from a flat plane. This is something we can all immediately understand, given that we live on an oblate spheroid that, because it’s so much bigger than we are, looks flat to us. In fact, this is very nearly the precise definition of a manifold, which basically says that a manifold is a topological space (read: set of points with some important, but largely technical, properties) where, at any point in the space, there is some neighborhood that looks identical to “flat” euclidean space; a 2-dimensional manifold is one that looks locally like a plane, a 3-dimensional manifold is one that looks locally like normal 3-dimensional space, a 4-dimensional manifold is one that looks locally like normal 4-dimensional space, and so on.

In fact, these spaces look so much like normal space that we can do calculus on them, which is why the subject concerned with manifolds is called “differential geometry”. Again, the reason why we would want to do calculus on spaces that look a lot like normal space but aren’t is obvious: if we live on a sphere (as we basically do), we’d like to be able to figure out how to, e.g., minimize our distance travelled (and, thereby, fuel consumed and time spent in transit) when flying from Denver to London, which is the sort of thing for which calculus is an excellent tool that gives good answers; unfortunately, since the Earth isn’t flat, we can’t use regular old freshman calculus.² As it turns out, there are all kinds of applications of this stuff, from relatively simple engineering to theoretical physics.

So, anyway, the point is that manifolds look, at least locally, like plain vanilla euclidean space. Of course, even the notion of “plain vanilla euclidean space” is an abstraction beyond what we can really visualize for dimensions higher than three, but this is exactly the sort of thing von Neumann was talking about: you can’t really visualize 10 dimensional space, but you “know” that it looks pretty much like regular 3 dimensional space with 7 more axes thrown in at, to quote Douglas Adams, “right angles to reality”.

Okay, so the claim is that SO(3), our set of special orthogonal matrices, is a 3-dimensional manifold. On the face of it, it might be surprising that the set of rotations of three space should itself look anything like three space. On the other hand, this sort of makes sense: consider a single vector (say of unit length, though it doesn’t really matter) based at the origin and then apply every possible rotation to it. This will give us a set of vectors based at the origin, all of length 1 and pointing any which way you please. In fact, if you look just at the heads of all the vectors, you’re just talking about a sphere of radius 1 centered at the origin. So, in a sense, the special orthognal matrices look like a sphere. This is both right and wrong; the special orthogonal matrices do look a lot like a sphere, but like a 3-sphere (that is, a sphere living in four dimensions), not a 2-sphere (i.e., what we usually call a “sphere”).

In fact, locally SO(3) looks almost exactly like a 3-sphere; globally, however, it’s a different story. In fact, SO(3) looks globally like , which requires one more excursion into the realm of abstraction. , or real projective 3-space, is an abstract space where we’ve taken regular 3-space and added a “plane at infinity”. This sounds slightly wacky, but it’s a generalization of what’s called the projective plane, which is basically the same thing but in a lower dimension. To get the projective plane, we add a “line at infinity” rather than a plane, and the space has this funny property that if you walk through the line at infinity, you get flipped into your mirror image; if you were right-handed, you come out the other side left-handed (and on the “other end” of the plane). But not to worry, if you walk across the infinity line again, you get flipped back to normal.

Okay, sounds interesting, but how do we visualize such a thing? Well, the “line at infinity” thing is good, but infinity is pretty hard to visualize, too. Instead we think about twisting the sphere in a funny way:

You can construct the projective plane as follows: take a sphere. Imagine taking a point on the sphere, and its antipodal point, and pulling them together to meet somewhere inside the sphere. Now do it with another pair of points, but make sure they meet somewhere else. Do this with every single point on the sphere, each point and its antipodal point meeting each other but meeting no other points. It’s a weird, collapsed sphere that can’t properly live in three dimensions, but I imagine it as looking a bit like a seashell, all curled up on itself. And pink.

This gives you the real projective plane, . If you do the same thing, but with a 3-sphere (again, remember that this is the sphere living in four dimensions), you get . Of course, you can’t even really visualize or, for that matter, a 3-sphere, so really visualizing is going to be out of the question, but we have a pretty good idea, at least by analogy, of what it is. This is, as von Neumann indicates, one of those things you “just get used to”.

Now, as it turns out, if you do the math, SO(3) and look the same in a very precise sense (specifically, they’re diffeomorphic). On the face of it, of course, this is patently absurd, but if you have the right picture in mind, this is the sort of thing you might have guessed. The basic idea behind the proof linked above is that we can visualize 3-space as living inside 4-space (where it makes sense to talk about multiplication); here, a rotation (remember, that’s all the special orthogonal matrices/transformations really are) is just like conjugating by a point on the sphere. And certainly conjugating by a point is the same as conjugating by its antipodal point, since the minus signs will cancel eachother in the latter case. But this is exactly how we visualized , as the points on the sphere with antipodal points identified!

I’m guessing that most of the above doesn’t make a whole lot of sense, but I would urge you to heed von Neumann’s advice: don’t necessarily try to “understand” it so much as just to “get used to it”; the understanding can only come after you’ve gotten used to the concepts and, most importantly, the pictures. Which was really, I suspect, von Neumann’s point, anyway: of course we can understand things in mathematics, but we can only understand them after we suspend our disbelief and allow ourselves to get used to them. And, of course, make good pictures.

² As a side note, calculus itself is a prime example of mathematical abstraction. The problem with the world is that most of the stuff in it isn’t straight. If it were, we could have basically stopped after the Greeks figured out a fair amount of geometry. And, even worse, not only is non-straight stuff (like, for example, a graph of the position of a falling rock plotted against time) all over the place, but it’s hard to get a handle on. So, instead of just giving up and going home, we approximate the curvy stuff in the world with straight lines, which we have a good grasp of. As long as we’re dealing with stuff that’s curvy (rather than, say, broken into pieces) this actually works out pretty well and, once you get used to it all, it’s easy to forget what the whole point was, anyway (this, I suspect, is the main reason calculus instruction is so uniformly bad; approximating curvy stuff with straight lines works so well that those who who are supposed to teach the process lose sight of what’s really going on).

It’s almost comforting that such invidious fluffy-minded sludge as this is floating around, as it seems, like religion, to keep the middle-brows hypnotized by “beautiful sentiments” which are so vague as to keep them from actually getting together and doing anything. It’s sort of weird to hear this weakly Marxist social-democratic pap which used to be shouted from the rooftops now being whispered in a low monotonous whine. The author avows his fealty to Jeremy Bentham, not Marx, and calls it utilitarianism not Marxism, but there are many illegitimate fathers along this line of thought.

The root of the idea is that, now that neuroscience has supposedly made it possible to actually identify what makes us happy, the idea of happiness has become quantifiable, and hence a program of providing the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people has become objectively possible. However, the author does not make the slightest effort to apply these wonders of modern science to actually determining what the alleged sources of human happiness are. The neuroscience tack is really just a defensive ploy to ward off the eternal charges that utilitarinism is simply a euphemism for an authoritarian imposition of values. As for espousing his positive program for what constitutes human happiness, it is simply the usual liberal middle-class canards, with not surprisingly a socialist edge: more time to spend with family, a decent wage for everyone, blah blah blah. But he seems to make two pretty criminally unsubstantiated assumptions: one is these sources are essentially the same for everyone, or at least could be under certain conditions, and the other is that they do not inherently conflict with anyone else’s.

I say under certain conditions could be, because in evaluating our current society he seems to privilege envy of other’s material well-being as the principal determinant of happiness. His theory is that above a certain level of material subsistence people are motivated primarily by status-seeking and the desire for a high rank within their social group. Therefore, the increasing wealth of the society will not increase happiness because people measure their well-being relative to the group, not by their absolute prosperity. This is always been a flaw in the concept of the “war against poverty”; I’m not sure it’s much of an argument for socialist economic redistribution. But actually if you read his section on the value of income taxes carefully, he doesn’t even seem to be arguing that they are useful insofar as they can be redirected to the less prosperous, although he does evidently believe that a certain amount of money contributes more to the happiness of a poor person than to a rich one’s. Rather, he seems to think that taking money away from the properous is valuable in and of itself, because it will supposedly make them less focused on the “rat race,” more family-oriented, etc., etc. In short he seems to be advocating a net impoverishment of society.

All of which may be consistent with the program of a good little socialist, but does not necessarily accord marvelously with his own evidence about the supposedly quantified happiness of humanity. The research that he cites non-specifically supposedly indicates that people’s feeling of happiness has not risen in the last half-century, but he does not cite anything which indicates that it has necessarily declined. He cites rising rates of depression and crime as presumably implicit indicators of greater unhappiness, but he does not seem to acknowledge the possibility that in our hyper-medicated and surveillance-based society perhaps people simply report depression and crime more. In any event, if roughly similar numbers of people today as in the ‘50’s report themselves happy (and we believe them), despite the increase in prosperity, that might perhaps indicate that happiness is not fixed to material well-being. Which may be consistent with his general point, but not with his idea of increasing happiness by manipulating income levels.

And even if it did, it seems rather difficult to countenance any social program predicated upon appealing to one of humanity’s most depraved instincts, namely envy. The author acknowledges that his ideal of taxation is mainly motivated by the desire to pander to people’s envy, but he seems to think that their envy will be sated by the loss of prosperity of those around them and that after that point there will be no more. So the envy of the less prosperous will be satisfied by the losses accrued by the more prosperous, which will somehow not be counter-balanced by the chagrin of the more prosperous at the prospect of seeing their status diminished. Very logical.

One of the more egregious presumptions of utilitarians is that non-utilitarian social systems somehow aren’t concerned with seeking the greatest good for the greatest number of people. On the contrary, that’s the defining problem of practically every social and political theory I can think of, and they all either seek or claim to have found the answer—whether such a solution exists, I have my doubts, but that’s why I’m a skeptic about politics. This is a handy trick by utilitarians: they say “I believe in the greatest good for the greatest number of people.” Which is practically begging the question: “As opposed to whom?” It’s useful because it tends to conceal the fact that their real agenda is generally somewhat more specific, and tends to consist in the autocratic notion that one or two measures of social living can be authoritatively determined to be the sources of happiness, and then divided up in a centralized fashion. Those that are the most insistent on the idea of liberty are generally those that are the most skeptical about the possibility of the notion of happiness being either quantitatively defined or generalizable. In other words, only indviduals can determine their own sources of happiness.

For the author, on the other hand, the fact that certain stimuli trigger certain areas of the brain at the times when test subjects profess pleasure has solved the problem of determining happiness. Of course, as mentioned, he never really bothers with the results that those studies have yielded. Somehow the fact that he considers envy to be a principal element of human happiness does not place very severe limits on the harmoniousness of individual happiness. Nor does it constitute a tyranny of the majority, because he claims that in an ideal utilitarian society the happiness of the most unhappy would be considered of pre-eminent importance. Of course, at the beginning of the article he cited the equal importance of each individual’s happiness as the fouding tenet of his theory, but I’m sure it all sorts out in the end.

Among social factors responsible for unhappiness, he cites divorce and unemployment as of pre-eminent importance. Of course, rates of both divorce and unemployment in the crassly materialistic and religious United States are much lower than in the much more overtly utilitarian-embracing Europe, but it would be a bit embarassing for him to admit this after avowing that all traditional value-systems outside of utilitarianism and “individualism” are dead.

Personally the question of the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people doesn’t exactly compel me constantly, although the issue of personal happiness tends to impose itself intransigently. I would have thought that evolutionary biology would have provided an adequate explanation of this, as well as the recurrence of what we call altruism. But such an idea of course suggests that happiness, whatever that is, is not really the point of our little existences, and that the more imperious competitiveness of life will ultimately subvert all of these little trifles of pleasure and pain. But in the meantime, we have these debased statistical notions of happiness to amuse us in an idle hour.

It seems to me that if one’s “objective” measure of happiness is electrical stimulation in the cerebral cortex, the most efficient utilitarian solution to the problem of human happiness would be strap everyone onto hospital gurneys and stimulate the “happiness” part of their brain all day long. If one does not wish to be this deterministic about it, perhaps one should allow more latitute to individuals to discover their own conception of happiness. Personally, I have found happiness generally to be an idea for the unhappy and something rarely spoken of by the happiness; mention of practically guarantees that it is not present in the environment where it is uttered. I don’t deny that what you might call love is the real bridge between personal happiness and moral obligations, and the only true means by which the desires of oneself and of others are united, but such a sentiment can never be mandated; it is entirely resistant to intellectual compulsion. Utilitarianism, which sometimes does a decent job of faking morality, is nevertheless ultimately predicated on the pleasure principle, and hence is wholly inadequate to uniting the moral and the pleasurable except when love truly pertains. In that case, of course, political theory is entirely superfluous, which is why this is all a waste of time.

p.s. I don’t claim that people’s behavior necessarily reflects what really would make them happy, but presumably it does at least reflect what they consciously value. Hence, if I were the author I would have been a bit skeptical of using the results of “surveys” of what people claim to value when the results don’t correlate with their behavior, i.e. they claim that spending time with family is most important, but they spend a disproportiante amount of time working (at least according to him). So either people are not really being forthright (consciously or unconsciously) in responding to surveys, or there is not actually a problem of priorities. In either case, he’s way over-valuing surveys as a guide to what will make people happy.

En la ciudad de Cuenca, el ambiente está cargado de emoción ante la inminente llegada del Carnaval, uno de los eventos más esperados por la comunidad. El Concejal de Festejos, Alberto Castellano, ha destacado la colaboración entre su departamento y la Asociación Amigos del Carnaval para fortalecer esta celebración anual. «Llevamos ya tiempo trabajando en […]

Artículo publicado en : Álex Simón Designado cartelista del carnaval 2025, que tendrá lugar del 1 al 15 de marzo

Le Snes-FSU, la FSU et six enseignants ont assigné en référé le site et son co-fondateur, Stéphane Cola, pour avoir proposé aux élèves de noter leurs profs nommément. Le sort du site internet "note2be.com", qui, en proposant aux élèves de noter leurs...

Rita O'Grady and husband Eddie work at Ford Motor in 1960s London. She's a good mother, wife, housekeeper, friend... and a totally uncompromising shop steward for a band of rogue unionist females who work for much lower pay than their male counterparts. With Sally Hawkins, Bob Hoskins, and Miranda Richardson. Now in limited release.

Mon ami H (rien a voir avec Hesiem...) souhaite vous faire part d'un message : En ces périodes de mondialisation, les identités, les traditions se perdent c'est bien connu. Certaines cultures insoupçonnées sont vouées à disparition par négligence, par...

El registro en los principales buscadores debe ser manual, de forma tal que se puedan cumplir todos los requisitos de la forma más óptima, lo cual con una herramienta automática seria difícil de lograr. Además ya en varios no es posible la inclusión automática pues uno de los pasos del formulario a llenar solicita la escritura de una cadena alfanumérica que se muestra en forma de imagen ruidosa la cual ...

Thomas Müller is  Lisa Müller nee Trede. The couple met while they were still teenagers in 2007. Thomas and Lisa tied the knot in 2009 in Ismaning, Germany. The couple doesn’t have kids. Lisa Müller Bio 32-year-old Lisa Müller was born 23 November 1989 in Weilheim in Oberbayern, West Germany.  She shares the same nationality… Continue reading Thomas Müller Wife 2021

The post Thomas Müller Wife 2021 appeared first on FootyBlog.net.

Il semblerait donc bien qu'Intel refuse les demandes de RMA pour les processeurs 14900K qui sont touchés par des soucis d'instabilité et qui utilisaient de la pâte thermique en métal liquide. Cela fait écho à un problème de prise en charge d'un de nos lecteurs, mais cela semble être la même chose pour un autre utilisateur à Hong Kong. Intel a refusé la garantie du processeur car l'IHS de ce dernier avait été détérioré par la pâte thermique, rendant illisible les numéros de série du processeur. Dans les termes de garantie des bleus, il est bien mentionné qu'un processeur exploitant du Liquid Metal Thermal Interface Material ne sera pas pris en garantie. On peut donc penser que les bleus sont dans leur bon droit et c'est le cas. […]

Le mois dernier, le Taiwan Digital Game Rating Committee listait l'existence d'un jeu Death Note à venir sur PS5 et PS4. Il n'aura pas fallu attendre bien longtemps pour que l...

Get 60% off a Sam's Club Membership - Now Only $20

A book on dog training, written to help with your dog training issues and get - and KEEP - an excellent relationship with your dog.

Follow the amazing adventures of Aimée on her quest to paint paintings with paint. Will this song help her? Tune in to find out.

Despite RIM's September win in its long-running patent dispute with NTP, the company suffered a real setback last week when a judge refused to delay NTP's appeals court case: The refusual to stay the case comes two months after a...

Dr. Alexander von Paleske --- 3.8.2024 --- Vorgestern kam in einem Ringtausch von Agenten und Straftätern (fake und real) auch der Tiergartenmórder Vadim Krasikov frei. Der war wegen des 2019 verübten Mordes an dem Tschetschenen Zelimkhan Khangoshvili vom Landgericht Berlin zu einer lebenslänglichen Freiheiststrafe verurteilt worden. Das Mordopfer Das Mordopfer stammte aus Pankisi Gorge, einem Gebiet in Georgien, seit Jahrhunderten Heimat für eine ethnische Minderheit von Tschetschenen...

Flat Rate Shipping $4.99. # Expiration: 12-31-2025

Catégorie - FEMMES » Genre - Rock

(Telecompaper) Thaicom saw its revenue from sales and services reach THB 614 million in the third quarter of 3024, which represents a decline from THB 638 million in the second quarter of 2024 and THB 623 million in the third quarter of 2023. This was mainly attributed to the revenue from satellite and related...

(Telecompaper) MultiChoice says it will update its DStv Stream platform by letting viewers rewind live television channels by up to 24 hours and improving Watch from Start functionality and Cloud PVR Recordings, which it introduced on 12 November. The Cloud PVR Recording feature lets customers record live shows for viewing or re-watching within 30 days...

Seventeen long years ago I wrote a piece here called The Gadget Manifesto. It was a rant borne out of frustration with the relentless increase in junk technology. The problem was basically too much Far Eastern manufacturing capacity chasing too few consumers. Result…price plummeting, quality plummeting, consumers suffering. I’m revisiting this subject only because it looks like we’re clearly not going to reverse course any time soon. Nearly 2 decades on, we’re still buying this junk, and throwing it away...

The post The Gadget Manifesto Revisited – plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose? appeared first on The Red Ferret Journal.

El estudio que considera 13 países de la región proporcionará información valiosa para la planificación, evaluación y comercialización de publicidad en medios y plataformas digitales.

Recientemente en el equipo de Comscore hemos tenido la oportunidad de participar en eventos de industria en los que con agrado escuchamos que los ponentes y participantes de paneles han retomado varios de los indicadores de este estudio para sustentar la evolución de Connected TV (CTV), OTT y Addressable Advertising en Latam pero, sobre todo, para resaltar la oportunidad publicitaria de este fenómeno para los anunciantes.

Nos últimos tempos, a América Latina experimentou um rápido crescimento no uso de CTV, graças à ampla variedade de conteúdo e à expansão das plataformas de streaming de vídeo. Embora na América Latina o consumo tenha crescido consideravelmente, atingindo mais de 150 milhões de espectadores, o equivalente a 41% da população digital latino-americana, quando olhamos para os cortes de consumo por país, identificamos grandes lacunas na região, que representam oportunidades de crescimento em cada país.

During this week as we venerate the cross of Christ, Fr. Tom Hopko shares a sermon by Met. Anthony Bloom on the cross and our sin.

There are so many images of Christ, the Trinity, and our worship as Orthodox Christians in the Old Testament but perhaps none so powerful as the story of Abraham.

La siguiente entrevista nos ofrece algo más sobre la iglesia Ortodoxa en América Latina con Serafina Karbo quien está cumpliendo su llamada al Señor como trabajadora en Proyecto México en Tijuana, México. Ella comparte con nosotros sobre su vida como una Cristiana Ortodoxa, su trabajo en Proyecto México, sobre su visión de cómo colaborar con la iglesia en México y América Latina. Ella se ha dedicado al labor en América Latina y la apreciamos por compartir con nosotros su fe y trabajo en el que ella colabora, el desarrollo y visión futura para trabajar en América Latina. The following interview offers us something more about the Orthodox Church in Latin America with Serafina Karbo who is fulfilling her call to the Lord as a worker in Mexico at Project Mexico in Tijuana, Mexico. She shares with us about her life as an Orthodox Christian, her work at Project Mexico and her vision for how to be more involved with the Church in Mexico and Latin America. She is dedicated to working in Latin America and we are grateful for her sharing of the faith and work that she is involved, her future plans and vision for working in Latin America.

Una entrevista inspiradora con el Padre Jesús Ruiz Munilla, un sacerdote con la Iglesia Ortodoxa de Antioquia en México. Padre Jesús también comparte con nosotros algo de la historia y el trabajo de la Iglesia Ortodoxa en México y América Latina. An inspirational interview with Fr. Jesús Ruiz Munilla, a Priest with the Antiochian Orthodox Church in Mexico. Fr. Jesús also shares with us about the history and work of the Orthodox Church in Mexico and Latin America.

St. Paul's first epistle to Timothy is full of pastoral and vocational wisdom. This is awesome. Even more awesome? Getting St. John Chrysostom's teaching on it! The version read is from The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, on the Epistles of St. Paul the Apostles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon (The Oxford Translation, Edited, with Additional Notes, by Rev. Philip Schaff, D.D., LLD.).