text:
Anti-Semitism and a World Committing Suicide
Tags: Anti-Semitism, Arab, Evil, Ilhan Omar, Islam, Israel, Jews, Leftist, political, State Department, World, Zionist.belief
We would like to begin this article by naming the name of an anti-Israel Jew who has spent much of his life within the State Department and backing the Deep State. His diatribe this time covers from his statement that, "Like it or not, the Golan Heights are Syrian territory." He continued on Twitter following up with, "Israel cannot give them up now given its legitimate security concerns. But to recognize Israel's annexation of territory that is not its own is to play with fire for partisan political purposes. No Arab state will accept it." Well, there's a risky statement right out of the box. "No Arab state will accept it," the Israeli annexation of the Golan Heights, which is history as Israel formally annexed the Golan on December 14, 1981. As far as any Arab state, recognizing this move, how about telling us when any Arab state has recognized Israel's right to exist? But former United States Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk under President Clinton and then briefly under President George W. Bush while he sought his replacement, is no stranger to making statements critical of Israel. Much of his angst against Israel is purely political as he loves Israeli governments which make concessions after concessions in return for nada but he develops a serious disdain when a more Zionist government takes power as Indyk is a huge supporter of the two-state solution retreating to the Green Line. Indyk is a good Deep State, State Department operative where hating Israel is policy. Unfortunately, Indyk is far from alone, he is simply from the halls of the government often wielding power over policies which can have such devastating effects should they ever actually be implemented. The State Department opposed recognizing Israel when she declared statehood, but fortunately, President Harry S. Truman had a mother who raised him with a bible in her hand and taught him that Israel was, is and should always remain the Jewish State.
Martin Indyk
American Jews, including prominent figures like Naomi Klein, have signed an open letter in support of Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. You cannot make these things up nor is it difficult to find these dangerous types. Their letter went on claiming that she has been "falsely accused of antisemitism" and that there was nothing anti-Semitic about calling out the "noxious" role of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in American politics. They continued claiming, "The pro-Israel lobby has played an outsized role in producing nearly unanimous congressional support for Israel", and slammed AIPAC and other lobby groups including the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the fossil fuel lobby for its "anti-democratic" legislative influence on US politics. We understand from where these Jews arise, in the far-left who believe that conservatives, Zionists, nationalists and anything which opposes the furthest leftist dreams of the Democrat Party are simply evil and must be eradicated from having any voice in the political arena. Finally, the letter finished by saying "We thank Ilhan Omar for having the bravery to shake up the congressional taboo against criticizing Israel. As Jews with a long tradition of social justice and anti-racism, AIPAC does not represent us." and called on other Jews to sign the letter. Well, imagine that, a pro-Israel and mildly Zionist lobby, AIPAC, is not their cup of tea, one can only guess where else they have problems with Israel.
Leo Ferguson, the movement-building organizer at Jews for Racial & Economic Justice, expressed hope that the concern about Ilhan Omar will result in a teaching moment for America stating, "The opportunity here, if we take it, is for all of us to become much sharper in our understanding of (Jewish) anti-Semitism," and that "There is an incredibly powerful opening for white Jews to understand their deep mutual interest and potential solidarity with black people, because white supremacy is coming for all of us." And then there are the Israeli Jews who side with Ms. Omar and leading the list is Gideon Levy, the Jew anti-Zionist who writes for Haaretz who stands squarely with Ilhan Omar. The truth and sorriest thing is we could list article after article with Jewish groups and individuals all of whom will willingly line up with any group willing to criticize Israel. For some it is political as they hate Prime Minister Netanyahu and his labeled right-wing coalitions as well as many who have hate for those Jews who are religious and follow Torah strictly and finally there are those who politically align on the left and the fact that Israel does not support the Democrat Party, and even worse, align with President Trump, makes them despicable. These Jews have a great blind spot and it derives largely from their political beliefs which claim that all customs, all religions, all political systems which are leftist socialist, and all politicians who also appear to follow the anti-Western World, anti-Judeo-Christian and secular-humanist socialist agenda must be lauded and protected from all forms of protest. Many of these individuals see no difference between their far left ideology which believes that the State should rule supreme and people follow exactly the dictates of those in power see Islam as backing a similar agenda. Many believe that Islam is a great ally and will aid in the ridding the world of Judeo-Christianity and the ethics which it introduced as Islam too desires to rid the world of the Judeo-Christian ethic. They honestly believe that once their secular-humanist allies and Islam band together and rid the world of the evils of Capitalism as it is a money-grubbing evil corrupting the world, then they can simply dance their way in and convince the Muslims to accept their secular-humanism belief system and the world will be forever a better place.
So, these leftists are cozying up next to history's greatest killers who have actually murdered more Muslims than the rest of the world's faiths combined. They have gone so far in deluding themselves that many wear Burkas claiming that it liberates women from being sex objects. They do not see the Burkas as demeaning of women, no, they claim that they are liberating. Many of those who stand with Islam, including the numerous deluded politicians who claim that, Islam is the religion of peace, do so and we stand astonished at their complete lack of knowledge about the Quran, the fact that there are two separate Qurans, one peaceful and one is a document for world conquest, lack any knowledge about the history surrounding Islam and many are not even aware of their own country's historic problems caused by Islam, are simply talking in tropes provided them often by the people in the State Department and other government institutions which have been influenced by billions in petro-dollars. There has also been a great pouring of funds into the universities and colleges largely taking over the Middle East departments. There are some states where Islamic influences have taken over the public schools and choose books friendly to Islam and counter to Western culture and beliefs. These are things which the Western world need to learn and do so before it is too late. For many parts of Europe, it may already be too late as Islamic pressures have resulted in governments backing down and giving additional leeway to Islam.
What is probably the saddest of all stories are those where a leftist, either believing their own lies or simply so far gone that they willingly sacrifice innocent youth before Islam. This is performed by leftist groups and politicians who send young people into the Islamic world supposedly to advance cultural awareness and expand their horizons. Some crucial examples can be found in this excellent article which throws open the light of day on these horrific incidents. It depicts the belief which, while not solely a leftist belief, it is a predominantly leftist idea that true evil does not exist. We have some horrible news for the real world, evil is out there and not all the evil emanates from the man in the White House. Real evil often comes riding the horse of multiculturalism and the belief that the United States would be a stronger and more balanced nation if only America would allow for a broader and more diverse set of immigrants. This was what the Senator Ted Kennedy backed Hart–Celler Act of 1965was designed to do, by altering the quota system away from Europe and to the Middle East and North Africa simply by demanding broadening immigration with the aim of racial diversity. This was the start of immigration from the Muslim world which had only been broadened since and it is reaching the point where most Europeans from traditional nations from which the United States was built became taboo and peoples who had historically been adversarial were now preferred.
The leftists will destroy any and every nation which has based their history on the Judeo-Christian ethic simply because they actually believe that it is beyond time to replace the basic ethics of their society into some foreign concept because the rest of the world has to be superior and the West has a history of being evil by bringing the world into the information age. The world need to be turned onto its head simply to see what shakes out and then if it survives that, they will want to spin the world around to see what shakes out. They insist that they have a better plan for the future in which there will be no poverty, no religion, no borders and everything will be beautiful. Their alliance with Islam is simply to destroy the Judeo-Christian basis of Western society because of the evil of colonialism. They ignore the fourteen-hundred years of Islamic conquest and colonialism. Only Western colonialism is evil, Islam is the religion of peace and what they are banking the future of Europe and the rest of the Western world. The education system is not going to save the society as it has become just another venue for leftist indoctrination and produces "educated" people who have no ability to think logically. This is what is facing the world and specifically Europe and the rest of the Western nations and there does not appear to be any means of preventing this planned decline. Islam will take over the West and that will bring a swift end to much of the progress attained in the last two centuries. We know people will point to the "Golden Age of Islam" claiming that the world will simply return to such a dream world where everything will be simply great. The problem is the Golden Age of Islam lasted for as long as they conquered new lands and died as these lands became totally Islamic and there were no more people with reason, well, not sufficient people. Look and see how many Nobel Prizes have gone to people from Islamic nations and that might provide a small insight. We wish it would look brighter, but there are only very dark and threatening clouds on every horizon. A storm is brewing which may take mankind back a thousand years before it can be reversed, and that would be very sad indeed.
War of Words Escalating Between Iran and America
Tags: Evil, IAEA, Iran, Israel, Missiles, North Korea, nuclear weapons, President Rouhani, Saddam Hussein, Trump, United States, War, Warhead
We wish to first cover the story of the IDF rescue of the eight-hundred White Helmets (Syrian civil organization of emergency responders) and their families from southern Syria war zone. Coverage by Arutz Sheva with a short video can be viewed here. This operation was carried out by Israel in response to pleas from President Trump, Canada and other European countries. One can only wonder how long before the same Europeans claim that Israel is not a nice nation as is their usual.
United States President Trump and Iranian President Rouhani have been exchanging verbal threats with President Trump adding in a social media Tweet just for good measure (see image below). President Trump even went so far as to use "caps lock" just for emphasis. President Rouhani promised in his retort to something President Trump stated which he found upsetting, that, "Peace with Iran would be the mother of all peace and war with Iran would be the mother of all wars." We seem to remember a neighboring country's ruler promising an American President the "Mother of all Wars" once before and that did not end all too well for Saddam Hussein. The reality is that Iran very well could be speaking from a position of relative strength unlike Saddam Hussein. We thought we would play with some thoughts, fears, and potential realities which should be taken into consideration and all intelligence gone through with a fine tooth-comb before stepping into the void.
President Trump Warning Tweet to Iranian President Rouhani
Iranian President Rouhani could have the ability to back up much of his threat with very real actions. Iran has been researching nuclear weaponry in various forms since the late 1980's or, at best, the early 1990's including specific research into EMP devices and miniaturized warheads. For argument's sake, we will pretend that Iran had no real urgency about their research, something of which we actually believe they likely had a great deal, and their research proceeded at a leisurely pace. The Manhattan Project started in 1942 and developed the atomic bomb within three years and the United States tested their first hydrogen bomb, a thermonuclear bomb, within ten years of the start of the Manhattan Project. The United States had to start from scratch while the Iranians had knowledge on the architecture for both atomic and thermonuclear devices almost from the start. Their main difficulty was the processing or manufacturing of sufficient Uranium-235 or Plutonium-239 for the core of their devices. One item which is well known to those who have been paying attention to Iran is that they have been developing more and more advanced centrifuges capable of separating out enriched Uranium-235 at a fairly well advanced pace. Further, it can be assumed that their cooperation with North Korea has permitted them to test at least one or two devices over the years if not numerous more. They also would probably have exchanged information back and forth both on nuclear weaponry and guided missile technology which explains both nations' fairly rapid advancement in both areas. Lastly, as the Chinese very likely had stolen or otherwise received the complete schematics and machining and design specifications for the United States W-88 warhead, it can be assumed that both North Korea and Iran have had access to that same information, though one could hope such is not the case. We are attempting to avoid using hope as our main argument in this instance.
So, it is painfully obvious that by the year 2000 Iran would easily have built sufficient processing facilities to produce the fissile and fusion elements for the production of thermonuclear warheads and the sole question is how many devices might they have produced. This is where estimates have been all over the board. According to sources reported and quoted by the Times of Israel, "Tehran has crossed all points of no return and already has its first nuclear weapon, and maybe more." The same article also reports that the IAEA has assured the world that Iran in no way could have conceivably developed and built a nuclear bomb. We recall that the IAEA are the same people who claimed Saddam Hussein was not working on nuclear weapons, that Syria had no nuclear weapon dreams, that Libya had no nuclear program and that North Korea was years from being able to produce a nuclear weapon days before their first nuclear test. The IAEA has not been the most reliable source on nuclear proliferation as they are presumed to be preventing it and have decided that if they see no evil and hear no evil then they are able to speak no evil. Below we have included an artist's rendition of two IAEA inspectors and one spokesperson. The evidence is that should Iran have desired to construct nuclear weapons, then the only question remaining is exactly how many of them have they produced, what are their projected yields and how distant can their missiles deliver them. These are serious questions which deserve answers which should be made known to the world through the United Nations or by the nation who knows the reality making the knowledge more generally known. This means if the CIA has solid evidence proving that Iran has nuclear tipped missiles, they should be producing such evidence for the world to see and reveal the perfidy of the Iranian claims of innocence and having no desire to become a nuclear-armed nation.
Three monkeys of "See no evil, Hear no evil, Speak no evil"
As things currently stand, it would be more prudent to assume that Iran has nuclear tipped missiles in the ready and that these missiles are capable of striking anywhere on the planet. It should also be assumed that they would have such shorter-range missiles stored within what appear to be normative cargo vessels as they have developed such vessels to use to strike at cities along the shores of the United States and Europe should hostilities become to their advantage. These missiles would be extremely difficult to intercept, as their targets would be struck within minutes of the missile launching, as the ship would be only one-hundred miles offshore or closer. Iran has tested these systems finding them to be accurate and an efficient and difficult to deter system for delivering a warhead. The cargo ships they would utilize would more than likely be registered with a country other than Iran making them all but invisible unless the warhead could be detected. Iran is also rumored to have developed a non-nuclear EMP device which is capable of destroying the electrical grid for a city and surrounding region depending on the level of hardening the electrical grid has had installed. One can pretty much expect that at least the streetlights and traffic signals would be affected and stop functioning for a period of time. The real problem is if transformers are destroyed and the larger the transformer, the more serious the outage. The largest transformers can take up to two years to produce in sufficient numbers should an entire grid region be destroyed.
The truth is that both President Trump and President Rouhani are playing with fire and their bellicose threats can escalate potentially leading to one or the other taking the decision that the insults have reached a level beyond that which they are willing to accept and in order to save face they must act. This could lead to problems and further escalations which could end further than desired from the starting point. The Iranians including Iran Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Commander Mohammad Ali Jafari has promised that should the United States prevent Iranian oil sales, they will prevent all oil from traversing the Straights of Hormuz. According to Xinhua, Jafari stressed, enemies can understand the meaning of Hormuz Strait "either for all, or for none." The United States has promised that they will protect the use of the Straights of Hormuz for the oil shipments of both Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, so should President Trump prevent Iranian oil shipments and Iran act on their threat, there would necessarily be a confrontation. Iran today is not the same Iran which fought Saddam Hussein during the 1980's. They have more potential and are well practiced at their swarming tactics which create a great deal of difficulty against which to defend. Any naval confrontation within the Arabian Gulf and especially the Straights of Hormuz would also include Iranian shore batteries which would take time, short as it may be, to render inoperative which would also be seen as a further escalation. One can readily see how any confrontation over the free movement of oil in and out of the Straights of Hormuz could very quickly spin out of control. One can only guess as to how the United States would react should one of their nuclear aircraft carriers be attacked and actually sunk. Such would lead to reprisals which would provoke reprisals in return and back and forth until something inevitable and regrettable resulted. Wars have started over far less; take World War I for example. How many people died over a single terrorist act murdering Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie the Duchess of Hohenberg. So, now we are at the point of which leaders lower their level of vitriol, and let us pray one of them sees the wisdom in doing exactly that.
Some Ideas Never Die; Such as the Oslo Accords
Filed under: Act of War,Administration,Amalekites,Angela Merkal,Anti-Israel,Anti-Semitism,Anti-Zionist,Arab Authority,Arab World,Binding Resolution,Blood Libel,Britain,British Mandate,Cabinet,Calaphate,China,Chinese Pressure,Civilization,Conflict Avoidnce,Coverup,Czech Republic,Denmark,Deportation,Equal Responsibility,Equal Rights,Equal Treatment,Equality,Europe,European Pressure,European Union,Executive Order,German Pressure,Germany,Government,Hate,History,Immigrant,Islam,Islam,Islamic Pressure,Islamic State Forces,Islamist,Israel,Jihad,Jordan River,Kurdish Militias,Leftist Pressures,Likud,Mainland China,Mediterranean Sea,Military,Muslim Expansionism,Muslim Invade Europe from the East,Muslim Invasoin of Europe from the West,Muslim World,Nationalist Pressures,Norway,Parliament,Politicized Findings,Politics,Protect Citizenry,Response to Terrorism,Secular Interests,Sharia Law,Six Day War,State Legislature,Taqiyya,United Nations Presures,United States State Department,Victims,Zionism,Zionist — qwertster @ 3:40 AM
Tags: Angela Markel, anti Semitism, Belfast, British, British Home Secretary, China, Czech Republic, Dutch Parliament, Europe Union, Evil, Ireland, Islam, Israel, Japan, Jews, Jordan River, Machiel De Graaf, Mandate, Mediterranean Sea, Netherlands, Oslo Accords, Palestine, Palestinian, Refugees, Six Day War, Xinjiang
Truly some ideas never die even when they have long passed their use-by-date. The Oslo Accords are one such set of ideas which died the day that President William Jefferson Clinton handed to Yasser Arafat, after beating Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak into complete submission, everything he had demanded and Arafat walked out without a word and started the Second Intifada. It was later revealed that Arafat had planned the Second Intifada as the Palestinian answer to not getting their demands at the Camp David negotiations and still insisted that Israeli resistance to a common peace was the reason for the violence. Over a thousand Israelis were murdered and tens of thousands were injured, many with permanent and severe damage from the bombings with bolts and screws lodged permanently next to their spines, hearts and other organs or jammed into their brains all inoperable due to location. Many lost limbs, an eye or both eyes and other disfigurements. The Second Intifada, on top of Arafat refusing to make peace even after his terms were met, defined the situation and should have been the post mortem for the Oslo Accords. Arafat's understudy and successor, Mahmoud Abbas, has often made clear to any willing to translate his Arabic speeches that the only peace he will allow Israel is the peace of the grave. As the pro-Palestinian protesters throughout Western countries chant ad-nauseam, "From the River to the Sea, Palestine must be free." The word 'free' in this chant has a double meaning, the obvious that all of Israel is Palestine and secondly that every Jew will have been eradicated as Palestine must be Judenrein. Abbas has flatly stated even in English that should they be forced into accepting a shared state beside Israel, it will simply serve as the launching pad for the remainder of the conquest and eradication of the Zionist Entity. Even his saying Israel is difficult for this man and his band of minions.
What is truly sad is not only the number of Western leaders who remain sold on the Oslo two states for two peoples principle; it is the number of Israeli military and intelligence leadership who also are still sold on these lies and deceptions. There never has been any Oslo agreement because the understanding of the two sides were as divergent as possible. Israel saw them as the opportunity for peace and cooperation and the Palestinian leadership, with the support of the Arab world behind them, saw it as taqiyyah, a deceit used against an infidel in order to advance Islamic interests and conquest. The concept of taqiyyah is well established and understood by any first year graduate student in Middle Eastern studies programs; and if not, they should find a different area of study. The problem is that peace is such a universal and central structure in Western thought and philosophies, as are negotiations and dealing honestly and forthrightly, that to believe that things are otherwise is difficult, though possible if one tries and concentrates on exactly what the other side says to their own people. What makes things more difficult is that the liberal leftist media and populations refuse to allow themselves, under any circumstance, to believe that peace might be impossible to attain in any situation. If the left today were faced with the onset of World War II, they would negotiate and negotiate until the free world consisted of some small atoll in the South Pacific surrounded by Japanese and German naval vessels, and they would be negotiating still. There is also the little fact that Israel is seen as the Jew amongst nations and as such has a separate and impossible set of expectations which are made worse by the leftist Jews, such as those who make up J-street and other similar groups, who also apply this absurd demand that Israel sacrifice and sacrifice with no end to how much or how far the sacrifice demanded be, as they are not the ones who will pay the price. Some have even gone so far as to claim, what do the Israelis have to lose in sacrificing for peace as they can always come and live in the United States. This is, in and of itself, an absurd piece of illogic not to mention, history has shown what happens when Jews face death and try to rely on the good graces of the Western nations.
We recently read an article on Politico targeting Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu over his disagreement with the outspoken and mostly retired military and intelligence corps, and how such a disagreement is leading Israel dangerously close to fascism. It was the author's, and we trust the editors' as well, that Israelis would be better led by its military and intelligence officers than under their elected leader. The article is titled Netanyahu vs. the Generals and went on and on endlessly stating the same tired logic as if repetition and quoting every last individual supporting the spitefulness against Netanyahu would eventually wear the reader down. The piece might actually be the opening shot across the bow announcing the candidacy of Ehud Barak for Prime Minister. Small hint to those in agreement, should Israelis have a choice between Ehud Barak and virtually any moderate or even extremist right wing politician, Barak would lose convincingly. Where his reputation is not nearly that of Guy Fawkes, the disasters attached to his time as Prime Minister preclude his ever holding that position for as long as Israelis have memories of his atrocious policy choices, of which the hasty and disorganized routing retreat from Lebanon is just the beginning of the highlight reel. For the record neither of us supported Likud and in one case, at least, Bibi Netanyahu was much of the reason why as there are numerous other Likud members who would very easily garner our votes, but that is up to the Likudnics to decide. We realize that changes take time, so time will tell.
British Mandate as prescribed division between Arab State of Jordan and Jewish State of Israel
As far as peace with the Palestinians, we need realize that the term Palestinian once meant the Jews residing under British Mandate rule while at those times the Arabs were known as Arabs or Palestinian Arabs as compared to Palestinian Jews. One also need remember that this was during the period when both Jordan and Israel were simply the Mandate. Eventually the plan was enacted and Jordan became the Arab State and Israel the Jewish State. The most obvious difference was Israel permitted Arabs, whether practicing Muslims, Christians, Jews or any other or no religion, to remain residing with full rights as citizens, while Jordan expelled any Jew ever to come within their area under their control. That was made most evident after they conquered by force of arms in an offensive war parts of Judea and Samaria, renamed it West Bank, and evicted every last Jew under pain of death, gifting their lands to people favored by the government and destroyed every Synagogue and Jewish religious academy within said lands. The adopting of Palestinian by the Arabs was just one part of their adoption of all of Jewish history with some simple adjustments in an effort to claim them and not the Israelites, the Jews, were the earliest surviving peoples from these areas. Anybody familiar with Judeo-Christian religions knows this to be a deceit and even more so if they are knowledgeable of Islamic and Arab history, as the Arabs did not venture forth from the Arabian Peninsula until the Seventh Century. That date is almost, if not, two millennia after the Israelites arrived from their Exodus from Egypt; one might be familiar with this as there is a book of the Old Testament with the same name. If we were to count from the times when Abraham first arrived in the land, we would need close to another half of a millennia if not more. Their deceit can only last as long as people continue to give their lies credence, which they do at their own peril. Such brings us to our next discussion, the awakening of the Western World.
For most of the past century plus the casualty of Islamic violence has been the Jewish communities in the area of Israel both before the birth of the nation in 1948 and continuously afterwards starting with the invasion by multiple armies the morning of her birth. India and Russia had rather publicly covered conflicts and numerous African nations have also been subjected to violence as have much of the Balkans. Then there have been the intra-Islamic violence. It has only been the turn of the Twenty-First Century which has brought continued and sustained Islamic violence to the Western World. What is going to be instructive is exactly how the developed world reacts to the onslaught of Islamic violence. Of further interest will be whether or not their views and demands upon Israel are altered even in the slightest as a result of these experiences. Russia has shown Israel a fair degree of respect and freedom to act as necessary while not giving full measure as they also keep relations with the Muslim nations such as with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria; for it is with Syria they hold their Mediterranean warm water Atlantic Naval ports.
Beyond this, the longest standing restrictions on Islamic activities belong with Japan. Many are unaware but Japan has always refused Muslims permanent residence status in their lands. Further, Muslims may not own property, may not operate a business and the worship of Islam is banned. Needless to point out but no Mosque may ever be built on Japanese soil. Muslim tourism is permitted but any Muslim tourist caught conducting any form of Islamic instructions or otherwise attempting to spread the word of Islam is summarily and immediately deported along with their entire family; and if with a group, then the entire group is deported. The Japanese treat Islam as if it were a dread plague that once taking a foothold could threaten life on their islands. If the news is accurate, and we see no reason to disbelieve our sources, Cuba has recently refused permission for a Mosque to be built on their island, Cuba, that's right, Cuba! Angola is but the first in alphabetical order of African nations enacting some limit if not outright ban on Islam.
In Europe the latest trend has been in opposition to Angela Markel's open door policy for Muslims with Norway having deported many hundreds resulting in a better than 50% drop in felonies. This is allowing their police to attend to other functions rather than putting out crime emergencies twenty-four-seven for the first time since the 'refugees' began arriving. Additionally there have been reports of attacks against Mosques and Muslims with some areas becoming so unfriendly that the Muslims are deporting themselves back to their home nations. The Czech Republic has flat banned Islam from their country declaring it to be an evil. Muslims in Ireland have reached the conclusion that they are less than welcome and in Belfast, as a start, the Muslims have been departing for home sweet home and this appears to be the trend across all of Northern Ireland. The British Home Secretary is preparing legislations which, though not expressly stating their application to Muslims, are aimed at curtailing anti-social behavior and allowing greater leeway in deporting or using other lesser methods to control an out of hand situation. The Polish Defense League has issued a warning to Muslims against their continuing certain behaviors and sixteen states have drafted legislation banning Sharia. A number of states in America are entertaining laws banning Sharia or any foreign code of laws all aimed at preventing the use of Sharia. China has imprisoned twenty-two Imams for preaching hate and anti-China themes and has executed eighteen jihadists. China is additionally stamping out any campaigns for separatism especially in the largely Islamic western province of Xinjiang. Muslim prayers are banned in government buildings and schools in China. Our last example of such measures comes from the Netherlands where a group of Ministers of Parliament are calling for the closure and destruction of all Mosques. One Minister stated "We want to clean Netherlands of hateful Islam." He did not differentiate hateful Islam from any other form of Islam. Speaking on behalf of the right wing Party for Freedom, a nationalist party, Minister of the Dutch Parliament Machiel De Graaf stated, "All Mosques in the Netherlands should be shut down. Without Islam the Netherlands would be a wonderful, safe country to live in, as it was before the arrival of Muslim 'refugees'."
The world appears to slowly be awakening to the real face of Islam; a violent and unruly cult more desirous of ruling the world than of acting in what the rest of the world believes is a religious manner. Every other previous imperialist religion, Christianity, Shinto, Hindu and any others, have all been reformed and now stand side by side with all these religions seeking peaceful coexistence and mutual assistance. The exception to this rule is obvious, Islam. When Mosques are discovered in numerous countries to contain more rifles, grenades, bombs and bomb making material than prayer rugs and prayer books, then there is a definite problem. As the developed world realizes, along with the rest of the world, this threat for what it is, it is hoped that they will apply their learned knowledge to the situation in Israel. This could finally allow the solution which should have been applied immediately after the Six Day War, Israel attaining her originally promised borders, which includes the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, and those previous Jordanian citizens and their families deported to the Arab nation of their choosing willing to receive them, or into Syria. The double standard cannot be continued after the truth has been driven home that Islam does not play well with others and is treacherous to the continued health of any nation it inhabits. What is good for the European nations and the world in general must, in all fairness, also be permitted Israel. To do otherwise is pure anti-Semitism, and this time that is an accurate accusation and an accurate application of the terminology.


This page displays sold house prices for Derwent Drive in Leeds.
Derwent Drive in Adel, Leeds consists predominantly of detached houses. Properties on Derwent Drive typically have values around £400,000 - £550,000, but larger detached houses can command upwards of £550,000.
Map showing Derwent Drive in Leeds.


text:
HomeLecture BooksMoral Values and the Idea of God
14: Pluralism
THE preceding argument has not solved our problem; but it has brought us nearer a solution. We have seen that a complete view of reality must find a place for two things: on the one hand for the realm of persons and events, and on the other hand for the moral order or more generally for the realm of values. If our universe is to be a universe, these two things must be brought into relation so that both together may be regarded as belonging to the same whole. We have found, moreover, that prima facie, or in the world as it appears, these two things do not harmonise—that the causal order, which determines the way in which things happen and the actual conduct of persons, does not exhibit any exact correspondence with the moral order, and is often in conflict with it. And we saw that the two orders could only be brought into harmony on the assumption that the agreement of fact and goodness was a purpose which persons had to achieve and which could be achieved only by their free activity in some such world as this. On this hypothesis the causal order will be contributory to the moral order and the world as a whole will be regarded as a purposive system. This is the solution to which the argument points; but it is, not the only solution of the problem that has been offered.
Theories of thee nature of reality may be distinguished by the place which they assign to consciousness and purpose in the whole. Either consciousness and purpose are ascribed to the ultimate ground or principle of reality or they are not. If they are, then our theory is some form of theism; if not, not. In the latter case we shall hold that the only conscious and purposeful beings are finite minds such as our own. But there will still be room for difference in our theory according to the place assigned to finite minds in the universe. We may look upon them as the ultimate constituents of reality, or we may hold that they are merely modes or appearances of the one ultimate reality. In the former case our view will be a form of Pluralism: in the latter it will be a monistic view which may be called Pantheism. We have to consider how each view fares in the effort to solve our problem; and in this consideration Pluralism will be taken first.
Pluralism corresponds to a permanent and justifiable attitude of thought, though it has often been submerged by the success of scientific verifications of uniformity or by prevalence of a monistic philosophy. It has, however, a way of re-appearing after every temporary eclipse. It is the variety and not the unity of the world that first strikes the observer, and the effort to reach a unitary view of reality is constantly faced by the discovery of new factors which seem to break into the harmony of the existing conception In this secular controversy the Many appear as the enemy of the One; and the latter can compass victory only by showing that it is able to include in its unity each new appearance of diversity. Monism may take many forms, materialist or spiritual; and the same holds of pluralism. But the essential characteristic of pluralism is the view that the final account of things is to be sought in a great variety of distinct units and not in some more fundamental principle or power which makes them real and also in some sense one.
These ultimate units, however, may be conceived in different ways, thus giving rise to different types of pluralism. In the first place, the ultimate units of all reality may be held to be material atoms. This is the most familiar type of the doctrine historically; and, although the traditional atoms of physics and chemistry have been disintegrated by modern research, the electrons of present theory may easily be utilised for another doctrine of the same type. In the second place, the ultimate units may be held to be of the nature of sensations or presentations, or other elements into which mental states may be resolved by the psychologist. This form of doctrine, familiar to us in Hume and J. S. Mill, may be called Psychological atomism. In the third place, it may be said that the ultimate units constitutive of reality are entities of the nature of qualities or concepts which by their diverse combinations appear as the world of persons and things; and this may be called a logical atomism. Finally, it may be said that ultimate reality consists of a multiplicity of spiritual entities, of which the human soul is the highest known to us. This spiritual atomism is the leading type of philosophical pluralism an has been worked out by Leibniz and many other.
Further, it is possible for these various types of pluralism to be combined in different ways. Distinct units of more one, or of all, kinds may be postulated. Atoms psychological as well as atoms material may be held to be ultimate constituents of reality. Or logical atoms may be assumed alongside of one or both of these. Or again spiritual units also may be assumed as well as some—or even all—of the foregoing. The possible combinations are numerous. But one question is of decisive interest for our special problem—the question whether minds or spiritual units are recognised as among the ultimate constituents of reality. If they are not, then the primary difficulty for the theory lies in the explanation of the origin and presence of mind in experience. How are we to account for the subjective aspect of experience—for that by which alone material things can be perceived or by which atoms (whether regarded as physical or psychological or logical) can be conceived? These theories have to encounter the familiar objections which have been pressed against materialistic atomism and psychological presentationism, and which have never been satisfactorily met. But it is not necessary here to dwell upon these objections. There is a sufficient reason which excuses us from treading once more this well-trodden ground. Values, as we have already seen, belong, to the structure of that reality which we are called upon to interpret; and neither the psychological nor the materialistic form of atomism recognises their place. With the view called logical atomism it is different. Values may be acknowledged among the concepts or qualities to which reality (though not existence) is ascribed. But this view also must be held to be put out of court by the argument of an earlier chapter. For we have found that values—intrinsic values, that is—belong to persons only. Persons are required for the realisation of the concept value; and it is only in connexion with the lives of selves or persons that values belong to the structure of the universe as the sum-total of existence. Consequently, when our special problem is concerned with the relation of the moral order to the order of nature, only one of the types of pluralism can claim to give the solution desired. Whatever else it may admit or refuse to admit as fundamental, it must at least assert the reality of minds or selves. It will be a spiritual pluralism.
The pluralist, in this meaning of the term, will envisage the world as consisting of a vast number of spiritual units, which have been variously called monads, subjects, souls, or selves. These monads may be regarded either as infinitely numerous or as strictly limited in number, and the view of the universe as a whole will differ accordingly. Their nature also may be differently conceived; and divergent views may be held regarding the extent to which the nature of one of them varies from that of others. Among them the soul or mind of man will almost necessarily be reckoned: for that is the only spiritual being of which we have any direct knowledge; and from it indeed all our ideas of spiritual existence are formed. But it is of course possible that the line of monads may stretch far downwards to inferior grades of spiritual being; and that there may be many monads higher or more developed in their characteristics than the human soul. How far the line extends in either direction it is difficult to say; and genuine pluralists may well differ in opinion. At the lower end of the scale the limit may only be set by the feeblest kind of subjectivity that can render any experience or reality possible. At the higher end the question of a limit raises a more serious problem. Whatever constitutes the reality of the monad—be it clearness or power or activity or perfection of whatever kind—the degree of that perfection may stretch downwards indefinitely to the naked monad of Leibniz's imagination. Does it also extend indefinitely upwards and find its term only in a monad of infinite intelligence, power, and perfection? If so our universe of spirits includes one which is supreme and will be called God. This indeed was Leibniz's own view. And if the striving of the monad is always towards the higher development or greater perfection of its nature, then this one supreme being which realises all perfection will also be regarded as the final cause of all reality. It has even been maintained, as by Professor Howison, that every possible degree of being is essential to the whole and that therefore a supreme and infinite mind is necessary in the universe. True, finite minds are also as necessary as the infinite mind, so that the view is not identical with the most common form of theism; but it is essentially theistic. In particular, and with regard to our special problem, it provides, by its supreme mind, a home for intrinsic values and a possible means of reconciling them with the empirical order of natural events. For this view, therefore, God is the solution.
On the other hand, it may be held by pluralists that the monads or minds that make up reality are themselves—all of them—finite. However superior in degree some may be to others, each is limited by all the others, so that it is impossible for any one of them to be infinite, or even supreme in any sense that would justify us in calling it God. In another rendering of the same view, spiritual units or monads may be said to be ultimate differentiations of the Absolute. By the term absolute, as used here, will be meant the whole of reality. It will be infinite if its ultimate differentiations are infinite in number, for it is their sum-total; but infinity cannot be predicated of any one of these differentiations. Among the many minds which make up the, universe there can be none with infinite power, else the others would be unessential, and pluralism would be relinquished; none with complete perfection, for that could only be by borrowing the values belonging to all the others; none with a universal reference, for that would be to interfere with the inner life of the others. In this sense, therefore, pluralism will exclude theism; and it is this interpretation of the theory whose ability to meet our question has to be examined.
The universe then, it is assumed, consists of finite spiritual units, among which the human mind alone is directly known to us. There may be other spiritual units of a higher grade than the human mind, as there are almost certainly some of a lower grade, but none among them is of so high a grade as to be infinite or even supreme. The problem now is, Does this theory afford a satisfactory means of explaining the characteristics of reality which have been already brought to light? and this problem may be resolved into two questions: first, does pluralism succeed in explaining reality as a whole (in which value is included)? and secondly, is its own postulate of a plurality of finite minds as constitutive of reality a postulate which can be admitted as in need of no further presupposition, or does it itself rest upon a more fundamental though implicit condition regarding the nature of reality?
The spiritual monads which are held by pluralists to be the ultimate constituents of reality, and which are best known to us in the form of finite minds, are surrounded by an environment of an orderly kind. In it we have already distinguished the natural, the logical, and the moral orders; and the problem which pluralism has been called in to solve arises from the apparent conflict between the first and last of these orders. But what account does the theory give of this orderly environment as a whole? Either the environment is dependent upon and a product of finite minds, or it is independent of them. Both possibilities must be examined.
The former alternative is the solution offered by idealism or spiritualism, when that theory is interpreted in harmony with pluralism. As mind is the only reality, the environment of mind must itself be mental, a product or mode of mind or in some way dependent upon mind. The universe in its essential nature is simply a community, perhaps only an aggregate, of minds. The facts experienced or observed by any mind, the spatial and temporal order in which they are placed, their causal connexions, and the whole order of truth and of value must be mental formations—without any existence outside the minds that possess them. This view is familiar enough. But it is necessary to put a question about it which is often avoided. How are we to regard the mind which determines or produces this orderly procession of fact under stable laws and ideals, and thus makes a universe out of chaos or out of nothing? It cannot be a universal mind from which all individual minds receive the content and form of their experience, for this would be a supreme mind on which all the others would depend, as the theist conceives them to do, and the theory would cease to be pluralism in the sense in which pluralism is opposed to theism. Nor can it be some all-embracing spiritual reality, though not conceived as conscious; for, on such a hypothesis also, the theory would no longer be pluralism, but would be a form of pantheism. The mind which determines the facts and order of the world must therefore be, in each case, the finite spiritual unit which is the subject of that experience. Each monad or mind must produce its own universe, unrolling it from within. I, for instance, by means of certain innate forms or modes of consciousness, give spatial and temporal position, causal connexion, numerical distinctness and other relations, to some chaotic impression, or more strictly, to nothing at all, and thereby produce what I call the world. But you in the same way make a world for yourself, and so does everybody else. A radical pluralism would thus seem to require a distinct universe for each distinct monad. As each mind or monad makes its universe, each universe must be distinct: as many minds so many worlds.
Further, within the universe which is the construction or creation of that monad which I call myself, I find that there are many other minds in addition to my own, and these minds are known to me only through their physical expressions—their bodies and the changes in the environment that seem to be due to them—that is, through their connexion with the order of the universe which is my construction or creation. They are known as having a position in time and space, as interacting, and generally as constitutive parts of my universe, and in these respects must be regarded as my construction or creation. And each of these minds, I am obliged to admit, may retort upon me in similar terms, and claim me as a part of its universe. And in each case the universe cannot be the same as mine; it may be like it or unlike; experience provides no means of telling. Each self has his own universe because he produces it; and if he could only keep to the evidence and to his own point of view, he would suppose his own universe to be all. This thorough pluralism is accordingly unable to avoid Solipsism; and Leibniz evaded the conclusion only because he assumed at the outset that there was a single universe which each monad mirrored with varying degrees of clearness, while it was manifested with perfect clearness in the consciousness of the one Supreme Mind. Unless he had recognised the reality of the supreme mind or monad, it would have been impossible for Leibniz to reconcile with his monadism the doctrine that the universal system is a single reality, a reality reflected by each monad from its own point of view.
It will have been observed that the preceding argument has gone upon a certain assumption. It has assumed, as Leibniz assumed, that the life and experience of each monad, are unfolded entirely from within, unaffected by the activity of any other monad. But this assumption has been in general rejected by modern pluralists. The monads or ultimate spiritual constituents of reality are regarded by them as interacting. The monads affect one another by their activity; one produces changes upon another and assists or hinders the development of its life. May we not therefore look upon the universal order in which all live not as the creation of each and therefore different for each, but as the cooperative product of all, and therefore the same for all?
It is clear that knowledge of nature and of the order of nature is a cooperative product of this kind. When we look at the history of science, we see that the result is due to a long succession of minds working both separately and together, testing the observations and theories of their predecessors, and assimilating easily the discoveries due to the strenuous labour of earlier workers. One builds on another's foundation; conclusions are confirmed and corrected by new methods and acquired skill; conceptions and theorems which required infinite genius for their first elaboration become in time an assured possession of the common intelligence of the race. And all this conscious cooperation, to which we owe the structure of modern science, has at its base a more elementary but necessary sub-structure due to unconscious cooperation. It is by gradual stages that the individual human being of the present day acquires facility in using even the fundamental conceptions of all knowledge. His ideas of space and time, of the causal connexion of events, even of the distinction of thing from thing in the outer world, are neither ready-made for him nor constructed by his solitary intelligence. Their place in his consciousness is due in part to his inherited mental dispositions and in part to intercourse with other minds. In language, the use of which he acquires gradually under social training, he enters into an inheritance of ideas whose form and contents have been defined by the experience of the race and fixed in words. In acquiring the use of language and the common-sense knowledge of the world, the individual of the present day retraces in his early years a process which had already taken place by slower stages and less direct routes in the history of the race. What the child is deliberately taught was learned by his ancestors by repeated trial and error, but always in a community of individuals to whose intercourse the result was due. The world as known, therefore, has been built up by gradual and combined efforts; it is a social construction.
All this is familiar doctrine and beyond dispute. It is a commonplace also that our understanding of the world is closely connected with the uses to which we put it, and at first almost entirely dependent upon practical interests. These interests are shared by the community in which a man lives, so that he learns to use things and to esteem them at the same time and in much the same way as he learns to know them. In the course of time, as we have seen, new values are discovered in life and new ways of realising them are opened up. In this process also mind cooperates with mind, and the common discovery becomes a common inheritance. The cooperation is indeed even more obvious in the region of values than it is in knowledge. In morality, art, and religion the communal or national factor is more marked than it is in science, and the mutual intercourse of minds can be more clearly traced when it is restricted to the nation or some smaller group than when it is world-wide. Of all human interests science is the most cosmopolitan; under modern conditions the influence of mind upon mind in all the operations of the scientific intelligence is affected to a comparatively slight degree only by national boundaries. Being so widespread and universal this influence may attract little attention. But nations are much more distinguished from one another by their attitudes to the ethical, aesthetic, and religious values. In this region their special characteristics are brought out, and we see the common mind of the people manifested. The influences which make a national character are pervasive and persistent within the nation, but to a large extent arrested at its frontier. In these influences we may observe the interaction of minds which are closely connected with one another by common history and conditions. Where similar interaction has free play in spite of differences in these respects, the mutual influence may be less obvious, but it is not less real: and this is often the case with knowledge.
It is hardly necessary to have said so much in admitting or defending the truth that our apprehension both of the order of nature and of the moral order is due to a process which has taken place by slow degrees and has been rendered possible only by the mutual influence of mind upon mind. The truth is important; but, however true and important, it must not be mistaken for something else. The apprehension of reality is a cooperative mental construction, but it does not follow that the reality apprehended is constructed in the same way or by the same process. Yet unless we confuse these two things—the apprehension of reality and the reality apprehended—of hold that one follows from the other, we have done nothing to establish the pluralist's thesis that the orders both of nature and of morality are a creation of individual minds acting in concert and competition.
Pluralism either holds that nature and morality are the product of finite minds or it does not. The former hypothesis, which is now under consideration, is neither proved nor made more probable by showing that the apprehension of nature and its laws and of moral values is a gradual attainment and the result of many minds working together. Because knowledge grows from a stage where once knowledge was not, it does not follow that the thing known has been growing at the same time out of nothingness into its full nature. Because many minds unite in bringing the knowledge about, this is no reason against there being a common and objective reality for them to know.
In perception and at every stage of knowledge the monad or mind is always in connexion with an environment. We have passed away from the view that objects known are simply the mind's own content spread out so as to give the illusion of objectivity: for this view, as we have found, can never get beyond solipsism. But what is the environment into relation to which the mind is brought in knowledge? The pluralist who is also an idealist will hold that it is constituted entirely by other minds or at least by monads which are in nature akin to minds, that is, unities with a life or subjectivity at least resembling consciousness and conceivably capable of development into consciousness. On this view the whole world or every part of it is alive. There is no such thing as dead or inert matter—nothing absolutely inorganic. That is only the limit to which consciousness tends when its clearness is gradually diminished, and the limit is never reached. So far as anything exists it has a subjective aspect, and in this subjectivity its true nature lies.
This view has its own difficulties. But they are difficulties not peculiar to pluralism; and it is not necessary to urge them here. So far as the present argument is concerned, we may admit the view that all existing things are monads or spiritual units. The point which concerns us is the way in which pluralism interprets the order or relations in which these units stand to one another and to the universe which they constitute. What we have to consider is the pluralist's interpretation of order or law. One monad or mind learns to understand the order of its environment. This understanding is due to intersubjective intercourse—to the help of other minds with which it is able to communicate in part directly and in part indirectly through tradition. No one mind can be said to have created this order which now many minds recognise. Is it possible to say, nevertheless, that it is their collective creation—that it has been brought about by their mutual intercourse and assistance? If we answer this question in the affirmative, then the creation of this order must have consisted in or been contemporaneous with its discovery; until discovered it was not real; and we shall be committed to the conclusion that mathematical relations and the laws of nature did not hold, or were not operative, until found or apprehended by finite minds. But these relations and laws as we now understand them are conceived as valid independently of our apprehension, and as having been valid through long stretches of time when they were not understood by any intelligences of which we have any knowledge. It is also obvious that finite minds are frequently making discovery of new relations and laws and adding them to the common stock of knowledge, and it is assumed that these new relations and laws were and are valid before and independently of their apprehension: they are discoveries not inventions. Is it conceivable that this assumption made in all scientific enquiry is nevertheless unfounded and false?
There is one consideration which makes it impossible for us to regard it as false. These discoveries, as we have seen, are due, at least generally, not to one mind only, but to many minds influencing each other so that truth is handed on from mind to mind, and one man lights the torch by which another sees and advances. But this whole process of cooperative investigation and discovery, on which knowledge has been built, has itself been made possible only through the operation of a variety of physical, chemical, and biological laws. Mind acts upon mind in certain definite ways and through certain media only. A slight change in physical conditions, or in chemical or biological processes, and sight, for example, or hearing would have been impossible, so that the ways in which mind has acted upon mind would have been closed. But this interaction has been assumed in our account of the growth of knowledge; in assuming it we have also assumed its conditions; and these conditions are formulated in and imply certain physical, chemical, and biological relations. These relations therefore must have had being—the 'laws' expressing them must have been valid—in order, that the process of acquiring knowledge might work, and accordingly before any knowledge was acquired. They cannot have been produced or created by that which they themselves have helped to render possible.
The pluralist resolves all reality into finite centres of life—monads or minds. Our enquiry has shown that he must also recognise something that is not itself a centre of life, and has not been made by any finite mind or by any finite monad below the rank of mind; and this is the order which connects these minds, and in and through which they live. This order, as has been often said already, may be distinguished into two main kinds. There is first of all the system of relations by which the monads are connected with one another, so that intersubjective intercourse is possible and an objective world is cognised. These constitute the 'laws of nature' in the widest sense of that term, including along with more concrete connexions those abstract relations of concepts which make up formal or logical truth. All these together may be spoken of for the present as the natural order. In addition to this system there is the realm of values which has been found to have validity for personal life, and this for the present may be spoken of under the name of its leading variety—the moral order. The question for the pluralist concerns the position which he is to give in his scheme of things to the natural order and to the moral order. They are not the product of the finite minds into which he has resolved the whole of reality, and yet they are there, essential in the universe and necessary for the functioning, if not for the existence, of finite minds.
This complicated but orderly system remains without any explanation on the pluralistic scheme; it is simply there. It can be understood by finite intelligence, but it has not been produced by it. Yet its nature is such that, were it less complete and universal, we should not hesitate to infer that it was the product of mind. We constantly infer meaning from order, and mind from meaning, and we find the inference justified. There is only one alternative to this inference, and that is to refer the order simply to 'nature' or the structure of the universe. Whether this too has a meaning and also reveals a mind is just the question which a non-theistic pluralism has to answer in the negative. But in so doing it has also to admit that, after all, finite minds and other monads are not the sole reality: that an unexplained order enters into the constitution of reality. This order controls minds, but it is not itself the product of mind or in any way mental. Minds or monads are said to be the ultimate constituents of reality—the only things ultimately real. Yet surrounding them and controlling them there is an eternal order or law or system of relations. They are the subjects of this system not its masters. It may not have created them but neither have they created it, and they are bound by its canons. And in nature it is alien to them—intelligible, certainly, but not intelligent or in any way akin to mind. Rather, it is a sort of inexorable fate by which they are determined as by an external and unsympathetic power.
The theory, therefore, ought not to be called an idealistic or spiritualistic theory. It starts indeed with a view of reality as of the nature of mind; but it has to add to this something else not of the nature of mind and yet controlling it. That the view should nevertheless be put forward as an idealistic or spiritualistic interpretation of reality may be explained by means of the distinction between two forms of idealism to which I have elsewhere drawn attention1. According to one form of idealism, which may be called the Platonic, the real consists of ideas; and ideas are intelligible realities which are not dependent on minds for their being. It. may be true to say of them that they produce minds; but it will not be true to say that minds produce them. On the other form of idealism, which may be called the Berkeleyan, all reality consists of minds and the content of minds; nature and the laws of nature are part of this content, and the orderly system which finite minds did not produce reveals the content and the existence of the infinite mind. Now both these views are able to give an account of reality which, at least prima facie, is harmonious and unified. For on both views mind and the structure of the universe are homogeneous. According to Plato the finite mind is not alien in nature to the ideas which it is able to comprehend; according to Berkeley, the order shown in what are called laws of nature is itself a product of that one mind which is the source of all others. But non-theistic pluralism cannot assert this homogeneity between mind and the universal order. It has been thinking along the lines of Berkeleyan idealism in asserting that the ultimate constituents of, reality are minds; it has been following out a Platonic doctrine when it allowed or maintained as ultimate the laws or relations which lie beyond and above the power of all finite intelligences. Part of its theory is idealistic in the Platonic sense, and part of it in the Berkeleyan sense. But the whole theory is not idealistic in any single and unambiguous meaning of the term. And there is no means of making it so. It has set out from the Berkeleyan standpoint. But, refusing to admit an infinite mind, it is unable to interpret the order of reality in terms of mind.
The difficulty for pluralism becomes greater when it is admitted that the moral order or order-of values is feature which must be taken into account as having objective validity. If it were merely (as it is often held to be) an expression of the experiences or aspirations of finite minds this difficulty would not arise. But we have seen reason to hold, and pluralists often admit, that its validity and objectivity are independent of its apprehension or realisation by individuals, whether alone or in society, so that the question presses of giving an intelligible account of its position. Like the natural order it is not the work of the finite minds which alone are recognised as constituting the universe, and yet it is there-a law holding for these finite minds. It does not even describe their interaction as the laws of nature do; it does not always direct their functioning; but it is a standard for their conduct, and in their correspondence with it they reach the highest end of which their nature is capable. We admit its validity for judgment and appreciation; and its verdict is that finite individuals—that is, the ultimate constituents of reality—have not yet attained their full or true nature as long as their character falls short of the ethical ideal.
We have therefore a new difficulty to face in addition to that arising from the necessity of recognising the natural order as independent of finite minds and yet as belonging to the universe of reality. This latter difficulty compelled the pluralist to admit that his ultimate constituents of reality—minds or monads of whatever sort—were controlled by something else which was not mental in structure and which therefore was so far inexplicable on his theory. Now, in view of the position of the moral order, he will have to admit that his ultimate reals have not yet attained the reality of which they are capable, and can only reach it through correspondence with an order which is independent of them and is not mental in structure. Here also it is his refusal to admit the conception of an infinite or perfect mind that lands his theory in incoherence.
There are types of pluralism which may be willing to put up with incoherence, even to welcome it. This acquiescence in a universe with ragged edges and imperfect connexion of its parts characterises much of the writing of William James; and when his thinking passes beyond this view it tends to a form of monism2. Perhaps it is impossible to refute the idea that the world consists of chance happenings and unstable relations—a view to which the term pluralism might be less unsuitable than any other. All we can do is to seek out the conditions of what happens and trace the relations of things and events, and when we do so our thought is always guided by the postulate that reality is a cosmos or order, and that it is possible for us to understand that order. To arrive at a conception of that order by a complete examination of all the data which experience offers is obviously impossible; and were it possible it would be insufficient, for experience is a process of growth never completed. If these data are to be fused into a view of the whole, that can only be done by an intellectual effort which involves imagination, since it passes beyond the scattered facts and seeks to view them as a whole by insight into their unifying principle, while, at the same time, it must submit to be judged by its inner harmony and by its adequate comprehension of the empirical material.
The pluralism which has been examined is a synoptic view of this kind. It interprets the universe by means of the most adequate conception it can reach, and thus endeavours to see all things as, modes or products of many minds. As all experience has its being for us only in and through its reference to the unity of the subject, which thus contains it and makes it possible, it interprets the whole choir of heaven and furniture of the earth as owing their reality to mind. And it has the further feature, which may easily be regarded as an advantage, that the highest mental life which it postulates is of a kind or degree which our immediate experience reveals and compels us to admit. Mind or self is the final word. But there are many minds, many selves, all united somehow into a universe: whose structure may thus be compared with that of the social orders of college or church or state, in which human minds have expressed themselves and in which they have found a form of unity more comprehensive than that of the individual self.
The view is impressive; but we have found that it is met by one grave difficulty with which it is unable to cope. The social order, it may be said, gives it a cue for the interpretation of the wider reality which surrounds the individual self, and the social order may be regarded as a product of the finite minds of whom, and of whom alone, reality is said to consist. But the environment of finite minds is something more than the social order. There is the natural order and there is the moral order; and neither of these is due to the activity of finite minds. It has been said3 that the atom of the materialistic philosophers is in every respect the contrary of the monad of the pluralist, having no spontaneity and being completely determined from without. It cannot therefore function as an ultimate unit of reality in a genuine pluralism. What holds true of the atom without qualification is also true, with a qualification, of finite minds or spiritual monads. They are incompletely spontaneous and partially determined from without—dominated by the order of nature and directed by the order of values. How can we regard them as the ultimate constituents of reality when they are under the power of something other than themselves?
Nature and morality may indeed be held to be the expression of mind—but only of a creative mind. They cannot be accounted for as the expressions of the finite minds which come to recognise them. They are not even the expression of the social mind—if the term may be used. For the communication of mind with mind, and the growth of knowledge and of the social order, imply that the laws of nature and moral values were valid before and independently of their recognition. If these are interpreted as the expressions of mind, that mind cannot be limited in comprehension or power as finite minds are limited. And the pluralist, unwilling to postulate a mind that is supreme or infinite, is forced to admit into his view of the world two different and even discordant kinds of being—the region of finite minds, and the realms of law and values which these finite minds have not produced, but by which they are nevertheless controlled. If he is not troubled by the necessity of explaining this cosmic order, he will remain a pluralist. If, on the contrary, it comes to loom larger in his vision, so that in comparison with it finite minds seem dependent beings, controlled and determined by the order which envelops them, then his theory will be transformed into a species of monism or pantheism.
Hibbert Journal, vol. II (1904), pp. 703 ff. The use of the term Platonic for one of these forms of idealism is justified by the argument in the Republic and elsewhere. It is not to be taken as implying an historical estimate of the significance of Plato's thought as a whole: for that purpose his later teaching that soul is the origin and moving power of all that is (Laws, X, 896 A) could not be ignored.
E.g., A Pluralistic Universe, p. 290: "May not you and I be confluent in a higher consciousness, and confluently active there, though we know it not?"
J. Ward, The Realm of Ends (1911), p. 51.
Moral Values and the Idea of God

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


The Department of Geophysics provides knowledge and understanding of the composition and structure of the Earth, together with the atmosphere surrounding the Earth, the natural resources within, especially oil, gas and water, and the creation together with the planets as part of the Solar System. It is the only department in Israel where there is a complete educational program in geophysics with the physical aspects of the Earth emphasized.
The study program is diverse and contains courses and laboratories in the field, trips around Israel, involvement with research teams, seminars and fascinating projects. The studies in the department are carried out in a pleasant atmosphere, the relationship with the lecturers is direct and informal, with advice, help and direction provided at any time.


Tracking and managing tool inventory can be an important factor in keeping costs low and setup times short. By implementing ToolBoss, an automated inventory control system from Kennametal, this shop completely overhauled its approach to tool management.
Gordon Hensel, center, Hy-Tech's local Kennametal Sales Engineer, discusses insert performance with Tom Ober, CNC Coordinator. Hy-Tech's use of the Kennametal ToolBoss system ensures that Ober's crews do not run out of inserts.
The ToolBoss system can be configured with a wide variety of drawer sizes and compartments to accommodate an array of tool dimensions.
Without an effective tool management system, shops often find themselves doing one of two things, says Paul Treml, global marketing manager at Kennametal Complete Services. They either rush orders of new cutting tools when inventories are unexpectedly depleted, or they stock more tools than they need to keep from running out in the first place. Both can significantly add to costs and cause problems on the shop floor.
Hy-Tech Machine, a Cranberry Township, Pennsylvania manufacturer of pneumatic tools, sockets, fasteners, siphons and hydrostatic test plugs, chose the second route. With no reliable tool management mechanism in place, the company had to stock significant inventories. Only jobs were tracked, not actual tool usage. In fact, the company's tool-tracking procedures depended solely on the previous shift communicating tool consumption and status. This created unproductive downtime when the incoming shift found needed cutters and inserts missing or in the wrong place, says Tom Ober, CNC coordinator for Hy-Tech.
To solve this problem, the shop invested in the ToolBoss system from Kennametal. ToolBoss is an unmanned, drawer-based system that regulates and audits tool usage, performance and procurement. Now, the shop buys metal cutting supplies on an as-needed basis rather than stocking a large inventory of cutting tools. Since implementing the system, the company has saved both time and money.
The shop installed five ToolBoss units in strategic locations at its main plant in Cranberry Township to provide tool dispensing at the point of use. Another unit resides at its sister plant in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. The 25-year-old company has 102 employees and splits its applications evenly between milling and turning. The company says it has particular expertise in hardened, ground parts, although machined materials include mild carbon steel; stainless steel; alloy and tool steels; castings; virtually all grades of aluminum; copper; brass; and bronze.
For storing and tracking the different tools required to machine this variety of materials, the shop needed more than just a cabinet with drawers. ToolBoss delivered. The system comes standard with Kennametal Automated Tool Management (KATMS) software, which not only provides tool tracking, but also enables consolidated ordering and reporting among multiple ToolBoss units. That is, the five units, or bays, in Hy-Tech's Cranberry Township plant are all interconnected, allowing the software to keep track of every tool in the shop and issue notices to the purchasing department when more tools are needed.
Users program specific job data into the system to ensure that operators take only the tools they need and to ease the process of locating the right materials, Mr. Treml says. Security systems on each unit allow only authorized users to access the tool drawers. When the user enters which job he or she is working on at the embedded computer, the system displays pictures and data on the needed tools, while LEDs illuminate the drawers in which the tools are stored. Other LEDs within the drawers indicate the correct compartment. Each compartment contains only the number of tools needed for the job, allowing the shop to dispense its most costly tools as needed.
At the end of each shift, the software runs detailed reports, which include information such as the number of tools used by which operator for which job. In addition, programming job data into the system allows the software to issue a notice if something is out of place—for example, when more tools than expected are used for any given job.
"If you're working on aluminum and you need to drill 500 holes, the system knows that a particular coated drill can handle all 500 holes," Mr. Treml explains. "If for whatever reason you end up using three drills, it's going to prompt you to question what's wrong—if you are drilling at the wrong speed, if the drill is not performing the way it should, etc."
Hy-Tech's relationship with Kennametal extends beyond the ToolBoss system. The shop has come to rely heavily on Kennametal cutting tools for many of its parts, especially for high-volume work, says Herb Poore, Hy-tech facilities manager. To further optimize Hy-Tech's processes, Mr. Poore says he hopes to continue and expand that relationship. "We want to someday have a uniform supplier line-up—one toolmaker, one OEM, one toolholding system—so that everything is set up the same each and every time, each and every shift," he explains. "Our partnership with Kennametal, and in particular, our usage of ToolBoss, is helping us to realize our vision."


There are various the reason why you are searching for information about lovely full interior design house or shot 2, and surely, you are researching for new suggestions for your purposes. We determined this on the web sources and we suppose this is one of several awesome content for reference. And you know, when I first found it, we loved it, hopefully you are too. We believe, we might have different viewpoints, but, what we do just want to assist you in finding more references regarding stockholm mobile home interior painting ideas interiors in kerala style house design curtains.
lovely full interior design house or shot 2 93 home interior design india images.
Below are a number of best rated lovely full interior design house or shot 2 photos on internet. We identified it from reliable resource. It's tagged in modern furniture home interior design pictures dubai room painting ideas bedrooms uk board and submitted by europadir in home interior field. We expect this lovely full interior design house or shot 2 graphic could possibly be most trending niche when we promote it in google plus or twitter on September 21, 2018.
When were the kind application moment for adorable home interior painting ideas colors design for small spaces philippines meters designs 50 under square, shiny modern furniture home interior design pictures dubai room painting ideas bedrooms uk board, inspirational stockholm mobile home interior painting ideas interiors in kerala style house design curtains, the best interior the attractive home design course in india for houses philippines beautiful interiors kerala depot painting ideas small designs, lovely decorating top home interior designers in india design companies houses for ideas small kerala decoration house, and so on. Of course your opinions and those of others concerning to some of these choices are different. This will be very important because we understand that everyone has not same tastes also.
Somehow the selection of shiny lake interior color home design photos hd ideas paint exterior house pictures kerala painting colour small, shiny postmodern design home interior ideas for bedrooms beautiful interiors in kerala painting, courageous house home interior design india images pictures kerala bedroom for lovely amazing art ideas full, shiny contemporary interior sleek home design pictures dubai ideas living room rooms photos striking 13 for apartments and, awesome ideas pure home interior design kitchen small kerala style in india white, and so forth. Of course your opinions and those of others toward some of these options are variety. It would be very important because we recognize whom some of people has variety tastes also.


teenage_girl Seller was great and super patient and undertsanding! thank you!
viavia92 Fuss free, fast response, quick n timely response n delivery. Thanks!!
alveree Excellent service by the seller. Much recommended. prompt reply.
✔ All items listed are authentic & available! 📷 Mailed items will be bubble wrapped + photo proof 📩 Not responsible for any lost mail Meet ups at Marsiling MRT Normal Mail/SmartPac available (Mailing preferred) Feel free to PM for any enquiries!
The By Wishtrend Teca 1% Skin Barrier Cream is a spot cream to strengthen, calm and improve the skin's overall health. Consisting Centella Asiatica it helps to regenerate skin and restore damaged and weakened skin barrier. Main functions: 1) Helps regenerate damaged skin due to collagen synthesis.


text:
package net.sf.flatpack.examples.largedataset.largecsvperformancetest;

import java.io.BufferedReader;
import java.io.File;
import java.io.FileReader;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;

import net.sf.flatpack.DataError;
import net.sf.flatpack.DataSet;
import net.sf.flatpack.brparse.BuffReaderDelimParser;
import net.sf.flatpack.brparse.BuffReaderParseFactory;

/*
 * Created on Dec 1, 2005
 *
 * TODO To change the template for this generated file go to
 * Window - Preferences - Java - Code Style - Code Templates
 */

/**
 * @author zepernick
 *
 * TODO To change the template for this generated type comment go to Window -
 * Preferences - Java - Code Style - Code Templates
 */
public class CSVLarge {

    public static void main(final String[] args) {
        try {
            final Map settings = readSettings();
            final String data = (String) settings.get("csvFile");
            call(data);
        } catch (final Exception e) {
            // TODO Auto-generated catch block
            e.printStackTrace();
        }
    }

    public static String getDefaultDataFile() {
        return "LargeSampleCSV.csv";
    }

    public static void call(final String data) throws Exception {
        BuffReaderDelimParser pzparse = null;
        try {

            // delimited by a comma
            // text qualified by double quotes
            // ignore first record
            pzparse = (BuffReaderDelimParser) BuffReaderParseFactory.getInstance().newDelimitedParser(new File(data), ',', '"');

            final DataSet ds = pzparse.parse();
            final long timeStarted = System.currentTimeMillis();
            int totalCount = 0;
            int tmpCount = 0;
            while (ds.next()) {
                totalCount++;
                tmpCount++;
                if (tmpCount >= 2500) {
                    System.out.println("Read " + totalCount + " Records...");
                    tmpCount = 0;
                }
            }
            final long timeFinished = System.currentTimeMillis();

            String timeMessage = "";

            if (timeFinished - timeStarted < 1000) {
                timeMessage = (timeFinished - timeStarted) + " Milleseconds...";
            } else {
                timeMessage = ((timeFinished - timeStarted) / 1000) + " Seconds...";
            }

            System.out.println("");
            System.out.println("********FILE PARSED IN: " + timeMessage + " ******");

            if (ds.getErrors() != null && ds.getErrors().size() > 0) {
                System.out.println("FOUND ERRORS IN FILE....");
                for (int i = 0; i < ds.getErrors().size(); i++) {
                    final DataError de = (DataError) ds.getErrors().get(i);
                    System.out.println("Error: " + de.getErrorDesc() + " Line: " + de.getLineNo());
                }
            }
        } catch (final Exception ex) {
            ex.printStackTrace();
        } finally {
            pzparse.close();
        }

    }

    private static Map readSettings() throws Exception {
        final Map result = new HashMap();
        FileReader fr = null;
        BufferedReader br = null;
        String line = null;

        try {
            fr = new FileReader("settings.properties");
            br = new BufferedReader(fr);

            while ((line = br.readLine()) != null) {
                if (line.trim().length() == 0 || line.startsWith("#") || line.indexOf("=") == -1) {
                    continue;
                }

                result.put(line.substring(0, line.indexOf("=")), line.substring(line.indexOf("=") + 1));
            }
        } finally {
            if (fr != null) {
                fr.close();
            }
            if (br != null) {
                br.close();
            }
        }

        return result;

    }

}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Wes Schaeffer is The Sales Whisperer®, an irreverent, detail-oriented Air Force veteran, father of seven who gets it done. If you need inbound marketing, the best CRM, or proven sales help, and you are not a controlling narcissist, let's talk.
Buy Wes's New Book, "The Sales Whisperer® Way"
© 2019 TSW Group, Inc. All rights reserved.


The Italian government has decided to gamble and it is undoing completely its 45 billion austerity plan.
Every single line of the austerity bill passed urgently after diktat from the EU is being scrapped, of course justyfing such changes with new taxes which the day after are immediately withdrawn after the usual protest of the affected lobby.
Actually today every single line of the early August plan has been changed or removed, Italy is saying thanks to the ECB for purchasing its bonds and can renege on the promises made to the EU as condition for the bailout. Just wandering who will help Italy in September with bond purchases if the government is clearly a group of liars and crooks.
Of course the Italian government has been doing it stealthy convinced that no one abroad would notice what is called by them a simple correction.
Unfortunately for them Bloomberg has released an analysis titled "Berlusconi's Backpedaling May Push Italy Back Toward The Brink of Disaster."
It is rather self-explanatory: as a reminder the ECB is only buying Italy bonds as part of its SMP monetization expansion due to promises that Italy would slash its deficit and implement austerity.
Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi may be steering his country back toward the eye of the sovereign debt- crisis storm as he tests the European Central Bank's commitment to saving the Mediterranean country from a full-blown economic and financial crisis.
Berlusconi, responding to domestic opposition, said on Tuesday that a previously announced 45 billion euro austerity package, which may have swayed the European Central Bank to buy Italy's government bonds, will be pruned. The new version will drop the "solidarity tax", which would have taken an extra 5 percent or more of annual incomes exceeding 90,000 euros. In addition, cuts in funding to regional and local governments that totaled 9 billion euros in the original plan will be trimmed by about 2 billion euros. The Senate will vote on the revised plan next week. The reduction of the austerity package will probably leave the ECB's Governing Council even less inclined to buy Italian government debt as it attempts to cut its overall level of bond purchases from the 22 billion euros acquired during the week ended Aug. 12, after the 10-year Italian sovereign yield reached 6.2 percent. The central bank had already reduced its weekly purchases to 14.3 billion euros during the period ended Aug. 9 and 6.7 billion euros last week.
The vigilantes are already reminding Berlusconi they are watching his every lie.
The spread between the 10-year yield of Italy's government bonds and those of Germany rose by 11 basis points on Tuesday, as investors digested the latest amendments to the austerity package, and has increased by 30 basis points since the ECB completed the Aug. 12 round of purchases, its largest weekly intervention.
Italy can ill afford to test the ECB's commitment as the country prepares for a serious test of its ability to continue accessing financial markets in September, when it will need to refinance 46 billion euros of maturing bonds. That is about six times the amount successfully raised by the Italian Treasury on Tuesday.
Payday Loans Online http://www.legitpaydayloansonline1.com/ Fundpopog [url=http://www.legitpaydayloansonline3.com/]Payday Loans Online[/url] Stype Instant Payday Loans Online Payday Loans Online Direct Lenders Cash advance america is a reliable and professional company just choose cheaper, unbranded products..In terms of approval, it is common act in most popular advance with your next paycheck because of insufficient funds.Many financial institutions offering the same day payday net is that in one shot in the next payment cycle?
Payday loans online http://www.legitpaydayloansonline2.com/ Fundpopog [url=http://www.legitpaydayloansonline3.com/]Payday Loans Online[/url] Stype Payday Loans Online Payday Loans Online Friends and family are unlikely they have bill in case your business venture is unsuccessful.
payday loans http://www.legitpaydayloansonline2.com/ Fundpopog http://legitpaydayloansonline1.com/ Stype [url=http://www.legitpaydayloansonline3.com/]http://www.legitpaydayloansonline1.com[/url] http://www.legitpaydayloansonline1.com You need to show the lender that you make enough nay urgent financial requirement or emergency!Lenders have adopted required to to deal owners or this can be a very expensive proposition.If yes, it is better for you to apply long possible or you'll will of what is the online application mode??
Most of us have enjoyed having our very own [url=http://longchampsoldes2013.devhub.com]sacs longchamp[/url], a clear sock or shaped bag that people say goodbye on Xmas Eve to ensure that Santa with [url=http://longchamppliagesolde.devhub.com]sac longchamp[/url], Tradition claims that a child that has misbehaved throughout the year is only going to receive lumps associated with coal in his/her stocking [url=http://isabelmarantsneakers11.devhub.com]isabel marant baskets[/url]. children utilized one of their very own socks or stockings for a Xmas stocking, [url=http://www.saclancelsoldes2013.info]sac lancel[/url] are used. Numerous households make their very own and place names upon to make sure [url=http://www.saclongchampsoldes2013.info]longchamp[/url] will understand whose stocking is actually in whose.
As a expert locks stylist [url=http://isabelmarantsoldes.over-blog.com]isabel marant collection[/url], I recently experienced a person ask me [url=http://isabelmarnatbaskets.over-blog.com]basket isabel marant[/url] in the event that Audrey Kitching's present hair color (red along with white [url=http://saclongchampfr.over-blog.com]longchamp pas cher[/url] 'bronze-ish' complexion. That obtained me thinking... [url=http://guessmontre.over-blog.com]guess montre[/url] if you have fair skin and light blonde eye brows, [url=http://michaelkorsmontre.over-blog.com]michael kors homme[/url] will not function if you want to look organic.
Designer [url=http://sacguessboutique.webnode.fr]guess pas cher[/url] have the the majority of stylish designs as well as impressive. [url=http://sacslongchampfrance4.webnode.fr]sacs longchamp[/url] era we have come across numerous cycles how the interest toward designer purses is quite regular. In our day-to-day lives|it has become a [url=http://longchampsacs2013.webnode.fr]longchamp pliage[/url] to appear appealing as well as stylish|which desire is actually generating. To be sure [url=http://longchampsoldes2013.devhub.com]longchamp pliage[/url]. For those who wear understand Givenchy [url=http://sacguesssoldes2013.webnode.fr]sac guess[/url] electric outlet with regard to holding your general appear.
A lady provide you with an kind of the greatest quality designer [url=http://longchamppascherpliage.weebly.com]longchamp pas cher pliage[/url] and luxury [url=http://isabellemarantsneakersimitation.weebly.com]isabelle marant sneakers[/url] We are pleased to advise you concerning the trusted online topple off wallets stores on the planet. [url=http://sacmichaelkorssoldes.weebly.com]michael kors soldes[/url] plenty of lady have the right to sparkle whilst walking along the road using their reproduction chanel [url=http://sacguessbymarciano.weebly.com]guess by marciano[/url] or look and feel the best quality [url=http://longchampsacssoldes2013.weebly.com]longchamp soldes[/url] replications.