Psychology Archives - Science Can Change Your World.
Having been interested in psychiatry for a long while, I have now embarked on several months training in the discipline. And although mental health is never far from the public eye, it seems to be that a general understanding of mental health and disease is vastly lacking. But in my fledgeling understanding, I have begun to know things just that little bit more.
To begin with, the concept of normality, whether it is physical or mental health, is debatable. When it comes to physical health problems, like chest pain, we are quick to recognise what is 'abnormal' and would require action, how much action and the mode of action. It is not a necessarily binary situation, but we know enough about the natural history of a disease, biology and treatments to make a workable approach.
Psychiatry, however, is less clear-cut. Although science has, for a long while now, explained mental health problems in terms of physicality, biology and chemicals, the understanding of the human aspect of the disease still warrants expert judgement. Phenomenology, that is the study of words, has attempted to categorise mental health complaints within recognisable schema; what one may describe signposting depression should be generalisable.
My sadness and your sadness should be understood in a similar way, and their approach into depression more so.
This has had some success, and within the streams of both biological and psychoanalytic models of mental health, has allowed us to recognise disease in a functional way. By understanding the language of disease, as expressed by our patients and selves, we can learn to spot patterns in the same way we may read an ECG. To an extent. However, a psychiatric disease is not as simple as an ECG*.
The issue with psychiatry, which has been long debated, is the suggestion that, including psychotic beliefs (those not grounded in reality or truly understandable by doctors,) we do not classify disease purely on biology, but on their proximity to social norms. This is quite foolhardy philosophically since all of our norms are prescriptive and based on a shared belief, which when applied to metaphysical understands of the world is rendered mute.
Put simply, we have created the goal posts by which we measure psychiatric abnormality, and unlike physical problems (if treated as separate,) there is a great discordance between people on what disease actually means. To some, their core beliefs may seem entirely rational and healthy, but to others, a clear indication of being unwell. And how do we make these judgements?
Apart from CT scans, biochemical markers and agreed diagnostic categories, we fray on the fringe of relative value.
And when you review popular media, for example blaming massacres on the mentally unwell, regardless of whether this is the truth (which it rarely is,) you can see how a moral value has been ascribed to behaviour, and how it can be used to suggest a diagnosis. You need to look no further than the 'luny left' and 'liberalism is a mental disease' to recognise this shortcoming of human understanding.
So when I meet my patients, I cannot fully assess them without realising that my diagnosis is shining a thin light on a large area, where the boundaries of normality are hazily defined. Does this mean that all psychiatry is value assessed, not necessarily, there is clear science and patterns, but we must be aware of where the evidence ends.
We have known for a long time that the human brain is vastly imperfect. We also know that morality, that is our measure of the 'goodness' of things, is a relative concept. In fact, some philosophers such as Freidrich Nietzsche have gone as far as to claim there is no such thing as good and evil, and others have renounced all understanding and attributed such judgements to God alone.
Herego, mental health problems do not escape the scrutiny of evolutionary explanation, and this is where the science of anatomy, genetics, sociology, psychology, behaviour, chemistry and anthropology meet the human disciplines of art, literature, history, speech, song and expression. The human mind is a result of its best compromise and survival, and with it, mental health problems have shared a journey.
So when we interview our patients, we see the humanity of disease, etched through eons of evolutionary history, expressed in the contemporary terms of our sociocultural understandings. A psychotic belief is amoebic, and will likely include tenets of that person's popular culture, as opposed to one of the ancient Egyptians. This cannot be avoided but can give us clues to an underlying constant process.
Psychiatric disease is likely part of our survival, for better or for worse.
The history of psychiatry and philosophy is intertwined, and before such things as brain imaging, it was the brain and its wake light pondering that allowed us to conclude the nature of things. Logic, experiment and results were used across a vast arena of disciplines, from which arose different schools of thought such as Freudian Analysis.
The later schools of medical models have all but usurped the philosophical and analytic, but the latter still play a vital role in our understanding. It is likely that with further science we may be able to pin psychiatric disease, or at least its base aetiology (ie cause,) on something purely biologic and explained through measurable variables, but until then, we rely on our interpretation of behaviour to guide us to the scan.
So with the somewhat hazy and complex architecture of the interplay between evolutionary explanations of psychiatric disease, medical explanations, sociocultural norms, variable and diverse human expression and the legal system, the idea of diagnosis and treatment becomes one of great importance. And one that can cause great contention.
We can mostly all agree that someone at risk of suicide due to severe depression may need to be sectioned. We can also all agree that it is in their best interests to do so. This is because we value life, but also claim knowledge that psychiatric disease renders one incapable of deciding what's best for themselves. At the extremes, we tend to agree, but in the middle ground, there is less commonality. We agree on death, but sadness is a different issue.
And when it comes to issues that have a socially contentious element, such as gender and health, we must listen very carefully.
I work in an acute psychiatric unit, which means the patients that I see are on the more severe end of the spectrum, that is that they very rarely occupy the middle ground of disease severity. I see patients who believe they are being monitored by government agencies (which arguably, we all are) or can see ancient ghosts wandering the halls.
My view of psychiatry is within the deep end of the human mind, the echoes of our ancient brains pushed to their limits. And as a growing student of the evolutionary explanations for psychiatric phenomena, it is becoming abundantly clear to me that a full understanding of the subjective nature of the disease is probably beyond pure science, it will be found in expression.
So how does this translate to sectioning a patient, or indeed, deciding if and when someone should or will be treated? To give a general answer to this is difficult, but I will give it a try, based on when the patients own subjective view of the quality of their life is jeopardised by their disease.
But for those actively psychotic, i.e who have left reality behind, such subjectivity is lost, and we must use our own sociocultural norms and understanding of reality to make sense of their experience. And we do our best. Sometimes that means bringing people in against their will, and believe me, that is rarely an easy decision.
So having trawled, on a surface level, some of the complex themes that goo into diagnosing and deciding to treat a psychiatric illness, what of treatment? From my experience, the variety of methods out there provides hope. Whether it be medication (which addresses biological and chemical causes of disease,) ECT (which, as far as we know, derives its role in chemical and anatomical methods,) and therapy, which helps us to understand and correct aberrant thinking, we do see changes.
Sometimes these changes are drastic. I note one man who came in severely depressed, paranoid, almost catatonic, who after a few weeks of ECT is now back to shopping with his wife. His subjective view of the world and his disease has changed drastically as if some great mist has disappeared. Others are less pronounced, where a persistent delusional belief is still present, but less concerning.
In each case, our measure of success is built through understanding the subjective view of our patients, either phenomenologically through an interview, or objectively through an analysis of behaviour and biochemical changes. This is a far cry from the newspaper headlines and personal accounts that litter the blogosphere, but good is being done. Psychiatry, a discipline of the old and new, saves lives.
Placed in context, however, we must always remember that our view of success is based, at least in part, on prescriptive sociocultural norms, derived through evolutionary behaviours and limited by our own bias and cultural beliefs. The solution to the malady of psychiatric disease is one that may never be fully answered, but until then I find myself in a world where I can make a difference.
So far this has been an enlightening journey. But to be a good psychiatrist means truly understanding your patients, their views, expectations and dreams based upon their understanding of a world that we may not agree on. We must be prepared to listen more than talk, read more than present, understand that we know little. Crucially, we must know ourselves to know our patients.
It means understanding history, evolution, biology, neuroscience, art, writing, speech, religion, social causes and much more. It is by no means simple. I hope to be starting to get to grips, but I can always improve.
What's next? Join our wonderful community!
Subscribe to our mailing list. We publish regularly, and we wouldn't want you to miss our great content.
Contact Dr Janaway on Twitter, always happy to welcome new colleagues.
If you liked this article, please help us to reach more people by clicking the icons below.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of Dr Janaway alone and may not represent those of his affiliates. Featured image coutersy of Flickr.
*Note, the interpretation of an ECG is far from simple. However, in relative scales, the number of clear diagnostic changes available comparing ECG to phenomenology is vastly disproportionate. This is an academic and rather histrionic comparision, so apologies to the Cardio Reg.
'Increasing prevalance' of PTSD in UK Veterans after recent conflicts.
New results published in the British Journal of Psychiatry suggest that post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may be on the rise in service personnel. The condition, associated with exposure to trauma, has long been long linked with combat. But this new study highlights just how much Veterans may be at a higher risk than active soldiers.
But to really show what this means, I also talked to a veteran, who was kind enough to explain what PTSD feels like beyond the data.
A cohort study compared over 8000 personnel either deployed to Afghanistan and/or Iraq, with those active but not deployed, and those newly active since 2009. The study reviewed the participants in three phases, collecting data on mental health symptoms and level of alcohol use during the study period.
The first phase examined soldiers deployed to Iraq, then the second followed these up and added those deployed to further conflict, and a third to new soldiers as well as those already under review.
The study found that, overall, 21% of those reviewed displayed symptoms of common mental health disorders (such as depression,) and that those who had been deployed to the conflict were at a higher risk. 6.1% of those surveyed showed signs of probable PTSD, with a significantly higher risk in those who had seen active duty.
All in all, the overall risk was 9% for veterans and 5% for those still serving, and higher in combat roles and support roles such as logistics and medical personnel. However, the study also showed that alcohol abuse rates have dropped during the same time period.
PTSD is a mental health condition characterised by the emergence of unsettling or traumatic symptoms from short months to years after a severely troubling event. Those who develop the condition may report a combination of symptoms, either 'reliving' the event in some way such as through flashbacks or nightmares, or through 'numbing' by avoiding emotional subjects or addressing their symptoms.
The link with military work has been long known and likely due to the intense and terrifying experiences. And the legacy is one that is unfortunately predictable. But this new study sheds light on how PTSD may develop, not as something that primarily affects soldiers, but preferentially affects those who have survived and come home.
It may very much be that the evolutionary antecedents to our survival, forged long ago in the heat of prey vs predator, have become maladaptive. Or indeed, never had the chance to become adaptive over time. Repeated exposure to life and limb trauma is not a natural state which can be readily traced back beyond tribal warfare, as survival was much less guaranteed.
Perhaps a study like this, which highlights the true cost of war to the victor, can help us learn that suffering is ubiquitous in theme, just different in nature.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of Dr Janaway alone and may not represent those of his affiliates. Featured image courtesy of Flickr. Full informed consent was gained for interview and distribution of content obtained during the interview. All profits from this article will go to the Poppy Appeal.
The world can be a confusing place, but academics, authors, artists, poets and philosophers are just some of the many who have tried to explain things. In my wanderings through scientific texts, popular non-fiction and and documentaries, there have been a few stand out comments.
Whether it be Malcolm Gladwell's keen insight into human nature, or Carl Sagan's prophetic view of the world, all have resonated in some way beyond comprehension. They seem intrinsically correct, and universally true.
So here are ten incredible pearls of wisdom from the great minds.
'Let us understand what our own selfish genes are up to because we may then at least have the chance to upset their designs.' – Richard Dawkins, ethologist, evolutionary biologist and popular-science writer.
As the current face of evolutionary theory, Dawkins' is no stranger to controversy. And although his work has revolutionised our understanding of the natural world, his opinions about how we must overcome our nature have caused the most conversation.
The nature of life is conservative, selfish and driven by unconscious forces. Dawkins' understands that to 'be good' you must understand our basic urges. Image courtesy of Flickr.
Dawkins' is very aware how our evolutionary history, and how the selective pressures of the environment and each other, have shaped our behaviour. And in his book 'The Selfish Gene', gives us to pause to consider the true morality of nature.
What is 'natural' isn't inherently 'moral', and what we consider 'moral' is not inherently survival. So Dawkins' asks us to understand our primal natures if we are to best them.
'To acquire immunity to eloquence is of the utmost importance to the citizens of a democracy. ' – Bertrand Russell, Philosopher, Logician and Nobel Prize winner.
Although Russell is best known as a philosopher, his life of work reached deeper into the shared mind of society than we realise. By studying and writing on the academic disciplines of logic, mathematics and epistemology (the study of knowledge,) he became a strong advocate for peaceful societal reform.
A man's words may make beautiful the macabre. Russell relied on logic to unify humanity toward a common good. Image courtesy of Flickr.
And most noteworthy are his observations of how people can be manipulated by words. The use of eloquent language, a flowery vocabulary or poetic arrangement can make the terrible seem empowering. You need only read the words of Nazi spokesperson Joseph Goebbels to see how language can betray human decency.
We must understand a man's motivation, and place it in the context of the sociopolitical climate, to truly understand what may be hiding behind the words.
'Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.' – Friedrich Nietzsche, Philosopher, Author and culture commentator.
As the central reference to 'Nihilism', Nietzsche examined the purpose of life without purpose. His infamous quote 'God is dead' instilled the idea that the concept and role of any God is limited, and that through pain and suffering we may choose a virtuous path.
Nietzsche warned us not to become monsters in the pursuit of greatness. Image courtesy of Flickr.
Whilst an avid skeptic of religion in general, his infamous parable 'Thus Spoke Zarathustra' presented, in humbling terms, the true insanity of zealotry. He warns us not to lose ourselves in purpose, and to recognise how a belief in achieving 'the good' can lead to evil.
And in a world where popular influencers claim a moral authority, his words could not carry greater weight.
'Man is condemned to be free; because once thrown into the world, he is responsible for everything he does.' – Jean Paul Satre, Philosopher.
Regarded by many as the father of 'Existentialism', Satre believed that existence precedes essence, and that we must find our own way in a meaningless universe. But in accepting this freedom in action, we cannot ignore our role in what comes next.
Satre believed that with action comes responsibility, and with freedom comes the same. Image courtesy of Pixabay.
Many existentialists reject the concept of 'good' or 'bad' behaviour being an inherent natural motivation, and instead suggest that we make our decisions based on complex (although often incorrect,) contextual interpretations.
Not only does this mean we must be aware of our own limits, but take responsibility when they are exposed.
The older I get, the more I understand that the only way to say valuable things is to lose your fear of being correct. – Malcolm Gladwell, Author and Journalist.
Famed author of 'David And Goliath', 'Outliers' and 'The Tipping Point', Gladwell explores the interconnectedness of humanity with the world around it. In his poignant prose he unravels what may seem miraculous, often challenging widely held beliefs.
Gladwell has exposed and explained the hidden reasons behind cultural success and individual power. To question convention is as useful as it is risky. Image courtesy of Flickr.
His work tells us not only to dig deeper to explain the world, but that explanations may exist beyond the obvious. He also extols the value of expressing new ideas, fearlessly with no regard for your own ego.
We must challenge convention to find the truth, even if it risks our reputations.
'You can learn something about a person by the company she keeps.' – Sam Harris, Philosopher and Neuroscientist.
Although more likely to be a figure of repute for his views on religion, Harris is a distinguished author and surveyor of the interface between neuroscience, morality and the world at large.
A fierce critic of authoritarian dogma, Harris asks us to take responsibility for building our knowledge toward creating a better world.
Sam Harris is a vocal critic of authoritarian regimes and their numerous abuses. Image courtesy of Flickr.
He also asserts that morality itself exists independently of religious doctrine, and empowers a human approach toward a coalescence of society. And as a neuroscientist, he is all to aware of how our behaviour may make us, or betray our intentions.
So if you want the measure of a man, consider who they value as friends.
7. On The Illusion Of Simplicity.
'I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that.' – Ben Goldacre, Physician and Author.
The namesake of his popular book tells us a lot about Ben Goldacre. An academic and scourge of pseudoscience and 'folk wisdom', Ben uses evidence to expose the lies many are sold by the few to the many. He also tells that what is made simple, or appears so, may not be.
Ben Goldcare makes it his mission to challenge misleading beliefs, expose bad science and explain the misunderstood. Image courtesy of Flickr.
What is claimed to simple may be complex, and what lies between may be inaccurate, underhanded and deliberate.
And with that, we should try to understand the motives behind simplification, and why it is so easy for us to be sold a lie. Amongst his many targets is Homeopathy and the risks involved in being misled.
8. On the Arrogance Of The Human Mind.
'See that the imagination of nature is far, far greater than the imagination of man.' – Richard Feynman, Theoretical Physicist, Nobel Prize winner and Science Communicator.
Whilst it may seem odd that a theoretical physicist is so humble about uncertainty, Feynman shows us just how wonderful the universe is.
Although a pioneer in our understanding of the nature of our reality, he recognises that there is simply more we don't know.
Feynman studied and revealed some of the most hidden secrets of our universe, but in doing so realised that was is unknown is our greatest teacher. Image courtesy of Flickr.
The intricacies of our reality, currently hazy between the infinitesimally small and unimaginably large, appear to us through rigorous questioning and often teach us that our presuppositions are not just wrong, revealing a drastic flaw in human understanding.
We claim to be intelligent, and yet this intelligence often blinds us to our own folly. We must revel in the wonder of whats left to wonder about, and not be afraid to look stupid doing so.
'I was never born to write. I was taught to write. And I am still being taught to write.' – Atul Gawande, Surgeon, Research and Author.
If you are a doctor, you no doubt are aware of Gawande. Whilst a strong advocate of evidence and comprehensive approaches, Gawande has also ventured into a philosophical musing of the human condition.
As a surgeon, Gawande not only saves lives, but has taken it upon himself to understand what the true value of life is. Image courtesy of Flickr.
In his best-selling book, 'Being Mortal', Gawande examines the true value of human life, and what we lose and gain as we age. And true to his nature, he treats himself with a level of skepticism coherent with his humble world view.
We are born with a choice in a difficult world, expertise is only a measure of dedication tempered by self criticism, and arrogance undermines greatness.
'The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena.' – Carl Sagan, Astronomer, Astrophycist and Pulitzer Prize winner.
To reduce the works of Sagan to one sentence would vastly sell him short. Not only did he lead the way in popularising science, but housed a mind so in tune with the human condition that his loss is truly universal.
Having inspired legions of scientists, including protege Neil deGrasse Tyson, Sagan's holistic approach to science and its delicate implications toward society rings as true today as it did years ago.
Carl Sagan was not just a pioneer of knowledge, but arguably one of humanity's greatest teachers. Image courtesy of Flickr.
He was exceptionally kind, humble and patient, expressing the very tenets he postulated as a universal ideal.
Sagan reminds us that the true beauty of the universe is not just in its nature, or its creation, but in our pursuit of explanation and the inherent ability to use this knowledge to better ourselves and future generations.
And that perspective matters, for the universe is much greater than such complex molecular machines as we. We are so very small, but in that there is much to be learned, gained and valued.
Ten quotes simply isn't enough to even scratch the surface of the grand insights accumulated in the wealth of human knowledge, or beyond it. And with each quote, you may have taken your own interpretation of meaning and purpose.
Perhaps you disagree with some, or worry that they are incongruent with each other. But I am willing to contend the opposite, that each shares a unity in placing the pursuit of knowledge through humility, truth and beneficence as a true virtue.
So what are your favourite quotes? What and who has changed your life? Let us know in the comments. And if you believe, like I do, that knowledge is best shared, then help us by sharing this article with your friends and family.
Learn how you can become an information explorer.
Follow Ben on Twitter so you never miss an article. Or join our mailing list.
Note from the Author: Upon writing this article I became very aware of just how much I don't know, and how much I can learn. I feel it only right to follow up on this article with more information about the works and lessons of the persons featured. There are many greats not featured on this list, but don't worry, I will find ways to include them. I do not value my opinion of what is great above any others, I only wish to signpost what is already there.
Ethics are tricky in the real world, but there is a surprising amount of evidence that we may actually be living in a simulation. If that is indeed true, we can only speculate on the creator and the motive behind such a complex and compelling trick. Who are they? Are we an experiment or entertainment? What would it mean to them if we figured it out? Do we risk being 'turned off' if we were break the proverbial 'fourth wall?' And perhaps an equally poignant question, does this change our code of ethics? Join us in the first of several thought experiments into a simulated Universe. Press 'Save' now.
Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before. – Edgar Allen Poe.
The crux of The Trolley Problem is quite simple, when does murder become ethically permissible? Would you sacrifice one to save many others? Depending on your individual view it may never be okay to kill, but in a study by VSauce it found that most participants would not kill one to save many, even if they would claim otherwise. There are also multiple philosophical schools or ethics, including Utilitarianism which dictates that we must also provide for the majority even at the expense of the few. We consider such conundrums and hypotheses in a world of consequence, but what if suddenly those consequences seem to disappear? What might be ethical in a simulated world?
What would be entertaining to an alien may be integral to our survival.
One could reason that our actions should be as dramatic and entertaining as possible to a lay watcher. Unfortunately this raises many questions, and if the world was suddenly to learn its best chance of existing was violence, drama and explosions, the result would likely fly in the face of common ethics. War would be entertainment, crime pay-per-view. and Alien minds could pay an extra season pass price to follow a criminal from sentencing to execution (but only after the cosmic watershed.) Although this is discussed jovially, it does cause pause for thought. What do you think Truman would have done if there was no door in the sea wall? And sadly, a utilitarian ethos would support mass war as long as more survived than died.
Fortunately there is an alternative explanation for a simulation, experiment. But, even then, we must be careful.
'It's the sad thing about entertainment, it's not always about who is the best.' – Jake Roberts.
In this case the best we could do, in a rather Nietzsche perspective, is be the best we can in tune with what we perceive as 'the ultimate good.' Immanuel Kant proposed the 'categorical imperative' to explain an inherent code of morality within humans that we must adhere to. Wouldn't be much of an experiment if the creators loaded the dice like that. So lets assume we have a choice to extol or ignore these virtuous ideas, then run the simulation for a few billion years. You can see how making changes to the environment (such as drought or plague) and the insertion of strong beliefs (such as religion or cults,) would make for an interesting test. How would a large, diverse population respond. How would they change? What would be the outcome? The takeaway for the creators is clear, they have a working predictive model of anthropology, politics, psychology and social interaction by which to run their own species.
If we are an experiment, then how would we act to be valuable?
In this case, we may want to stay around as long as possible. To be useful to the experimenters (but this assumes having an inkling of their hypothesis..) But that if that means 'being aware' of the experiment, it is immediately faulty. We walk on a tightrope.
So, in this potentially highly hypothetical situation with contrasting variables and contradicting endpoints, how do you live ethically in a simulation? My personal thoughts would be, if we are alive now, then we have fulfilled either the 'entertainment' or 'experiment' role. So you could just say 'carry on.' But when 'just carry on' means continue jihad, crime and war, our own ethics come into question. So I will propose a compromise, go with Neitszche. Do the best you can for the most you can, but be true to yourself. And in the end, there is a saving grace. Catharsis is stronger than division, and our alien viewers may like a happy ending. And our experimenters would probably find it worth learning from anyway… maybe.
Next time; If we could prove this is a simulation, should we?
Learn more about a simulated universe.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of Dr Janaway alone and may not represent those of his affiliates.
Note: The arguments and assumptions presented here are in no means comprehensive. For example we have not considered the outcome of a simulation experiment, the role of bias, or indeed something as simple as its hypothesis. Furthermore we have not considered the full scope of ethical standpoints that an alien or creator species would have, what they may find entertaining. Each assertion is anthropocentric, and therefore is limited, and the causal nature of each premise based on plausibility rather than induction. This article is not designed to examine all these alternatives, but perhaps a book down the line could. Some of these subjects will be touched in the following articles, but I would wager more questions would be raised than answered in such a short format. In essence, this article is designed to inspire you to pose your own answer to the riddle.
The idea that everything we know 'is a lie' and we have been dreaming all of this time pervades culture en masse; From Plato to the Wachowskis, the possibility that we are all collectively experiencing a simulated reality is a juicy subject for discussion. But there is something to this idea. If we are in a simulation, how would we know? How might we begin to prove this? Defining a hyperobject (or a hyper-hyperobject), such as reality itself, is difficult. We come up like the fish searching for water. It is everything to the fish, so where do we even begin with being?
The human mind is not equipped to answer the big questions very well. In fact, our very logic is based on very restrictive parameters. Our understanding of distances, time and flying things is limited to what we see day to day. This is why we are easily tricked by the massive or very small, our brains aren't evolved to make sense of the information. Or indeed, there has been no demand to do so that restricts our survival as a species. And answering whether our Universe is in fact 'real' isn't a question that would have vexed our ancestors, so its little wonder we have trouble with it. Today's big questions confuse yesterdays brain.
Questioning the nature of reality is one of those big questions. Take optic illusions and hallucinations for example, or the auditory hysteresis as best demonstrated by 'Laurel' or 'Yanny'. We have a limited number of sensory cues which we can attach to our environment. When we try to cut corners, our brains attempt to fill the gap and make mistakes. Our brain will attempt to make sense of ambiguity by pushing previous experience on to it. VSauce has a great video explaining how and why this can happen, so take a look. So knowing this, where do we know where objective reality stops, and our own shortcuts begin? What is truly real outside of our own interpretation?
Although a powerful idea, it doesn't answer the question objectively but actually throws another layer of faith on the issue.
This was termed methodic doubt or Cartesian scepticism. The take-home message is that seeing is not believing. The extension of this, Solipsism, is the belief that you are the only aware rational agent (agent meaning one capable of observing and influencing.) From a simulation perspective, it means that you are the only 'real' person. Of course, our video games are populated by Non-Player Characters (Cortana in Halo, Navi in Zelda.) If we are in a simulation, it is more likely that you are not 'real'. Why would a simulation be built for us alone?
Of course, this is a basis for a line of thought, not an encouragement to live your life in this way. People still look both ways before crossing the street. An NPC is not benevolent and doesn't exist to help you by nature (i.e any character who attacks you in a game.) Solipsism, as understood by Karl Popper, is not a falsifiable hypothesis. Traditional scientific method seeks to disprove ideas via a null hypothesis (the chance that the association between X and Y is due to chance). Solipsism cannot meaningfully be disproved in this way (the death of the main agent ends the argument, one way or the other). This doesn't mean that it isn't true, but that solipsism is in the hands of philosophy over science.
Which is an uncomfortable position to be in. If you can't objectively prove it, or at least reliably disprove it, nothing can be concluded. Popper himself is aware of this and forms the basis of his work.
We can approach this problem from the other direction; that is to say, by considering the ethics of simulation after the fact. As software becomes more advanced and hardware becomes more capable, our simulations or the possibility of any simulation becomes more sophisticated. The simulated minds we might develop could be more complex and we have every reason to suppose that we might pursue this. The map might start to look more and more like the territory.
Clearly, either this isn't true, or Hitler's suicide was a programmed termination carried out as volitional. We couldn't be certain either way. Popper once again becomes very relevant, as we have no way of proving any hypothesis of even this one act.
These sim people would be 'p-zombies' or philosophical zombies. A p-zombie is not a horror movie villain. They look like people (or sims) and we cannot tell them apart, even from their reactions. If you tickle them, they laugh and if you pinch them, they would cry. However, they do not feel that indescribable sensation ('qualia'). At some point, surely this becomes indistinguishable also? A simulant human such as found in Blade Runner was virtually human, and Robin William's Bicentennial Man was actually declared human as 'he' became ethically synonymous with his organic peers.
Robin William's Bicentennial Man achieved human status through consciousness.
So we have established a reasonable proposal that these simulations are possible (although not provable only within philosophy.) We have now a frame of understanding with which to appreciate this issue. Next, we must turn theory into practice. How do we find the proof?
The best way to analyse the problem of our potential simulation is to look at how we would do it. We need to examine how we build simulations and models. What limits do we put on them and how does that map onto what we have observed in the universe? After all, we have built simulations to model economic or anthropological behavior and VR goggles encourage us to leap into cyberworlds, is it that unrealistic that these might become more sophisticated and take on lives of their own? And what would reassure us that we weren't indeed sentient 'code'? Are we virtual reality convinced of physicality because of that same programming?
This prospect is not that unrealistic according to Hans Moravec, an Austrian futurist. Eventually, a civilization of some sort or another will become highly technologically advanced. This civilisation will be able to mass produce self-contained virtual simulations. They might do this for entertainment purposes or to model certain situations, as we do. These widespread simulated realities may become so numerous that any thinking entity has a greater chance of being inside one than out. Simply put, if the code can perceive and experience, how would it know if it was real or code? And if most of the 'entities' in a given universe are code, statistically you are more likely to be one of them.
Nobel Prize-winning physicist, George Smoot, encourages us to examine the basic physical constants which govern the universe. In his opinion, the fact that our environment is quantized ('fuzzy on a small scale', think of it as pixellation) so that physics works differently on a large scale compared to a small one may be a way of saving space an computational power. This discrete-ness is our binary. Basically, the way the Universe works, the rules it plays by, aren't there by chance. They are created by a programmer, and that the base levels of 'reality' such as quantum physics, are an example of this.
Its just data, and since the small doesn't reliably approximate to the big (i.e no one has developed a Unified Theory of quantum vs classical physics, it might be because a programmer has made a subroutine to relate the two to save data.) He also points to entangled states as another 'simulation memory'-saving device. Other people take the computer science element a little further and examine Planck lengths, absolute zero and the speed of light. These unbending limitations could also better enable such a simulation to run smoothly.
So what we know about writing code, the concessions we make for 'functionality' may be present in the Universe itself. This is disconcerting because it speaks of 'design.' And we can see it. Its like Halo's Master Chief realizing that the loading screens are actually real.
Back to philosophy again with the anthropic principle; the idea that the universe is meant for conscious minds to inhabit and observe it. There are two variants to this idea: the weak and the strong. The weak anthropic principle posits that we are only able to observe our universe because of the presets producing its formation. If the big bang never happened, or the earth was too far away from the sun, our civilization would never have arisen. Thus it is easy to say 'of course the universe was made for us', if it wasn't, we wouldn't be here to make that observation. A million other universes with different laws of physics or other presets might exist, but we'd never know because we are unable to observe them.
The strong variant of this argument goes similarly. It states that the scale of time and place in the universe is such that life must arise within it somewhere. Given how many billions of years and how large it is, there is a strong probability that intelligent life will come about and begin asking questions. However, this is a circular argument, suggesting that the proof in the pudding is that since we can question, the universe exists for it to be so questioned. Once again we are visited by the idea of a simulation.
IYou can consider further what the anthropic principles might mean for our position in the grand scheme of things. At this point we might speculate that if simulations are powerful and advanced enough, we could have sims running simulations and circles within circles. I don't want to linger on who or what would do this; that takes the frame of this discussion from the strange into solipsism and mental illness. But if we are to entertain the philosophical argument for simulation, and note that physics may give it strength, we are met with an uncomfortable 'reality'.
Or at least, we may be programmed to.
Even if you are in a simulation, it doesn't matter because the universe is out to get you.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of Dr George Aitch and Dr Janaway alone and may not represent those of their affiliates. Article written by Dr Aitch and embellished and edited by Dr Janaway (But the vast majority goes to Dr Aitch!!) Images courtesy of flickr.


text:
Urban Tribes Prowl Havana Nights
December 19, 2010 Circles Robinson	0 Comments
Dalia Acosta
G Street Havana by night. Photo: Jorge Luis Baños Hernández/IPS
HAVANA TIMES, Dec 17 (IPS) – A different city emerges on the weekends in Havana. Young people, whose faces are as strange as they are common, take possession of the city and reinvent it. They are the "urban tribes," a global phenomenon that has made its mark on Cuba.
A stretch of about 700 meters of Calle G (G Street), one of Havana's main avenues, is a meeting site for these informal networks. As described by French sociologist Michel Maffesoli back in 1985, these "tribes" are groups of young people, ages 12 to 20, who create new forms of human relations and establish their own behavioral norms.
In Cuba, it is cultural consumption that differentiates the main tribes, largely based on their musical preferences: the rockers (rockeros) are divided among metalheads (metaleros), new metalheads, punks, hippies and freaks (friques); the "emos," devotees to the subgenre of dark, emotional rock music; the "mikis," dedicated to electro acoustic, disco and Cuba's native-grown trova music; and the "reparteros," who follow reggaeton, hip hop, rap and timba (often referred to as Cuban salsa).
"Every urban tribe has its sanctuaries and traditions," states writer and rocker José Miguel Sanchez (Yoss) in the digital magazine "La Isla en Peso."
Nevertheless, Calle G accepts everyone. The street becomes the great unifier, even for those who do not embrace any particular identity.
"There really aren't many options for young people. Here you run into thousands of people, and they might not have much in common with you, but you build your social life with it," Max, who had made himself comfortable on a bench on the old Avenida de los Presidents, told IPS. By day, he works for a state-run transport company.
Only a few academics have turned their gaze to this social phenomenon, which grew out of the new identities emerging amongst "a young and adolescent population that needed to differentiate itself," according to psychologist Daybel Pañellas. A professor at the University of Havana, she led a study about nights on Calle G.
In a debate organized by the Cuban magazine "Temas," Pañellas said she does not agree with classifying these groups as tribes, "in terms of a solid ideology that mobilizes a particular social project," with the exception of the "rockeros," a group that has been well established since the 1960s.
Some 2,000 youths swarm the area on weekend nights, Friday to Sunday, and have their spaces marked: first the rockers, then the reparteros and mikis, and ending with the emos, often spurned by the others due to their tendency towards melancholy and sentimentality, men and women alike.
According to the academic study of these groups, based on more than 400 interviews, the mikis, reparteros and emos are united in essence for their aesthetic, musical and entertainment preferences. The rockers, meanwhile, come from years of resistance against official policies. For years the government considered them "ideological deviants" and "counterrevolutionaries."
"We are different from all the rest: in philosophy, clothing, musical genre, the way we talk and how we behave in society," Alejandro, a 17-year-old rocker who studies electronics, told IPS. "We now have a calmer philosophy, less conflictive and more centered on ourselves," he said.
Some of Cuba's other cities have their own urban tribe phenomena, to varying degrees, including Matanzas (west), Santa Clara (central), and Holguín and Santiago de Cuba (east).
In 2008, Calle G saw a rise of a futuristic aesthetic, with straightened hair — whether black, blonde or red — molded into a long fringe that covered half the face, and in many cases both eyes. In Cuba, this style is known as "bistec"
(beefsteak). However, few people wear the style very long, due to the tropical climate.
Lila, and 18-year-old emo, explained to IPS why she thinks other groups, like the reparteros, reject her "tribe": "We are based on feelings. We are very united and we make our friendship into a brotherhood. The male emos face more social disapproval because they are seen as 'flojitos' (weaklings, suggesting homosexual), but they aren't at all."
The emo culture of Europe, dating to the 1980s, is strong on misanthropy and self-inflicted pain, like cutting. But in Cuba it is nuanced by the Caribbean identity of "someone who is happy, optimistic, a little machista, a femme- fatal or Casanova," according to psychologist Yessabel Gómez Sera.
Gomez Sera, author of "Who Are the Cuban Emos? An Exploratory Study of a Group of Adolescent Emos," from 2009, stressed that "not all emos cut themselves. They simply scratch themselves, and then quickly realize that they can be emo without it."
Meanwhile, the mikis in Cuba are similar to those known as "chetos" in other Latin American countries. According to Angel, a self-identified high-school- aged miki, his "tribe" is characterized by happiness, "having a good time" and "great outlooks for the present and the future." He doesn't like that mikis are often seen as materialistic and superficial.
With stronger local roots, the reparteros emerged from timba music, a fast and aggressive type of salsa music from the late 1990s. They listen to "danceable rhythms that are catchy, contagious, and rich… and are closely tied to fashion," said a young man who didn't want to give his name.
The reparteros arrived relatively recently on Calle G. "It has to do with humble people, who live in marginal neighborhoods where there isn't very much culture," he said, referring to a tribe often stereotyped as violent and conflictive.
Regardless, the diversity of Cuba's urban tribal identities is reflected in their aesthetics: borrowing from African styles for the Rastafarians, imposing and dark for the rockeros, irrevocably androgynous for the emos, attention grabbing for the reparteros, and clandestine painting for the graffiti artists.
← Alfredo Guevara: 'Cuban Society Will Break Free of the Prison of the State' (I)
Lunar Eclipse Early Tuesday →
Segments Today's Song
Contento – Song of the Day
Boys & their Marbles, Cuba – Photo of the Day
Cuba Contracts Out MDs to Panama to Fight Covid-19
Cubans Always Have Problems Aplenty
Flower Vendor, Cuba – Photo of the Day
Brazilian radio journalist threatened, car burned
Havana Weather for Dec. 31 – Jan. 6
Despair in Santiago de Cuba over Closing of Businesses
UK Orders Third Nationwide Lockdown
Social Activism: When the Context Matters
Questioning Honduras

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Five Innovative Urban Gardening Programs in Los Angeles
Mia Lehrer
For the first time in the history of the United States, children have lower life expectancies than their parents.
This is bad news. Here is some good news: "Let's Hear It for Urban Agriculture," "Mayor's Agriculture Plan Soon to Bear Fruit," and "Planners Recommend New Zoning, Lower Tax for Urban Farms." These are just a few of the headlines that pop up from a Google search for current news on urban agriculture.
The idea is not new, but it's being resurrected in cities throughout the country (and, for that matter, the world), in part because it's one way of fighting childhood obesity, which, along with diabetes, is a serious health concern for children of all ages. The number of urban gardens in the United States has grown dramatically in such cities as Los Angeles, Detroit, Milwaukee, and San Francisco, where local governments and residents agree that these gardens are an important way to give children and residents access to healthy food like locally grown fresh produce. Below is a list of innovative programs and initiatives emerging in the Los Angeles area.
Urban Farming Food Chain Project
A partnership between Green Living Technologies and Emslie Osler Architects, this organization constructs "edible" food-producing wall panels and mounts them on buildings. The people who tend these vertical gardens use them for their own purposes (meaning produce is not sold commercially), but they currently have four locations in and around downtown Los Angeles.
Silver Lake Farms
Launched in 2004, Silver Lake Farms just began a Community Supported Agriculture program offering subscribers a weekly box of fresh produce, grown locally in Silver Lake. They also hold workshops on how to start your own vegetable garden, and sponsor a volunteer program that connects urban residents with local farms, community gardens, and homesteads to help out with some of the work.
Market Makeovers
Responding to poor access to fresh fruits and vegetables in their communities, South Los Angeles's Healthy Eating, Active Communities initiative and Public Matters have teamed up to engage young people and convert corner stores into sources of healthy foods via an online toolkit.
Urban Homestead, Pasadena
An advocacy group for self-sufficient city living via farming and homesteading, this family-owned operation was started in the mid-1980s on a one tenth of an acre backyard plot. Most of the produce is sold to local restaurants and caterers.
Urban Farming Advocates
Formed in June 2009, Urban Farming Advocates is a group of individuals, small business owners, and organizations seeking to legalize urban farming in the City of Los Angeles. Their goal is to revise outdated ordinances that restrict people's freedom to use residential land for urban agriculture.
What sort of urban farming initiatives are going on in your community?


text:
O P I N I O N S
Editorials | Article | Middle | Oped
When cohabitation did not work in Karnataka
THE imposition of President's rule in Karnataka was unavoidable following Chief Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy's resignation and Governor Rameshwar Thakur's recommendation to the Centre.
Blueline killers
Killings on Delhi roads must end
Blueline buses of the national capital are supposed to be a public service but often they mow them down, as one bus did on Sunday, killing seven. On Tuesday, they claimed two more lives. This has been going on for several years now, with the number of deaths in the past three years mounting to 500, 97 this year alone. To say that things are horribly wrong will be an understatement.
Setback in Nepal
Pervez wins, but…
Nobel is not noble always
Mr & Mrs Anand
Deal time in Pakistan
Collapse of the other 20:20
Bandh by default
General has his way
Education in Punjab
Berthright
Inquilab Zindabad!
George visits Beur
Just to defend a murderer
THERE was a time — it is hard to recall now — from the 1960s to 1980s when Mr George Fernandes could be trusted to take up every right and rightful cause. Now, in a perverse reversion of form, Mr Fernandes simply cannot resist the lure of supporting the most despicable causes and characters.
Oppression in Pakistan
Soldiers must go back to barracks
by Kuldip Nayar
THE stately building of the Supreme Court stands on the Constitution Avenue in Islamabad. The avenue has seen the Pakistan constitution being battered again and again. It has come to remind one of the Tiananmen Square in Beijing where the pro-democracy protestors are beaten and bundled to jail when they criticise the rule of the Communist government. Totalitarian regimes, whether of the Left or the Right, are the same when it comes to oppression.
Unforgettable courtesy
by Bhup Singh
I had the good fortune of interacting with the most powerful men and women on earth (Heads of States; Heads of Governments, including of both erstwhile super powers; kings and queens; military dictators, and the religious heads like Agha Khan) over a period of approximately three years at Rashtrapati Bhavan.
The mysterious Burmese junta
Foreign powers, including China, have limited say
by Kerry Howley
THESE are supposed to be humbling times for foreign policy analysts – chaos in Iraq having made it harder to cast the United States as omnipotent, omniscient and self-actualising. But judging by the reactions to the recent protests in Myanmar, also known as Burma, the commentariat hasn't stopped ascribing otherworldly powers to ambitious governments. It's just that they're choosing different governments.
Europe's success as a 'workfare' state
by Steven Hill
IN the global economy, today's winners can become tomorrow's losers in a twinkling, and vice versa. But what about Europe? You may be surprised to learn how Europe has been faring during these roller-coaster times – and how successfully it has been knocking down the Europessimist myths about it.
New avenues for financing healthcare
by R. Kumar
HEALTH policy in India has shifted its focus from being a comprehensive universal healthcare system as defined by the Bhore Committee (1946) to a policy confined to family planning, immunisation, selected disease surveillance and, to some extent, medical education and research.
THE imposition of President's rule in Karnataka was unavoidable following Chief Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy's resignation and Governor Rameshwar Thakur's recommendation to the Centre. Ever since the BJP withdrew its support to the 20-month-old government following the refusal of the Janata Dal (Secular) to transfer power to it on October 3 in conformity with the 20:20 power sharing agreement, the government was reduced to a minority. In the 224-member House, the Janata Dal (S) has 58, the BJP 79 and the Congress 65 members. Even after the BJP's withdrawal of support to his government, Mr Kumaraswamy, in cahoots with his father and former Prime Minister, Mr H.D. Deve Gowda, desperately tried to cling on to power. The father-son duo thought that the Congress would extend outside support to the government to avoid a mid-term poll. However, once the Congress leaders met the Governor and demanded the government's dismissal and imposition of President's Rule, Mr Kumaraswamy's fate was sealed. Incidentally, the BJP had also demanded dissolution of the Assembly.
Interestingly, the Chief Minister's tactic in convening a special session of the Assembly on October 18 to prove his government's majority came a cropper. A floor test is justified only when the government's majority support is in doubt. In Mr Kumaraswamy's case, it was crystal clear that his government was reduced to a minority the moment the BJP withdrew support. Not surprisingly, the Governor curtly told him to either resign or face dismissal. Consequently, the lameduck Chief Minister had no alternative than to fall in line and put in his papers.
The ugly side of the episode was the hurried resumption of parleys between some Janata Dal (S) and BJP leaders, of course, with the idea of installing a BJP Chief Minister this time, when it became clear that the state was heading for President's rule. This speaks volumes about the politicians' lack of integrity and insatiable greed for power. Mr Deve Gowda's rigid stand on his son's continuance as the Chief Minister was the root cause of the crisis. Had the Janata Dal (S) not betrayed the BJP and duly transferred power as promised, the alliance would have continued. Its leaders had second thoughts only when most partymen opposed fresh polls, but it was too late. With the imposition of President's rule, the ball is in the people's court again.
Blueline buses of the national capital are supposed to be a public service but often they mow them down, as one bus did on Sunday, killing seven. On Tuesday, they claimed two more lives. This has been going on for several years now, with the number of deaths in the past three years mounting to 500, 97 this year alone. To say that things are horribly wrong will be an understatement. Instead of venting one's ire on half-trained drivers or unscrupulous contractors, it is necessary to have a hard look at the overall problem. The DTC has shown many times in the past that it is incapable of providing an efficient public transport system on its own. A partnership with private operators was inevitable. But the regulatory mechanism in place is so corrupt that bona fide players just do not dare to enter the fray. They know that everyone from politicians to police officers to transport authorities wants one's cut underhand. No wonder it is only fly-by-night contractors who frequent the shady world.
There is a widespread impression that some Blueline buses are owned by politicians and police officers or their friends and relations. The contractors who ostensibly run the service manage to get licences and fitness certificates in a jiffy because of their influence. There is no question of such smart operators observing traffic and other norms. As a result, Delhi has ramshackle buses driven by vest-clad drivers racing each other and killing people at will. This has gone on despite court orders, forcing a Delhi High Court Bench to direct the government to inform it on the next date how many politicians own Blueline buses. It had earlier asked the police to apprise it of the names of police officers who owned Blueline buses.
Ironically, Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit has come up with a shocking statement that "I wish we had control over all this but unfortunately we don't". If anyone is supposed to have control over the transport department, it is she and her transport minister. If only they can rid the department of the perennial corruption, the norms can be strictly enforced, encouraging serious contenders to run the public transport system with some modicum of decency and safety.
THERE was a time — it is hard to recall now — from the 1960s to 1980s when Mr George Fernandes could be trusted to take up every right and rightful cause. Now, in a perverse reversion of form, Mr Fernandes simply cannot resist the lure of supporting the most despicable causes and characters. Five days after a Patna sessions court sentenced a former MP and two former MLAs to death for inciting a mob that lynched an upright district magistrate G. Krishnaiah in 1994, Mr Fernandes rushed to the rescue of the criminals. He visited the Beur Central Jail in Patna to provide "moral support" to convicted MP Anand Mohan and others, including Mohan's wife Lovely, also an ex-MP. There is not much further that Mr Fernandes can ignore the standards which public life demands. And, Mr Fernandes was not alone in lending support to the criminals. He was accompanied by eight other MLAs; five from the JD (U), of which Anand Mohan was an MP and a number of Thakur bosses owing allegiance to the JD(U), the BJP and the LJP.
Not only did Mr Fernandes meet and lend support to Anand Mohan but went so far as to say that there was no substance in the charges framed against him and others in the case of Krishnaiah's killing. Mr Fernandes and those who accompanied him are obviously in search of any stick with which they can beat Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar. Yet, they must have taken leave of reason and all political values to defend and support a criminal punished for heinous crime.
Mr Fernandes has not served the cause of Parliament or the people by glorifying a criminal in the eyes of the public by visiting his friends in the Beur Central Jail in Patna.
Is it progress if a cannibal uses knife and fork? — Stanislaw Lec
People in Pakistan, unlike the Chinese, have not yet surrendered their right to rule themselves. The flame of democracy still burns, although dimly. The desire to protect it has inspired the Pakistanis to defy the authorities for years as they did a few days ago on the Constitution Avenue. Their dem onstration was against the Supreme Court's six-three judgment to allow President Gen Pervez Musharraf to contest for another five-year term without shedding his uniform. The police and soldiers beat some 200 lawyers and journalists, coming like waves in a battlefield.
What one could on Pakistan's television screens, before they were switched off, was no beating. It was carnage. Leading lawyer Aitzaz Ahsan, who won Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhary his reinstatement, seemed to be the main target. Some journalists at the risk of their own life spread themselves on him and saved him. They are lying in hospitals with broken arms and deep wounds. That the Supreme Court ordered a suo motu inquiry of the beating in Islamabad is a commendable step. Two police officials have already been suspended.
But the Supreme Court went over a similar exercise a few months ago. That too was a suo motu inquiry. At that time also, the "police" was equally brutal in beating up the lawyers who were agitating for the reinstatement of Chief Justice Chaudhary. I do not recall the dismissal of the Director-General of Police or Inspector-General of Police, nor any arrests. If some ordinary policemen were punished, no one knows about it.
One is not surprised at the brutalities. When governments run amuck, they use every method, illegal and repressive, to chastise opponents and critics. The idea is to use power to break the morale of the opposition and the intelligentsia. One could see this happening in India during the Emergency (1975-77) when the police and the government servants became a willing tool of tyranny.
What hurts one is that the ethical considerations inherent in public behaviour become generally dim and in many cases beyond the mental grasp of many of the government functionaries. Desire for self-preservation is the sole motivation for the official action and behaviour. What the police on the Constitution Avenue did could not have been possible without a word from the above. Reports are that the "police" were given instructions by the powers that be.
The police zulum is not uncommon in India as well. There are instances of Gujjars being beaten up in Rajasthan and workers in Haryana. The difference in India is that people have their revenge when free and fair elections take place. They see to it that the rulers who use the police for their own ends are defeated. One wishes elections in Pakistan could give the kind of the freedom which the Indians have. The democratic system makes all the difference despite the excesses which the security forces commit. In an open society, justice catches up with the criminals, sooner or later.
What one is not able to make out is why Ms Benazir Bhutto, chief of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP), is conspicuous by her silence. Many lawyers who were beaten up are her party's stalwarts, particularly Mr Aitzaz Ahsan. There has been no public condemnation, nor any warning to the government which behaved as if it was pitted against the enemy.
That Ms Bhutto has been negotiating a deal with General Musharraf has been known for some time. Now the cat is out of the bag. The details of the deal are coming out. Ms Bhutto will return to power after the next elections which may have to be "managed" in such a way that a particular number of seats go to the PPP and a particular number to the religious parties. General Musharraf will see to it and balance the two in such a way that he and his supporters become arbiters. This way he hopes to complete his five-year term as President even without uniform.
Ms Bhutto may go down in the estimate of the public because all cases of corruption against her have been taken back and the questionable bank accounts, frozen so far, have been released. One hopes she is aware of the protest within the PPP, particularly for not standing by the side of the members who have given their all to the party to attaint the position she enjoys today. Beating was bad enough, but her tacit acceptance was worse. Is it a part of the deal that some articulate and radical members should be eliminated for smooth management of the new relationship between Ms Bhutto and General Musharraf?
The General has created confusion in the Opposition ranks. The surprising part is that the PPP, once in the forefront, is now seen on the side of General Musharraf and his kind of politics.
Cricketer-turned-politician Imran Khan, who resigned from the National Assembly, has said that they will now go to the masses and awaken them against the General, who has now managed to win the undeclared presidential election. That alone is not enough to restore democracy in Pakistan. The soldiers have to go back to the barracks and stay there as is the practice in India and other democratic countries. It is a pity that the US, which calls itself the strongest democracy in the world, has been a party to what has been agreed upon between Ms Bhutto and General Musharraf. Washington has its own ways to "save" democracy.
Deputy Military Secretary to the President of India is an appointment with zero-mistake tolerance. One of my duties was to attend to the Prime Minister of India whenever she was in Rashtrapati Bhavan, which was more than once a week. I had been duly warned that the PM was a great stickler for time and efficiency and that no one was ever spared for any kind of dereliction.
Being a perfectionist, I left nothing to chance and was always very strict with myself to ensure proper decorum and all courtesies due to a lady in addition to the ones due to the Prime Minister. While receiving her on her arrival at the Bhavan; as the attendant opened the car door for her to alight and I bowed and wished her; she would invariably give a broad smile and say, Hello. She did remark once or twice that there was no harm in giving a little smile even in the trappings of military uniform and whenever she noticed a fleeting smile on my face, she never forgot to acknowledge saying that, that is certainly better.
Mrs Indira Gandhi was to escort a foreign Head of Government to the Palam Airport for the send-off ceremony. I had got two VVIP cars inspected and serviced by the authorised workshop and obtained fitness certificates in accordance with the Standard Operating Procedure.
The Chief of Protocol (COP), Ministry of External Affairs, was visibly upset on his arrival at the airport and declared: "Someone is going to really buy it today". The PM's car had stalled in the middle of road halfway to the airport. The announcement was within my hearing and with a meaningful glance at me. I did not know how to react to the bad news. The COP was extremely conscientious, energetic and decent person who always exuded confidence and efficiency. He had a habit of climbing the stairs of the VVIP aircraft and also at Rashtrapati Bhavan at the run. He did not want to embarrass me but, to only forewarn me.
The PM's fleet of cars soon arrived and I opened the door for her, basically to meet her ahead of all others and to apologise to her for the fiasco. Having saluted her I said, "Madam, Muje bahut afsos hai ke aapki car raste me ruk gai" (Madam, I am extremely sorry to know that the car stalled en route). She always conversed with her staff in Hindi in the presence of foreign dignitaries.
Pat came the reply with a broad smile and with her hand on my shoulder, "Oh nahin nahin, gaari to gaari hai, aur kahin bhi ruk sakti hai. Hamen car badalne men koi dikkat nahin hai — (Oh, no, no, vehicle is a machine, after all, and it can get stalled anywhere. We had no problem in changing over to the followup car).
The COP had overheard the conversation and was very pleasantly surprised. Later he told me "Bhup, you are very lucky indeed. The PM was in good mood. Otherwise she doesn't spare anyone".
Little did Mr Mohammed Hamid Ansari, now Vice-President of India, the then Chief of Protocol, Ministry of External Affairs, know about the very special rapport that had developed. Unlike many other VVIPs it was her greatness that Indiraji was all smiles and courtesy to me, whenever we were face to face — always and every time. How can that sort of courtesy be ever forgotten!n
China is widely perceived as a key supporter of the junta. Here, South Korean protestors hold up placards against China — AFP photo
The "shame and misery of the Burmese junta," claimed Christopher Hitchens in Slate magazine, will endure just "as long as the embrace of China persists." Hitchens isn't the only pundit casting China as puppeteer to the junta.
"China must use its 'special relationship' with the junta," explained Nobel Peace Prize winner Jody Williams in the Wall Street Journal, "to arrange the release of Ms. (Aung San) Suu Kyi and hundreds – if not thousands – of other political prisoners." US Senator John Kerry has expressed similar sentiments, and various human rights groups are calling for the United States and Europe to boycott the Summer Olympics in Beijing.
But how much sway do Chinese leaders actually hold over Myanmar's famously intransigent, xenophobic military?
"They actually have very limited leverage, as all foreigners do," said William Overholt, who advised the pro-democracy coalition of 21 tribal groups that created the Provisional Revolutionary Government in Burma in 1989 and is now director of Rand's Center for Asia Pacific Policy. "The whole theory of this government is to cut itself off from the world so no one can influence it."
That certainly comes through in the propaganda, which I saw much of during the year and a half I spent living and working in Yangon. Under Burmese law, all printed material must contain a government statement of Burmese nationalist principles under the heading "people's desire." Principle No. 1? "Oppose those relying on external elements, acting as stooges, holding negative views." That message applies to China too: Stooges come in many stripes.
John H. Badgley, a retired Cornell University professor who has studied Myanmar for 50 years, says its rulers are best understood as a nationalist party not easily influenced or bought off. "The notion that some external group can come bludgeon them into behavior modification is just false".
The truth is that no one really understands what makes Myanmar tick. It is an information vacuum, characterised by a surreptitious, paranoid political culture suspicious of all things foreign. The world is watching footage of Myanmar's protests in a way that would have been impossible in 1988, but it's not as if C-SPAN can set up shop in the Ministry of Home Affairs. The generals' decision-making process remains a mystery, and pundits fill the void with their a priori commitments. Exiles push sanctions; isolationists advocate restraint; China hawks blame China.
But China is not the cause of Myanmar's backwardness. It may not even be much of an accomplice . In the late 1960s, China began openly supporting the Communist Party of Burma, contributing to a long and bloody civil war. "Burmese generals remember the bitter civil war, with China on the other side, and China doesn't really trust those erratic guys," said Bertil Lintner, a former correspondent for the Far Eastern Economic Review and a Myanmar expert who has been blacklisted by the government. "They are new allies."
Despite, or maybe because of, this fragile alliance, China has stood by Myanmar recently, vetoing a U.N. Security Council resolution in January (as did Russia). But although it makes sense to pressure Beijing in areas in which it clearly has control, such as its own veto power, most of the anti-China arguments are not political but economic. Here China hawks have lost a clear sense of how much influence Beijing really has.
China is not Myanmar's biggest trading partner; Thailand is. "You keep seeing these references to Chinese oil and gas assets in Burma," Overholt said. "The reality is that they're trivial. China's attitude toward Burmese gas is that the Thais have already signed up for most of it and the Indians want the rest." China is building an oil and gas pipeline – but the gas it will carry will flow to the Middle East. This is weak stuff to hang a boycott on; Overholt calls the idea "nutty."
So why all the focus on Beijing? The West has been repeatedly frustrated in its attempts to influence a small group of secretive generals; a decade of sanctions has not brought Myanmar closer to democracy. It may be that leaning on China – a country we expect to respond rationally to incentives – channels the need to "do something" in the same way embassy protests, candlelight vigils and online petitions do. It may also be that China is a locus of negativity already, ripe for scapegoating. Western companies with valuable oil holdings in Myanmar have attracted less attention than has China.
The point isn't that wealthy nations have no role to play in coaxing Myanmar forward, or that applying pressure is futile. But casting the world in terms of all-powerful actors and weak client states is no more likely to lead to smart policymaking than casting it in terms of good and evil. A smart assessment of Myanmar starts with acknowledging how little we know, and how powerless we – and even China – may well be.
The writer is a senior editor at Reason magazine who spent 18 months at the Myanmar Times.
By arrangement with LA Times-Washington Post
1. The sclerotic European economy is incapable of leading the world.
Who're you calling sclerotic? The European Union's $16 trillion economy has been quietly surging for some time and has emerged as the largest trading bloc in the world, producing nearly a third of the global economy. That's more than the U.S. economy (27 percent) or Japan's (9 percent). Despite all the hype, China is still an economic dwarf, accounting for less than 6 percent of the world's economy. India is smaller still.
2. Nobody wants to invest in European companies and economies because lack of competitiveness makes them a poor bet.
Wrong again. Between 2000 and 2005, foreign direct investment in the E.U. 15 was almost half the global total, and investment returns in Europe outperformed those in the United States. "Old Europe is an investment magnet because it is the most lucrative market in the world in which to operate," says Dan O'Brien of the Economist. In fact, corporate America is a huge investor in Europe; U.S. companies' affiliates in the E.U. 15 showed profits of $85 billion in 2005, far more than in any other region of the world and 26 times more than the $3.3 billion they made in China.
And forget that old canard about economic competitiveness. According to the World Economic Forum's measure of national competitiveness, European countries took the top four spots, seven of the top 10 spots and 12 of the top 20 spots in 2006-07. The United States ranked sixth. India ranked 43rd and mainland China 54th.
3. Europe is the land of double-digit unemployment.
Not anymore. Half of the E.U. 15 nations have experienced effective full employment during this decade, and unemployment rates have been the same as or lower than the rate in the United States. Unemployment for the entire European Union, including the still-emerging nations of Central and Eastern Europe, stands at a historic low of 6.7 percent. Even France, at 8 percent, is at its lowest rate in 25 years.
That's still higher than U.S. unemployment, which is 4.6 percent, but let's not forget that many of the jobs created here pay low wages and include no benefits. In Europe, the jobless still have access to health care, generous replacement wages, job-retraining programs, housing subsidies and other benefits. In the United States, by contrast, the unemployed can end up destitute and marginalised.
4. The European "welfare state" hamstrings businesses and hurts the economy.
Beware of stereotypes based on ideological assumptions. As Europe's economy has surged, it has maintained fairness and equality. Unlike in the United States, with its rampant inequality and lack of universal access to affordable health care and higher education, Europeans have harnessed their economic engine to create wealth that is broadly distributed.
Europeans still enjoy universal cradle-to-grave social benefits in many areas. They get quality health care, paid parental leave, affordable childcare, paid sick leave, free or nearly free higher education, generous retirement pensions and quality mass transit. They have an average of five weeks of paid vacation (compared with two for Americans) and a shorter work week. In some European countries, workers put in one full day less per week than Americans do, yet enjoy the same standard of living.
Europe is more of a "workfare state" than a welfare state. As one British political analyst said to me recently: "Europe doesn't so much have a welfare society as a comprehensive system of institutions geared toward keeping everyone healthy and working."
Properly understood, Europe's economy and social system are two halves of a well-designed "social capitalism" – an ingenious framework in which the economy finances the social system to support families and employees in an age of globalised capitalism that threatens to turn us all into internationally disposable workers. Europeans' social system contributes to their prosperity, rather than detracting from it, and even the continent's conservative political leaders agree that it is the best way.
5. Europe is likely to be held hostage to its dependence on Russia and the Middle East for most of its energy needs.
Crystal-ball gazing on this front is risky. Europe may rely on energy from Russia and the Middle East for some time, but it is also leading the world in reducing its energy dependence and in taking action to counteract global climate change. In March, the heads of all 27 E.U. nations agreed to make renewable energy sources 20 percent of the union's energy mix by 2020 and to cut carbon emissions by 20 percent.
In pursuit of these goals, the continent's landscape is slowly being transformed by high-tech windmills, massive solar arrays, tidal power stations, hydrogen fuel cells and energy-saving "green" buildings. Europe has gone high- and low-tech: It's developing not only mass public transit and fuel-efficient vehicles but also thousands of kilometers of bicycle and pedestrian paths to be used by people of all ages. Europe's ecological "footprint," the amount of the Earth's capacity that a population consumes, is about half that of the United States.
The current health scenario however is abysmal. Annually, 22 lakh infants and children die from preventable illnesses; 1 lakh mothers die during child birth, 5 lakh people die of tuberculosis. diarrhoea and malaria continue to be killers while millions of people are suffering from AIDS. The geriatric population, estimated to be the largest in the world, will also put additional healthcare demands in the near future.
Jeffrey Sachs, who is the Director of the UN Millennium Development Project, has said that so far India has "underinvested" in the health sector. "India ranks 165th out of 177 in the share of public sectoral spending on health. As part of its National Health Mission, India should make a National Health Insurance scheme as one of its priority areas, with a large population of the country still living in poverty".
Public spending on health in India has declined. Despite the commitments to raise it to 2-3 per cent of GDP, it seems to remain static. As per WHO estimates there is a backlog of eight lakhs hospital beds. With the public healthcare system adding only 8000 beds per year, the private companies in India and abroad have a huge business opportunity to fulfill the demand for quality healthcare for domestic patients as well as foreign medical tourists.
A recent CII - McKinsey study forecasts growth from US$ 18.7 billion to around US$ 45 billion – equivalent to 8.5 per cent of GDP by 2012. The Indian Healthcare Federation estimates fresh investments of US$ 25 billion over the next 8-10 years. With US$ 12-15 billion expected in domestic investments, the Indian healthcare sector represents a US$ 10 billion opportunity for foreign investors.
The Government of India's National Health Policy (2002) envisages an overall increase in health spending to 6 percent of GDP by 2010, of which one-third would be committed to public health investment. Some of the measures suggested in the policy are: Assessing infrastructure status in the healthcare industry, reduction in import duty on medical equipment from 25 per cent to 5 per cent, raising depreciation limit on medical equipment to 40 per cent from 25 per cent, reduction of customs duty to 8 per cent from 16 per cent for medical, surgical, dental furniture and on medical equipments to 5 per cent, and income tax exemption under Section 80 1B of the Income Tax Act for the first five years to hospitals set up in rural areas.
Besides medical tourism, healthcare BPO could potentially be a US$ 4.5 billion opportunity for India, offering employment to about 200,000 people. It includes off shoring of processes such as medical billing, disease coding, forms processing and claims adjudication. Already, over a dozen companies are either consolidating operations or have kicked off pilot projects in this space.
As healthcare BPO players mature, other businesses like claims repricing, medical diagnosis and actuarial work are expected to gain momentum. The opportunity is being driven by the US$ 1.4 trillion US healthcare industry, which is trying to rationalise costs. India has an opportunity at hand to reap financial rewards and finance its healthcare system, not only from the USA but also from other countries of the world.


text:
Capitol News Forum
Wilbur Ross
Dick Shelby
Pat Leahy
Matthew Whitaker
Sunrise Movement
Intelligence Committee
Michael McAuliff
House Delivers Second Trump Impeachment To Senate
Marching through hallways of the Capitol where Donald Trump supporters rampaged just 19 days before, nine members of the House formally delivered their new article of impeachment to the Senate Monday evening, accusing the former president of inciting that insurrectionist mob.
House managers and Congress's sergeants at arms march Donald Trump's second article of impeachment to the Senate.
Trump is the first president ever impeached twice, and would be the first to be barred from office if two-thirds of the Senate agrees that his repeated and baseless claims of election fraud inspired the mayhem and assault on the Capitol Jan. 6 that left five people dead, a police officer among, with dozens more injured.
"President Trump greatly endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government. He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a co-equal branch of government," House lead impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin said, reading the full article to the Senate, where 31 Democrats and just three Republicans were on hand to hear them.
"Wherefore Donald John Trump by such conduct has demonstrated that he will remain
a threat to national security, democracy and the Constitution if allowed to remain in office, and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law, Donald John Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States," Raskin concluded.
The mob stormed the Capitol directly after listening to Trump and Trump loyalists spur them on from a "Save America Rally" on the Ellipse near the White House in which the then-president and others repeatedly offered violent imagery.
"We fight like hell, and if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," Trump told the crowd that chanted "Fight for Trump" repeatedly -- as it also did inside the Capitol later.
"You'll never take back our country with weakness," Trump said. "You have to show strength. You have to be strong."
"You don't concede when there's theft involved," he said. "Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that's what this is all about."
Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) had kicked off the violent rhetoric earlier, telling the crowd, "Today is the day American patriots start taking down names and kicking ass!"
"Let's have trial by combat," Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, exhorted them.
Trump ended his speech by telling the angry thousands to march on the Hill.
"We're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue," he said, "and we're going to give our Republicans -- the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help -- we're to try and get them kind of pride and boldness they need to take back our country."
The article of impeachment cites some of those quotes, as well as Trump's attempts to strong arm the Georgia Secretary of State into manufacturing votes for Trump.
Democrats think it's an obvious case, and 10 Republicans in the House agreed with them.
Whether Republican senators will go along remains to be seen. Seventeen of them would have to vote for a conviction to reach the two-thirds threshold.
Although Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has suggested Trump may have committed impeachable offenses, he hasn't said if he agrees with the article the House passed, and many other members of his caucus have suggested the entire exercise is out of bounds.
Many claim the process in unconstitutional because Trump is no longer in office and because Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts is not expected to preside.
"I think it's a sham impeachment. If the chief justice isn't coming over, it's just a partisan farce," said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).
"I still have concerns about the constitutionality of this, and then the precedent it sets in trying to convict a private citizen. So, in the future, can this be used against President Obama?" said Iowa Republican Sen. Joni Ernst, blaming the rioters themselves for the Capitol assault, not Trump's false claims and incitement of the crowd.
"He exhibited poor leadership -- I think we all agree with that," Ernst said. "But it was these people that came into the Capitol. They did it knowingly, so they bear the responsibility."
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), one of the handful of Republicans who formally objected to the election results in the Senate and has been accused of helping to incite the mob, admitted Trump's words were dangerous, but said he did not believe the Senate should hold him to account.
"I think the ex-president's rhetoric on the day was inflammatory. I think it was irresponsible. I think it was wrong," Hawley told reporters shortly before the article arrived. "But I think that this impeachment effort is ... blatantly unconstitutional. It's a really, really, really dangerous precedent. Because if you can do this, then you can just do anything."
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) countered such arguments earlier, saying in a Senate floor speech that they make no sense when the Constitution mandates meting out punishment through a Senate trial.
"There seems to be a desire on the political right to avoid passing judgment one way or the other on former President Trump and his role in fomenting the despicable attack on the Capitol," Schumer said. "There seems to be some hope that Republicans could oppose the former president's impeachment on process grounds, rather than grappling with his actual awful conduct."
"This is not going to fly. The trial is going to happen," Schumer said.
He pointed to the historic 1876 impeachment of War Secretary William Belknap, who tried to dodge a Senate trial by resigning. The Senate tried him anyway. Schumer also argued that the Senate has a role because a guilty verdict could be followed by a separate vote barring Trump from ever holding federal office again.
"It is certainly and clearly constitutional, and if the former president is convicted, there will be a vote to disqualify him from future office," Schumer said. "There is only one question at stake -- only one question -- that senators of both parties will have to answer before God in their own conscience: Is former President Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection against the United States?"
Exactly how the trial will proceed is not yet decided. Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), the president pro tempore of the Senate, will preside over the proceedings instead of Roberts.
But beyond that, little is set. Schumer told reporters earlier Monday that both sides were still working out whether witnesses would be called and other details.
The timeline for Trump's second impeachment trial is as follows:
Tuesday, Jan. 26: Senators are sworn-in and a summons is issued for Trump
Tuesday, Feb. 2: Trump's answer and the House's pre-trial briefs are due
Monday, Feb. 8: Trump's pre-trial brief is due
Tuesday, Feb. 9: House's pre-trial rebuttal brief is due and the trial can start
Jamie Raskin
Josh Hawley
Trump's Historic Second Impeachment Goes To The Senate
©2018 - 2019 by Capitol News Forum.


This beautiful house is located in Austin, Texas. It is called the Cat Mountain Residence, and it is absolutely gorgeous!
The exterior is a light gray stone with rich brown wood. The garage is a wonderful collection of interesting horizontal and vertical lines, creating beautiful rectangles. The entrance is glass, fantastically decorated with the same lovely lines, but in black.
The lights under the roof highlight all the wonderful aspects of the beautiful house by Cornerstone Architects.
The back of the home reveals an enticing backyard area! A bright blue pool sits directly in the middle.
The contemporary seating area has creme chairs, with radiant patterned blue and green pillows, tying them in with the bright blue pool.
A stone fireplace sits between the pool and the seating area, providing the perfect spot to take in the panoramic views.
The inside of this beautiful house is full of light woods, large windows, neutral colors, and turquoise accents.
The living room has floor to ceiling windows and glass doors. The black outlines on the windows and door continue the fantastic geometric shapes seen on the garage door and entrance.
The stone wall in the living room connects to the exterior of the home, adding texture and variety into the living room.
Built-in shelves are perfectly placed and lighted, providing a perfect place for storage. The artwork on the side of the built-in shelves continues the turquoise accents, and separates this particular area of the house.
The kitchen is absolutely gorgeous! A white island with marble countertops sits in the middle. Stainless steel appliances and white cabinets surround the island, while beautiful wooden stools line the eating area, adding warmth and a bit of a rustic touch.
Green glass lights hang from the ceiling, lighting and adding color to the room.
Tasteful, grand, and picturesque, fully describe every facet of this beautiful home.
I just absolutely ADORE this house! I had never seen the facade before, just the interiors, but now that I have, I felt definitively in love.


As Christians, how can we explain (in such a way that is not offensive and instead would encourage and inspire everyone to believe in God) our blessed hope that one day, Jesus will come back for all of us. Please share your thoughts. Thank you and God bless!
Thank you for responding to this post Innocent165. God bless you!
I maybe late to this topic however I do not think we should speak about something like that to unbelievers. Even within christindom there are strong divides with this topic. However I will continue with the sentiments of Sis NITA918 and Bro BENSY261 that you should just tell them about Christ work on calvary.
The second coming was first prophecy by the prophet Daniel; I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.... For me, the bible cannot tell a lair. A couple of months ago, I was preaching to a catholic, who believe when you die you go to heaven. I explained to her about the second coming of Jesus Christ, and show her a few scriptures. I think, if people cannot accept His works in His first coming. They're going to refuse his second coming.
The Romans Road,gospel tracts,Four Spiritual Laws,one's own personal testimony,etc.
You shall offend many for the Lord's sake(Matt 24:9-10, Luke 21:12-19, John 15:18-21, Luke 6:22), so Preach the Word and if men of the World hate you for it Rejoice.
There's probably little point to explaining that "Jesus will return" to people who don't even believe God actually exists. There's likely little point to explaining the "good news" of salvation without first explaining the bad news of sinful human nature in contrast to God's holiness and fairness (which requires judgement).
In short, you need to start by explaining the reasons for accepting that God exists before going further in your conversation. You can then go into Jesus' claim to being God in the flesh, the resurrection, and so on. You need to start at the beginning. Saying "Jesus loves you", while true, is a very poor excuse of an apologetic and not an argument for your critic to evaluate because there's no reasoning behind it. Peter said that we are supposed to give a reasoned defense (i.e. apologetic) of the faith, not just unsubstantiated assertions.
My thought is that, in most (not all) cases, if you're trying to persuade a non-Christian by starting from the good news of the N.T., you're probably (not necessarily) going about it the wrong way. How much success would you expect to have by trying to explain to someone that they need the cure you're offering, when they don't even know they're sick?
Paul learned from his mistake the hard way when preaching to the Greeks. He realized that he had to start at the very beginning with Genesis; he had to explain everything starting out with creation, the fall, and judgement, all of which lay the groundwork for people to see that they're hopelessly lost. It is then, at this point, that it makes sense to explain the good news. People need context to understand why they're even called "good news" in the first place.
I believe that in the first place you should start from somewhere,talk to them about the love of christ John 3:16,1John 4:8,and let them know the goodness and the love of christ for them,then explain to them the need for salvation,its benefits and adverntage of accepting christ as lord and saviour.What it meant when he died on the cross of Calvary his stripes,the piercing on his ribs,the crown of thorns etc then the dead and resurrection ,the sending of the holyspirit as a helper to us believers and his ascension to the father in Acts 1:9_12,then they will understand.But they have to start somewhere!
Well explained like the explanation because its in detail.