text:
(Sample Material) UPSC Mains Philosophy (Optional) Study Kit "Philosophy of Religion (Divine Necessity)"
Sample Material of UPSC Mains Philosophy (Optional) Study Kit
Topic: Philosophy of Religion (Divine Necessity)
TERENCE PENELHUM
THIS paper is a discussion of certain limited aspects of traditional theological doctrines of the necessity of the divine existence and attributes. In spite of being greatly indebted to a number of recent treatments of these themes, I still feel that something worthwhile remains to be said about them, and that certain important morals can be drawn from them regarding the relation of theistic belief to metaphysics and philosophical analysis. The traditional doctrines seem to me to be a paradigm case of the impossibility of presenting basic religious assertions as answers to metaphysical demands for explanation; but when the demonstrative trappings are carefully stripped away, what remains is seen to be of the very essence of theism, and any difficulties inherent in it are distinct from those associated with traditional attempts to demonstrate theism.
I shall be concerned throughout with general and not historical considerations; but those illustrative references I shall make will all be taken from the Thomistic system, since this is the most enduring and meticulous example of the doctrines I discuss, and is in one way or another normative for a great many religious thinkers. It is also considered by many to be the most modest in its metaphysical claims, but I hope to indicate that its relative agnosticism does not make it less open to the criticisms to which all forms of demonstrative theism are subject.
Click Here for UPSC Mains Philosophy Study Material
Apart from the Ontological Proof, demonstrations of God's existence have taken the form of insisting that there is some fact about the world which requires explanation, and that no explanation short of a deity will do. The fact chosen will vary from thinker to thinker or chapter to chapter, but there is one clear division among those facts said to be puzzling in the way required: on the one hand there is the bare fact that there is a world at all, that anything exists whatever; and on the other there is the fact, or indefinitely large group of facts, that the world is as it is, that it contains the particular sorts of quality or relation that it does. Since Kant there has grown up a habit of thinking of all the demonstrations based on each of these as just one argument, and forgetting the great variety of arguments that have been offered of each sort; this may not be very harmful in the first case, but it certainly is in the second: the world is a very varied place, and its orderliness is not the only feature of it that has been picked out as requiring God to explain it, even though this is the feature emphasized in the traditional Argument from Design. To avoid any restrictions associated with long-standing titles, I shall talk of Existential and
Qualitative arguments
In both there are certain features of great importance:
(1) In each case the force of the argument depends upon undermining the tendency to explain the fact singled out by means of more normal explanatory procedures, e.g. scientific ones. The most effective method is to render these irrelevant by making the puzzle too general for ordinary procedures to solve it. In the Existential case, temptationsto explain the existence of a given object in terms of the causal action of another are circumvented by showing that such explanations are congenitally incomplete because they leave unanswered the general question of why anything exists at all. In the Qualitative case, if a certain natural feature were scientifically explained it could be said that the natural regularity of which it was thereby shown to be an example, or at least some all-embracing one of which it in turn was an example, required explanation; the fact of order itself might be picked on for this; or one could just ask why it was that we had the sort of world which, however naturally, gave rise to this or that feature.
(2) Although less perceptive theists have often not seen this, especially in the Qualitative case, the demands for extra-scientific explanation should logically force its users to be discontented with the mere reference to a higher being. If it is puzzling that anything exists, it should seem puzzling that God does; if a certain feature's presence in the universe is puzzling, then it should seem puzzling that it, or that which gives rise to it, should be present in God. In neither case is the explanation complete. To complete it more has to be built in: the being referred to has to be one whose existence, or whose possession of the relevantattributes, is self-explanatory. The potentially endless series of 'Why?'· questions has to end in an answer that covers not only the last 'Why?' but the next one too. So we have the doctrines of a being who necessarily is, or necessarily is what he is. It is very important to see that exactly the same theoretical move is involved whether it is said that the divine existence or nature is self-explanatory to us or merely in itself; what is essential is that the explanation should be said to lie in the divine being, even if we do not know it.
As Kant saw in part, and Aquinas saw very clearly, the Qualitative question presupposes the Existential. One cannot finally answer the question of why the world is as it is without explaining why it exists, for nothing can have features unless it exists; though this is naturally only a part of the answer, since showing why anything exists is not enough to show why this sort of thing rather than that does. A theist who saw this would naturally begin by asking the Existential question, and then try to show that the being needed to answer it is implicitly enough to answer the Qualitative. This is in part the procedure Aquinas adopts: the Existential query is clearly basic in the Five Ways, but the Qualitative is answered by implication in the discussion of the Divine Attributes, and is, I think, operative also in the Five Ways themselves A word here about these famous arguments. They are regularly treated, since Kant, as though they are in effect one argument, called the Cosmological Proof, which turns out when stated to be identical with the Third Way, or argument 'from possibility and necessity'. This is not confined to non-Thomists anxious to refute the arguments, E. L. Mascall, for example, says As I see it, the ultimate function of the Five Ways is to make it plain, by calling attention to five outstanding features of finite being, what the fundamental characteristic of finite being is. And that fundamental characteristic is its radical inability to account for its own existence.'
In other words, there is at bottom only one argument: since all the beings we know are such that their existence cannot be explained by reference to them, they must derive it from outside, and ultimately from a being whose existence does not require outside explanation, and who accounts for the existence of anything whatever. This certainly fits the Second and Third Ways well enough, and perhaps the First also; and it can be made to seem a reasonable reading of the Fourth and Fifth, which involve it. But it is surely over-simple to emphasize it to the exclusion of the Qualitative query. Aquinas is surely concerned not only with the contingency of the being of finite things, but also 'E. L. Mascall, Existence and Analogy (New York: Longmans, Green. and Co., 1949), with that of their manner of being; in the Fourth and Fifth Ways he begins with the degrees of perfection things have and the order they exhibit, and not with their mere existence, which is more immediately his theme in the Second and Third. To borrow his language, just as the essence of finite things does not account for their existence, so the fact of their existence does not account for their essence. The ultimate answer required here is a being whose possession of the attributes necessary to cause those of finite things is self-explanatory, i.e. to be accounted for in terms of him. This explanation, however, would seem to have to be in terms of his existence. What else in him could his essence be explained by? So the two questions coalesce, the second vanishing into the first, perhaps, and we conclude with a being who must, by the sort of being he is, exist, and also must, by the mere fact that he exists, be the sort of being he is: one in whom essence and existence are identical. While granting Aquinas the credit for seeing that the two questions merge, and that the Existential is primary, I think it is mistaken to stress it to the extent of ignoring the presence of the Qualitative dimension from the very beginning.
Whether this historical excursus is sounu or not, we have two archetypal questions, which seem to have clear requirements for answers, and which tend to merge. Those who ask for them recognize that the required explanations are of quite a different order from scientific ones. We have to step out of such mundane explanatory processes and enter upon another, for they are inevitably never complete-this is the import of St. Thomas's troublesome remarks about infinite regresses. The psychological mechanism of this transition is easy to share in, but its rationality is dubious from the start, just because the kind of process we step into is of such a different order from the one we step out of. For this same reason it cannot be regarded as the completion of the ordinary explanatory processes. This is easy to see when we reflect that the only reasons for stepping out of them into it, say, six finite causes back in the series rather than sixteen or six hundred are impatience or fatigue. Philosophers, contrary to common opinion, are prone to both, but they should not found arguments upon them. In the sense in which a Necessary Being explains, contingent causes do not explain incompletely, but are not attempts to explain at all. Sceptics might say that since the concept of explanation is formed by reference to contingent causes, the demands for explanation made in our questions are spurious; a question does not become intelligible merely because of the co-presence of a curiosity-feeling.
To this the metaphysical theist might reply that it is the spuriousness, and not the genuineness, of a question that need demonstrating, and that in the present case it is possible to explain quite clearly what sort of answer would satisfy the questioner. I would be the first to agree that when both sides insist that they are dealing with a unique case, considerations based upon this fact cannot be more than persuasive. But we do not need to rest content with these; nor do we need to consider the perplexing problem of whether there can be a question to which, in fact, there just is not any answer;2 we need merely to assert that there can be no genuine question where the only possible answer to the purported one is demonstrably absurd. And both the Existential and the Qualitative questions are like this.
III (a)
'Why does anything exist?' is a total question. There can be nothing not mentioned in the question to bring in to explain what is mentioned in the question. There are therefore three possible ways of answering it. We could say that every individual thing is self-explanatory; we could say that the totality of things is self-explanatory, and individuals explicable by reference to it; or we could say that one part of what exists is self-explanatory, and the rest explicable by reference to that part. Of these three only the last is of interest, since all three make use of the same crucial concept of a self-explanatory being, and the first two have extra problems of their own beside this. The objection to this form of argument centres on the self-explanatory being. Kant held that the argument from contingent to necessary being in the Cosmological Proof reduced that argument to the Ontological Proof, and in spite of the fact that he located this reduction in the wrong place, a his claim is correct.
First, what is wrong with the Ontological Proof? It amounts to the claim that 'God exists' is an analytic proposition. The standard, and correct, objection to this is that which Kant raised, viz. that to assert the existence of something is quite different from asserting what sort of thing it is, and to know that either assertion is true is not to know the other is. If someone came in unannounced and said, 'It's blue!' we should not have much idea what he was talking about, but we would automatically know it was a visible physical object and not a philosophical theory or an Act of Parliament. But if he had come in and said, 'It exists!' we should know nothing about what sort of thing it was. Existence cannot vary in quantity or intensity, belong to some members of a class and not others, or be interrupted and then resumed. Moore has brought out some of the pecularities of the word 'exist' in a very well-known paper. From all this it follows that existence cannot be held to be a quality which a perfect being would have to have, since it is not a quality at all. So it further follows that no existential assertion can be analytic.
So much for the Ontological Proof. It is important to see that what refutes it is not a discovery about the structure of things, which might in a given case be different, but a logical discovery about the concept of existence, which sets it apart from other concepts; that no tautology can be existential is a consequence of this. Another consequence is the refutation of our Existential argument. For the distinctive character of the concept of existence precludes our saying there can be a being whose existence follows from his essence; and also precludes the even stronger logical move of identifying the existence of anything with its essence. These are the Anselmian error all over again. The only other way of explaining God's existence by his essence would be by asserting a causal relationship between them, but this would run us into absurdities like saying that God would have to pre-exist himself, or that his essence would have to have something almost, but not quite, amounting to existence in order subsequently to express itself in being.
So there is no way in which the existence of any being could be held to be a fact explicable by reference to that being itself. Before passing to the Qualitative argument, there are two important sideissues to discuss. One is the argument of G. E. Hughes6 that 'God exists', though not analytic, might still be necessary, i.e. synthetically necessary; the other is the important historical claim that the Theistic position is further removed from the Ontological Proof than any position I have considered, and is therefore unaffected by what I have said.
(i) To say that 'God exists' is synthetically necessary is to run counter to fashionable views about necessity in propositions, but, as Hughes insists, one can be out of fashion and right. The difficulty for our present purpose is the notorious one for believers in synthetic necessity, of explaining the necessary character of the examples offered. If all necessary propositions are tautologies, this explains why we cannot deny them; failing an equivalent explanation, purported cases of synthetic necessity seem to have a merely subjective certainty. I do not see what sort of explanation could be had in the present case: certainly a Kantian type of explanation is unsuitable.
(ii) Since Aquinas differs from Anselm in holding that God's existence has to be inferred from his effects and not from the mere concept of God, he is traditionally credited with having seen what was wrong with the Ontological Proof. He did see it was wrong, but not why it was, for he commits the same error himself. He says that we do not have the requisite knowledge of the divine nature to deduce God's existence from it; but his own argument leads us from finite beings to a being whose existence does follow from his nature, and this entails that if we knew God's nature we could deduce his existence from itand this is the mistake. To say that although God's existence is self evident in itself it is not to us, is to say that it is self-evident in itself, and the error lies here. It is not our ignorance that is the obstacle to explaining God's existence by his nature, but the logical character of the concept of existence. In order to introduce the morals I wish to draw from this, I shall discuss briefly a recently expressed view of Necessary Being put forward as the basis of discussion by R. L. Franklin. This is that a Necessary Being is just a being in whom the question 'Why?' stops, a being about whom it makes no sense to ask it. This looks to claim less than the Thomistic position, and Franklin claims that it offers an intelligible answer to the question of why anything exists, but not a demonstrable one. It is instructive to see why this is unsatisfactory: if we cannot ask why a given being exists there must be a reason why we cannot; if there were no reason, then we could ask this question-such at least is the assumption made in the initial stages of any version of the Existential argument. There are two possible reasons. The first is that the being in question is self-explanatory, which I have already tried to show to be an absurd reason. The second is that although the being in question is the cause of all other beings, there is no other being to be found which is the cause of it. In this case there would be one unexplained being, by hypothesis, and it would not answer the question of why anything existed. FrankIin says that 'Why does anything exist?' may not have an answer, but that if it does a Necessary Being (in his sense) would provide it. But a Necessary Being in his sense would not provide it, unless we went on to make it a self-explanatory being and thus reduced it to absurdity. It is not that something could provide an answer to the Existential question but maybe nothing does, but that nothing could. Now for the morals:
(i) It is absurd to ask why anything exists, because the only possible answers are in terms of the logically impossible notion of a selfexplanatory being. This is still logically impossible when it is softened by its user's saying that we personally do not know the explanation.
(ii) This in itself does not prevent us from saying that the existence of everything in the universe except one is due to that one (though we would presumably believe in that one for reasons not related to our present argument). But it does prevent us from going on to ask why that one exists, for in this context that would be equivalent to asking why anything does.
(iii) But unless you assume independently that a given being has no cause, you can always ask why it exists, i.e. what caused it. If you do assume it has no cause, you ipso facto make it impossible to ask why it is there.
(iv) So there may be a being who is the cause of everything else, but if there is he cannot explain the baffling fact of existence. For it is logically impossible to explain everything. The Principle of Sufficient Reason is demonstrably false.
(v) So the fact that things exist cannot entail the existence of God; it could only do so if God were self-explanatory. Failing this, the 'Why?' questions would only come to a halt if we had independent reasons for holding that the being we had reached was uncaused. And it would be these independent reasons that would bring us to theism. And it would not be a theism that explained. Theism cannot explain any more than atheism can.
III (b)
We turn now more briefly to our Qualitative question. The search for the complete explanation of the presence in the universe of any property is bound to lead to the claim that there is a being who has it, or some higher cause or analogate of it, seIf-explanatorily. The objections in this case are similar:
(1) Let us call the property P. Our doctrine could mean that God has P because of some other properties he has, the relationship being causal. This clearly only pushes the problem back to those other properties themselves.
(2) The doctrine could mean 'God has P' is a necessary proposition. I will assume this to mean 'analytically necessary', since, as before, its being synthetically necessary might give it certitude, but not explanatory power. Now to say that 'God has P' is analytic does not solve our problem, which is that of accounting for the occurrence, in the whole realm of being, of P. If it is analytic that God has P, this just tells us that having P is part of what is meant by the word 'God', i.e. that no being would be accorded the title who lacked P. But this merely means that there is a connection between the concepts of divinity and P-hood. not why either the first or the second has instances (or even whether either has). To know that 'Birds have wings' is analytic is to know something important about the words 'bird' and 'wing', but nothing at all about why winged creatures came to be. The analyticity of statements about God has been thought to raise more problems than it does. C. B. Martin9 has claimed that since 'God is good' is analytic, God cannot be identified with the man Jesus, for 'Jesus is good' is synthetic. This can be resolved by using Martin's own distinction between 'God' as a proper name, and 'God' as a concept. 'God (concept) is good' is analytic; but 'God (proper name) is good' is synthetic, and learned, if at all, by experience. In our present case the problem posed by the Qualitative query is that of explaining the fact reported by 'God (proper name) has P.' This is not explained by showing that 'God(concept) has P' is analytic, even though it is. Only one recourse remains. Since the divine possession of P cannot be explained by reference to the divine nature, it can only be explained by reference to the divine existence. Let us say, then, that God's having P is a deducible consequence of the fact of his existence. This would only explain his having P if his existence were previously said to be necessary, but let us ignore this. What is said of P would apply, by parity of reasoning, to all the divine attributes; so we come once This qualifying phrase will be assumed, but not stated, in what follows. more to the identity of the divine essence and existence, with some kind of priority being accorded to the divine existence. The connection between the Existential and Qualitative arguments is closer than Kant recognized.
The objections are not hard to find:
(i) Quite apart from the difficulties involved in saying God necessarily exists, we have gone in a circle if we fall back on this here. For we began by explaining his existence in terms of his essence, and we now find ourselves explaining his essence in terms of his existence.
(ii) The logical character of the concept of existence is not only nough to render it inadmissible to infer God's existence from his essence, but also renders it inadmissible to infer his essence from his existence—or, again, to identify them. The morals to be drawn are the same:
(a) It is absurd to ask why anything has P, for the only possible answers are in terms of the logically impossible notion of a being in whom the presence of P is self-explanatory, etc.
(b) This in itself does not prevent us from saying that the presence of P in any being in the universe except one is due to its presence in that one, etc. But it does prevent us from going on to ask why that being has P, for in this context that would be equivalent to asking why anything does.
(c) But unless you assume independently that a given being has P without cause, you can always ask why it has P, etc.
(iv) So there may be a being who is the cause of all other beings having P who have it, but he cannot explain the baffling fact of P itself, etc.
(v) So the fact that P can be found cannot entail that there is a God who has P; it could only do so if God's having P were selfexplanatory. Failing this, the 'Why P?'-questions would only come to a halt if we had independent reasons for holding that the being we had reached had P without cause, etc.
There can, then, be no metaphysical compulsion to believe in God; for the sort of metaphysical questions which would necessitate theism are spurious. This does not refute theism, however. It would only refute it if the sort of explanatory demand we have been considering were inevitably involved in belief in God. This has been argued by J. N. Findlay;l1 he says that the attitude of worship entails independence of all other beings, both in his existence and his possession of his excellences, and entails that he possesses these in the highest conceivable degree; if this is accepted, and it seems it must be, he claims we have to go on to say that God exists and has his excellences in some necessary manner; given the absurdity of this, God's non-existence follows. Theism can be rescued from his argument. One can agree with Aquinas that it is no limitation on God that he cannot perform logical absurdities; and one can adapt this and say it is no limitation on him that he cannot be a logical absurdity; and that is what a Necessary Being, in the sense we have examined, is. I think the readiness of Findlay's disputants to agree that God's existence and excellence are necessary is due to a dangerous and crucial ambiguity in the terms 'necessary' and 'contingent' (an ambiguity almost, but not quite, recognized by Rainer). It is pedantic of philosophers to insist that these words only apply to propositions and not to things; but our previous discussion should show that they will mean something different in each case. We do not need to say precisely here what propositional necessity is: let us say that, roughly, a proposition is necessary if its truth can be known without reference to anything other than a clear understanding of what is said or implied in it; contingency in propositions is the absence of necessity (and of its contrary, viz. necessary falsehood or, if this is the same, self-contradiction). As applied to things or events, 'contingent' will mean 'dependent' or 'caused', one thing or event being contingent upon another; 'necessary' will mean 'not dependent on any other', and, in addition, 'having others dependent on it'. A thing is necessary if it is indispensable. For want of a better phrase I shall call necessity in this sense 'factual necessity'. To be a theist is to believe that there is a being, God, who is factually necessary, all other beings being dependent, contingent, upon him. But the assertion of this will be a contingent assertion, in the propositional sense (and not in the Thomistic sense that Rainer adopts, viz. contingent to us but necessary for God). God's existence and nature are unique in the universe in being free of factual contingency, but the assertions of them share in propositional contingency with all other assertions of fact.
Theists believe that God exists, that he is supremely great and good, that no other beings would exist if he did not, and that all their multitudinous features have their source in him. I have denied none of this. It merely means that God is factually necessary, indispensable. I have denied he can be necessary in any other sense, that he explains either his own existence or nature, or, ultimately, that of other things. Since this ideal is bogus, God is not denigrated if he is not held to realize it. If there is a factually necessary being then, this fact, though the most important fact there is, could not be proved. 'Why, then, be a Theist?' Well, theism is older than the Cosmological Proof, and can survive it. Some have tried to present it as an ordinary empirical hypothesis, but this has seldom impressed. If theism is to be seen to be true at all, it looks as though this will have to happen through individual confrontation with what purports to be God's self revelation. A person who accepts this and then proclaims it to others is not free from philosophical criticism just because he does not proclaim his belief as metaphysically necessary; for he still makes statements which do not always appear to others to have the relationship to evidence which all statements (they say) have to have; and if 'metaphysics' is defined in the required way, what he says will be metaphysical to them still. But the objections thus raised against theism when it is expressed in undemonstrated assertions by such a person, however strong they are, are distinct from those much stronger ones that can be brought against offering theism as the answer to the sort of confused question we have examined above; and the sort of 'metaphysics' that may be contained in them or spun around them is likely to be immune to the objections we have stressed, whatever its other defects may be. Philosophical analysis will not progress much in understanding religious assertions, especially their relationship to metaphysical speCUlation. unless these distinctions are carefully borne in mind.
<< Go Back to Main Page
Civil Services Mains


Yongergnow Malleefowl Centre – a unique adventure into the mallee environment and the endangered malleefowl.
The Yongergnow Australian Malleefowl Centre is a unique adventure into the mallee environment and the endangered malleefowl.
(8 or more people)- advance booking essential.


Prayer Point: Urge Arby's to Pull Sponsorship from "The Mick". This TV show centers on Mackenzie "Mickey" Murphy, an irresponsible, foul-mouthed, alcoholic, pill-head who is forced into raising her rich sister's intolerable kids after the sister is arrested. This vulgar program is far from family-friendly and has a TV-14 rating.
Praise Point: St Paul's Street Evangelization is helping Changing Hearts do a Good Friday Walk in Indy. Details on our website Changinghearts.us. Dearest Lord, please help us succeed with the Good Friday Walk. Amen.
Pray: for Ohio and Oklahoma. May these citizens feel our support & have the courage to join us in prayer, fasting and action to Return the Culture to God. Our fasting suggestion this week is to fast from personal time as in Isaiah 40:31: "They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength. They shall mount up with wing as eagles." So, spend personal time resting with the Lord, and enjoying His love.
Visit us at ChangingHearts.us and as always, keep Kay Dodds and her family in your prayers.


Definition: Typography is the art and technique of arranging type, type design and modifying type for easy reading and looking good.
Typography can be in designing a webpage, print page, flyers, wallpapers and a hole heap of other things.
Term there different fonts that can be use to catch peoples eye like bold, Underline and italic.
The music industry is a great way to show what text can be used for. Katy Perry use's a unique use of animated text in her film clips. We have been commissioned by your favorite music artist to create a lyrical film clip for your song choice. Using our understanding of "kinetic typography" and our skills in Adobe After Effects, our challenge was to make a tapping into text page "Tapping to Text." In this project, We will develop more advanced tools using After Effects, utilize the camera layer and research special effects to apply to a polished and professional lyrical music film.


text:
B 46 steht für:
 die Bundesstraße 46 in Deutschland
 die Staatzer Straße in Österreich

B46 steht für:
 eine Atombombe: B46 (Kernwaffe)

B46

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


Advanced Grammar in Use, a self-study reference and practice book by Martin Hewings is the advanced level (C1-C2) of the world's favourite grammar series for learners of English, used by millions of people around the world. Advanced Grammar in Use Third Edition is an updated version of Martin Hewings' best-selling grammar book.
With clear examples and easy-to-follow exercises, it covers all the areas of grammar needed at this level. Now in full colour and with updated content, the third edition retains the simplicity, clarity and ease-of-use that have made the book so popular with learners and teachers alike. Designed to be flexible, this edition is available both with and without answers, making it ideal for self-study, but also suitable for reinforcement work in the classroom.
Retains the clarity of presentation of other books in the 'in Use' family. Two-page units present grammar explanation and examples, including typical student mistakes, on left-hand pages, and useful and varied practice on right-hand pages.
Updated page design, making the tried-and-trusted content even more accessible.
Extra practice exercises at the back provide further challenging and contrastive practice of grammar points from different units.
Useful appendices dealing with verb forms, and a glossary and all answers are given at the back.
hello, I'm Nur Halimah from Indonesia. I'm fighting for my IELTS. May I get all the book, please?? a thousand thanks for that.
May you send this book to my e-mail adress which is anataticortes@hotmail.com. ?


text:
<mat-tab-group>

  <mat-tab label="Uni-Code">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-uni-code></nlg-hex-uni-code>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="Border Arrow >">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-border-arrow></nlg-hex-border-arrow>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="> Img">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-border-arrow-img></nlg-hex-border-arrow-img>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="Rotate >">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-rotate></nlg-hex-rotate>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="> Img">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-rotate-img></nlg-hex-rotate-img>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="SVG">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-svg></nlg-hex-svg>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="Gradient">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-gradient></nlg-hex-gradient>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="Inside">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-transform></nlg-hex-transform>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="Spin">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-spin></nlg-hex-spin>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

  <mat-tab label="Skew">
    <ng-template matTabContent>
      <nlg-hex-skewed></nlg-hex-skewed>
    </ng-template>
  </mat-tab>

</mat-tab-group>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Emoov's Russell Quirk shares his 2016 roundup of the property market.
Despite a tumultuous year both in property and beyond, there has actually been a rise in property values in the post Brexit era. What 2017 is to bring is eagerly awaited.
In the New Year, the current resilient market is expected to see price rises of +6% in the UK as a whole, while high-end London could see a -10% hit.


This entry was posted on Monday, January 20th, 2014 at 12:45 pm	and is filed under Hair Accessories, Headbands, Side Tiaras. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.


For anybody exactly who are searhing for new tips to create an ideal home. After that Better Home Products Door Hardware photos gallery gives you the countless number of concepts and a lot inspirations. You are offered a lot of pics connected with remarkable home types. Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage photo is just the one of images that you can use to be a blueprint inside developing a residence. As a result of Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage photos, we are able to start to see the masterpiece of any developer who are expert throughout creating a home. We can easily observe the actual designers builds the room becomes so alive using the topic is current and everlasting.
You can embrace the particular kind of the Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage photograph straight into your property. Absolutely your own home may progressively seem awesome. Your own home would be a good area named dream home. Because of the home owner are not able to build a home in accordance with the character, and so the home owner would likely think uneasy when they ended up property. Once we observe Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage picture, the home is designed to let home owners think quite cozy at the home. It can be observed with the placement of the furnishings that incredibly well put together. As well as choice of walls colours which supplies a tranquilizing impression.
It is not without having explanation in the event Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage photos already observed by 1 visitors since posted by simply the administrator upon December 13, 2017 at 8:30 am, since Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage photos can be the graphic wich having very good grade, resolutions from Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage image is exactly 800 x 800 and its size is really 40 KB. It is possible to down load Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage photos in order to make it as your own motivation to build a family house, or perhaps you need to utilize Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage image as wallpapers of the PC, laptop computer, or even mobile phone. Follow on here you may get this photo. If you wish to publish Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage picture on your site, you then should include the hyperlink from Marvelous Better Home Products Door Hardware BP22115 Better Home Products Sea Cliff Lever Passage image. As well as if you are helped by simply Better Home Products Door Hardware photograph stock please book mark this web page on your internet browser.


text:
You are at:Home»Year 2016»January 2016»The Disease of False Secularism – Part-I
The Disease of False Secularism – Part-I
By admin on	 January 29, 2016 January 2016, Perspectives on Various Issues
Political Antecedents of Indian Secularism: Indian Nationalism and the Framing of the Indian Constitution – Part-II
The Psuedo–Secularism and the Isolation of Muslims since Independence – Part-III
The Disease of False Secularism in India: The Present and the Future – Part-IV
The disease of false secularism has befuddled our minds and invaded our good sense as a society. The glaring truth before us is that secularism, as has been practised in the last sixty-five years since Independence, has failed as a political and social creed. Yet, the intellectual class is bent on preaching the same old false secularism more than ever now.
Ever since the Narendra Modi government assumed power at the Centre in 2014, the intellectual and 'secular' political class of this country has been at the risk of being wiped out, losing out in the domain of academic institutions and vote-banks, respectively. Threatened by the hold of the Modi government over the popular psyche, in both urban and rural areas, the 'secular' class of this country has started to politicize every small incident and action of the government, terming it as communal and right-wing.
This is unfortunate. Even with the spread of Islamic radicalism world-over, we seem to be living in a bubble of our own. The argument our secularists advance is that there are two types of Muslims (just like in any other religion) viz. good or educated or peace-loving Muslims and bad or radical Muslims. They say that the problem is not with Islam – since, like all religions, it also preaches peace – but with its outer radical deformations which are confined to a section, albeit a large section, of Muslims.
This is a flawed belief. There is now a re-questioning of Islam itself in the current scenario. Muslim public figures like Tarek Fatah and Taslima Nasreen have come out openly to say that the problem is not with the Muslims but with what Islam preaches. If we don't expose this root cause of Muslim radicalism, we will never be able to administer the medicine which society so badly needs. Otherwise, it will be like saying, like Obama, that there's good Taliban and there's bad Taliban – an ill-founded assumption that has now landed Americans on their nose.
Islam's Koranic premise is that: "Fight them until idolatry is no more and God's religion is supreme".1 (1Jain, 2004.) It treats other communities and their people as kafirs or non-believers destined to go to hell, with whom there is a fundamental problem, precisely because they are the 'other' and not the same as itself. It ordains that the Prophet and his followers wage a holy war or jihad against these non-believers. Conversion to Islam, under duress, has been admitted from the very formative years of this religion and even in the presence of the Prophet, as documented by various Muslim authors like Husayn Haykal.2 (2Pathak, 2015)
In fact, even a minimum divergence from the injunctions of the Prophet is not tolerated. Therefore, within Islam, the differences between different sects have resulted in an enmity that now threatens to destroy its followers world-over, especially in the Middle-east. As one commentator succinctly summed it, "Sunnis consider Shias as kafirs, both of them consider Kurds, Ahamadiyas and Khojas and other minor sect peoples as kafirs. All of them in turn call each other as kafirs. Sufis are the most prominent sect with strong spiritual overtone. They too are no exception…Sufis are under threat from Salafis all over the Islamic world."3 (3 Pathak, 2015)
If this is the character of the religion itself, then certainly, even a so-called moderate Muslim would be moderate in spite of Islam and, perhaps, by going against it, and not because of it.
It is this point that we seek to make in the series of articles on secularism that we will bring out. In this article, we will expose the present context and the double-speak and false foundations of secularism advocated by the 'secular' Indian politicians and intellectuals.
The Present Context
The attack on the 'secular' credentials of the present government was revived following the 'intolerance debate' in the country last year. The trigger for the debate was the killing of rationalist M.M Kalburgi in September last year by right-wing elements. This led to protests by intellectuals against the government-funded Sahitya Academy for not condemning the killing, and they even revived the killing of rationalist Govind Pansare in Maharashtra in February 2015. The intellectuals went on an award-returning spree, with even celebrities joining in.
This was compounded with the beef ban controversy, which led to the lynching of a Muslim man in Dadri, outside Delhi, in September 2015. Even though the perpetrators of the crime could not be ascertained and the killing was apparently attributed to the flouting of the beef ban, the 'secularists' lost no time in blaming the central government for the death.
Finally, in the winter session of the Parliament, the battle lines were drawn as the debate was revived from day one, resulting in an unproductive outcome and confrontationist position by the opposition parties.
Through all these developments and even going back into history, it is clear that we have lost sight of what secularism means and what really are the serious issues at stake. Right from day one, the flaws in the intolerance-secularism debate were clear – that is why it divided society so sharply.
It was clearly politically-manufactured, with many of the intellectuals having clear affiliations to the Congress party or the Left. In November 2015, key party members became a part of a widely publicised conference to capitalize on the ongoing debate, by inviting a number of well-known academicians.
The debate was entirely divorced from any serious reflection on history and real issues. To the contrary, infamous figures like Tipu Sultan were raised on a pedestal by the Congress government in Karnataka, despite massive protests.
Even though the secularists accused the government of stoking a climate of intolerance, they were the ones involved in baseless allegations and double-speak. Never once did they comment on the attacks perpetrated by the Muslims on the office of Lokmat for its cartoon on ISIS around the same time. There were also numerous instances of gruesome murders of Hindu activists protesting against the flouting of the beef ban. Yet, because these murders were committed by Muslims, there was never any investigation nor were such instances of intolerance given space in the media.
False Secularism
Secularism, as understood by the Indian media and general public, is a discourse that has trickled down to us from the academic society. These academic discourses have never been able to reconcile the role of religion with state and society. They believe that secularism is related to justice, which, in turn, automatically means the protection of the minority communities and the vilification of the majority. Their brand of secularism does not permit any space for other definitions of the term.
They believe that Hindu nationalism is against the principle of secularism. The simple declaration of the RSS and Hindu organizations that they are secular has been vehemently opposed by the left-wing intellectuals. Unlike the self-styled secularists of today, the nationalist idea of secularism is not based on the vilification of the majority community or pandering to the minorities. They simply state that minorities will get full space and religious freedom in the country, but without the majority having to compromise their religion, culture or nationalism.
That is how secularism should ideally be practised – and is often practised in countries like the US – in any country, as a practical creed. It means tolerance and about necessary affirmative policy actions for the minorities. It does not mean elevating the minority religion as the centrepiece of public discourse and giving them excessive social and political power. This will completely destroy the social fabric of the country and this is what parties like Congress and the intellectuals have been trying hard to achieve.
Even though secularists advocate the separation of religion from the public domain, Indian secularists openly promote the minority religions. For instance, the whole debate on Uniform Civil Code is about this. After Independence, even though the government (and, before that the Hindu social reformers during the freedom struggle) reformed the Hindu personal laws completely, Muslim personal laws and those of other minority religions remained untouched. What's more, Nehru gave a Haj subsidy to the Muslims.
Despite the awareness that Muslim personal laws resulted in large-scale exploitation of Muslim women by the Islamic religion, feminists and social activists campaigned against bringing the Muslim religion under a Uniform Civil Code which can guarantee equality to Muslim women. And, after the Supreme Court's Shah Bano judgement of 1985 on alimony due to a divorced Muslim woman, which went against Muslim personal laws, the Congress government passed legislation diluting the judgement to appease the minority community.
Is this justice or selective bias to enhance minority vote-banks in the name of religious freedom?
Such appeasement is at odds with the crackdown on Islam the world-over, especially in Muslim countries. After the June 26th, 2015 attack, Tunisia ordered the closure of eighty mosques for spreading extremism. Prior to that, in Pakistan, the government had cracked down on forty-eight madrassas in Sind for promoting terrorism.4 (4 Pathak, 2015) In Europe, the liberal policy towards refugees and migrants from Muslim-majority countries has resulted in a massive backlash. News of mass Muslim attacks – attacks by skilled, educated migrants – on German women recently, has led to Europe closing its doors to migrants.
Certainly, it's a false belief that education alone can moderate the Islamic influence. Moderation is unlikely unless one breaks away from the religion entirely.
Going Back to History: Why is Current Discourse of Secularism False?
As we have seen, the Congress-dominated and intellectually-sponsored history has placed a misplaced narrative of secularism before us. We are told that Hindu and Muslims co-existed harmoniously before the advent of the British rule, and later the British used the divide-and-rule policy to create religious strife. This is a completely false view and there are ample historical records to refute it. However, when the historical record of Muslim atrocities in India is presented, as also that of the Catholic Church of Goa, it is dismissed by weak counter-arguments.
The two main arguments given by intellectuals are:
Attacks by Muslim rulers like Aurangzeb and Akbar on Hindu temples and on Hindu communities were not consistent. Some historians give examples saying that even though Aurangzeb attacked temples, he, at the same time, was known to give cash grants to Hindus, motivated by practical and not religious considerations. Also, they argue, that many Hindu kings also attacked Hindu temples to confiscate their wealth.
This is clearly a flawed argument. Attacks on the Hindu society and symbols, as documented by early Mughal historians, were based on religious instruction and personal inclination and orthodoxy of the rulers, especially Aurangzeb and Akbar. Giving of cash grants were rare and used as an occasional practical measure. Moreover, the rare attacks on Hindu temples by Hindu kings were not motivated by any Shastric injunction 5 (5 Jain, 2015) and, after the attack, the idols were worshipped and treated with respect. This is unlike the Muslim rulers whose attacks on the Hindu heritage were inspired by the Koranic injunctions, treating the Hindus as kafirs or non-believers who needed to be either converted or wiped out.
Another false argument advanced by the current secularists is that Indian history cannot be studied in terms of a Hindu versus Muslim discourse, a view which was perpetuated by the British. The so-called secular historians argue that, new categories have evolved in our historiography – such as gender, caste, ecology, class etc. Again, this argument masks the fact that a history of a Hindu-Muslim divide did exist and cannot, and should not, be wished away if Indian society is to get an accurate picture of its antecedents.
Jain, M. (2004, March 21). Hindu Internet Defence Force. Retrieved from Hindu Internet Defence Force: https://hidf1.wordpress.com/2010/12/03/meenakshi-jain-on-romila-thapars-somanatha-of-history/
Pathak, P. (2015). Dialogue – A Hindu's views on Islam and Muslims – II. Organiser, pp. 1-4.
Series Navigation Political Antecedents of Indian Secularism: Indian Nationalism and the Framing of the Indian Constitution – Part-II >>
Contours of the BJP's 2019 Victory: How the Flag-Bearers of Secularism Exposed Themselves Before the Election Results, Part III
Secularism Discredited: The Constitutional Face of Muslim Fundamentalism in the US
Sri Lanka Terror Attacks: The Regional Threat of Rising Islamic Extremism
Rohingya Radicalization and Indian Politics
No War Between Secularism and Islam
Bihar Elections: New Agenda-Setters
Protests Against Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019: An Attempt at Misinformation and Communalization

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


A newly restored "My Fair Lady" will be shown on the big screen at the Ridgefield Playhouse on Feb. 17.
The Ridgefield Playhouse is hosting a special 55th anniversary screening of "My Fair Lady, starring Academy Award-winners Audrey Hepburn and Rex Harrison, on Sunday, Feb. 17, at 5 p.m.
The eight-time Oscar-winning musical — including Best Picture, Best Director and Best Actor — was restored frame-by-frame from the original 65mm negative and scanned utilizing state-of-the-art technology under the supervision of famed film historian Robert Harris for its 50th anniversary.
The film is based on the musical that had its pre-Broadway tryout at New Haven's Shubert Theatre, before it premiered on the Great White Way on March 15, 1956.
The Ridgefield showing is part of the Cohen and Wolf P.C. Movie Series. Tickets are $12.50. 203-438-5795.


The Bush Institute blog is exploring the change in diplomatic ties between the United States and Cuba with a series of short interviews with observers of the U.S.-Cuba relationship. We continue the series with former U.S. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez.
On August 14, Secretary of State John Kerry led a high-level delegation to Havana to officially reopen the U.S. Embassy in Cuba. Carlos Gutierrez accompanied Secretary Kerry and agreed to answer a few questions about his trip and the changing relationship between the United States and Cuba.
Mr. Gutierrez was born in Cuba and left as a young boy in the wake of Cuba's communist revolution. He spent nearly 30 years at the Kellogg Company, including service as the firm's President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of the Board. From 2005 to 2009, he served as Secretary of Commerce under President George W. Bush, and currently serves as Co-Chairman of Albright Stonebridge Group. Mr. Gutierrez also serves on the Human Freedom Advisory Council at the George W. Bush Institute.
You left Cuba as a six-year old boy and returned to Havana for the reopening ceremonies for the U.S. Embassy. Was it an emotional trip for you? How so? How would you describe conditions in the country?
I wasn't sure what I would feel when I returned to Cuba after 55 years. I woke up on that first morning with a tremendous feeling of joy to be back in the land of my birth and that of my ancestors. It was a privilege to see the American flag being raised at the U.S. Embassy for the first time in nearly five decades.
The optimism of the Cuban citizens I met was inspiring. They are more than ready to move forward and they view this new relationship with the United States as a step towards improving their own lives. Havana has suffered from a lack of investment, which is clear from the pictures we all have seen. While some buildings have undergone a total re-haul, most need serious repair. Basic infrastructure needs to be built out. However, it is still a grand city with enormous potential.
You initially opposed the restoration of diplomatic ties with Cuba, but in June, you wrote in a commentary forThe New York Times that you have changed your mind and now feel it is the right policy. Why do you now think engagement with the Cuban government can help promote political and economic reforms?
In the past, I felt that the interests of both countries were polar opposites. Today, there are important changes taking place in the Cuban economy. There are many private restaurants, people buying and selling homes, and new shops are opening up. Cuba is changing and it's time that we change with it.
Unlike any other time in the last five decades, today we have an opportunity to actually help the Cuban people. We shouldn't let the opportunity pass. I would ask any opponent of normalization to visit Cuba. I believe they will reach the conclusion that the Cuban people are the biggest losers of the policy of Cuba isolationism.
Many U.S. businesses are eager to explore the opening in Cuba. With your long experience as a former CEO of Kellogg and as President Bush's Commerce Secretary, what are some of the challenges and opportunities businesses might face?
I would counsel businesses to be patient and to think long term when it comes to Cuba. The changes are going to be gradual. The embargo is still in place, Cuban regulations still need to be adjusted, and purchasing power is still low. However, Cuba has abundant human and natural resources. I would urge U.S. business people to visit and stay close to events on the island.
Some critics of the opening with Cuba say the negotiations gave away the store while getting few concessions in return from Havana, particularly with regard to political change and the treatment of dissidents. What's your assessment?
The process towards normalization is still at the beginning. It's interesting that many have lost patience with a nine-month old policy that is attempting to alter one that has been around for over 55 years. I don't think it's a matter of keeping score. We need to think through how we can help the Cuban people, and the kind of a relationship we want with Cuba and the rest of Latin America in 5, 10, 20 years. We need to do what is in our nation's interest.
Improved relations with the United States haven't seemed to slow the Cuban government's repression of independent journalists or human rights and civil society activists. What should be done to bolster the cause of nonviolent dissidents in Cuba? How do closer ties give the United States better leverage or new tools to help their cause?
We are now in a position to have substantive discussions with the Cuban government about human rights, including free speech. Our position on human rights should always be clear to all, while recognizing that the Cuban political system will be decided in Cuba. The opening of their economy reflects some, albeit limited, restoration of economic freedom. Overall, our policies should aim to help, not punish, the Cuban people.


text:
1. The Shadow
2. Dark Night
4. Frequencies & Vibrations
3. Embodiment
4. Evolution
For successful registration, subscription must be confirmed by email link. This is to prevent spam.
Contribute to Shifting Timeline
If you have gained value from the material at Shifting Timeline and want to give something back in exchange, please kindly donate here. Sami does not believe in using third party advertisements to generate revenue so your contribution, no matter how small, will help facilitate the creation of more content. Thank you!
* donate through paypal or credit/debit payment. *
3. Reality Creation
The Quantum Theory
The scientific doctrine aims to study phenomena in the external world to reach objective conclusions. Its primary focus is rationalising the physical nature of reality through observational and methodical measurement. However, this restrictive perspective can lead to dogmatic beliefs that diminish the extra-sensory nature of reality and non-tangible components that don't stand up to objective scrutiny, because they can't be tested using current scientific equipment. Though Psychology, a now classified science, has sought to understand our thoughts, behaviours and emotions, unlike the hard sciences, it has become yet another rigid discipline that diminishes anecdotal evidence and tries to pinhole behaviours and illness through yet another objective lens, failing to properly address the root cause of human expression without resorting to classifications and labels.
The Quantum Theory has been a thorn in the eye of the mechanical dogmas of classical physics, dumbfounding scientists with the notion that reality changes according to the act of observation. In the famous Double Slit experiment, when a wavelength of light is beamed through two slits, the waves split into two and interact with one another causing an interference pattern. This pattern can be identified by the way they hit a wall located behind the two slits, appearing as alternating light/dark strips, which is the result of the way the waves interact. This phenomenon is to be expected based on scientific rationale. When firing particles, however, the particles would be expected to contact the wall behind the slits approximately in alignment with the two slits through which they were fired. This was the case when particles were fired through a single slit, whilst the other was blocked off. However, when the second slit was opened and enough electrons (particles) were fired, they started to form the same interference pattern as the wave.
Skeptics would argue that there was some kind of interference occurring between the particles that were reacting strangely to the conditions of the experiment. However, the interference phenomenon still occurred when electrons were fired independently. To observe this behaviour and account for any potential intervening variables, observational equipment can be introduced. Strangely, in such cases, the particles start to behave like particles again, at least according to their definition under the commonly accepted laws of physics. So, ordinarily the particles were exhibiting qualities of the wave, indicating that they have a more fluid and dynamic nature, existing as kind of abstract potentialities, until they are observed whereby the wave collapses into a particular outcome, which gives an appearance of solidity. Therefore consciousness appears to be governing the behaviour of the particles and precedes matter, instead of the consensus that it is a byproduct of the brain.
The mainstream scientific establishment has been determined to keep the true implications of these findings suppressed, classifying the science as unsettled and conveniently ignoring the relationship between consciousness and matter, burying or limiting funding for research that diverges from the particle physics, Evolution and Big Bang Theory, which reduce human nature to a deterministic and predictable behaviour-response model to convince humans they are victims of chance, which restricts them recognising their true power as conscious creators and co-creators of their external landscape.
Because humans too are made up of the same subatomic fabric as the universe, it stands to reason that we are interacting with our environment intelligently through consciousness, yet most people are unaware of this interconnection, believing matter to be inert, and outcomes solely deterministic. If matter can be manipulated by mind, then we can utilise free will to influence outcomes, and so the reality we experience is not happening to us but responding to us. The quality of the thoughts we generate and emotions we feel have a bearing on the outcomes we attract, because all these components are interacting with one another under the governance of the unified field, which is an intelligent cohesion of all the forces of nature.
Cambridge physicist Rupert Sheldrake refers to the morphic field. The word morphic is derived from the word morphe in Greek, meaning form. Morphic fields are like the governing principle for self-organising systems. Others prefer the term akashic field. This explains synchronistic behaviour such as how birds fly and fish swim in perfect unison rather than at random. The morphic field is like a collective memory that drives instinct and habitual behaviours, explains the predisposition for phobias, as well as accounting for phenomena such as telepathy. The means through which information is transferred is known as morphic resonance.
The morphic resonance theory can be demonstrated through a number of observations in animals. There are numerous cases where dogs and cats are able to predict when their owner is about to arrive home. This was put to the test in an experiment conducted by Sheldrake with UK participant Pamela and her dog Jaytee in 1994. Pam had noticed that when left with her parents, her dog would sit by the window awaiting her return from work. This could have been explained by routine, but when Pamela was unemployed and returned at sporadic times, Jaytee would still anticipate her return with the same behaviour.
This was replicated with statistical significance and accounted for potential confounding variables. This included the sound and familiarity with the vehicle. Jaytee was able to sense the arrival time at a distance of over 6km, and even if she arrived by other means such as bicycle or train. This was the case regardless of whether Pam's parents were aware of her arrival time. In another study conducted at Harvard university back in the 1920s, rats learned to escape a water maze progressively quicker across subsequent generations, even with no genetic connection between the rats. Rats in Melbourne and Edinburgh seemed to pick up where the Harvard rats left off.
'The difference between the Platonic theory and the morphic-resonance hypothesis can be illustrated by analogy with a television set. The pictures on the screen depend on the material components of the set and the energy that powers it, and also on the invisible transmissions it receives through the electromagnetic field. A sceptic who rejected the idea of invisible influences might try to explain everything about the pictures and sounds in terms of the components of the set – the wires, transistors, and so on – and the electrical interactions between them. Through careful research he would find that damaging or removing some of these components affected the pictures or sounds the set produced, and did so in a repeatable, predictable way. This discovery would reinforce his materialist belief. He would be unable to explain exactly how the set produced the pictures and sounds, but he would hope that a more detailed analysis of the components and more complex mathematical models of their interactions would eventually provide the answer. Some mutations in the components – for example, by a defect in some of the transistors – affect the pictures by changing their colours or distorting their shapes; while mutations of components in the tuning circuit cause the set to jump from one channel to another, leading to a completely different set of sounds and pictures. But this does not prove that the evening news report is produced by interactions among the TV set's components. Likewise, genetic mutations may affect an animal's form and behaviour, but this does not prove that form and behaviour are programmed in the genes. They are inherited by morphic resonance, an invisible influence on the organism coming from outside it, just as TV sets are resonantly tuned to transmissions that originate elsewhere.'
~ Rupert Sheldrake, The Science Delusion
In another scientific study known as Quantum Entanglement, particles can be entangled and then separated across vast distances, yet when the properties of one of them are altered, the other responds instantaneously, irrespective of the distance, an action Einstein dubbed as 'spooky action at a distance'. This entanglement again demonstrates how, at a deeper level, there is a thread that binds matter together and if all matter originates from the same primordial field, then in essence all is still connected, irrespective of space and time.
In an experiment conducted in Colorado, at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, researchers created particles that rotated both clockwise and counter at the same time. When one of the particles was observed by a laser, it settled into a single direction, to which the other particles instantaneously responded in the same manner. Such experiments hail a breakthrough in scientific thought, bridging the gap between science and spirituality.
Throughout history, there have been numerous cases where those who had been clinically pronounced as dead have returned back to life, able to convey their experience during physical death. These are known as Near Death Experiences (NDEs). Though no current scientific instruments can be used to measure the non-tangible phenomena, there have been universal parallels in many of the accounts. Proponents of the material worldview take a skeptical view of such data, writing is off as pseudo-scientific and unsubstantiated, though it constitutes valid data nonetheless due to the amount of information available and the correlations that can be drawn across various cultures and demographics, and across successive generations.
When patients are classified as clinically brain dead by health professions, this is corroborated by a flat line in EEG readings, yet the consciousness of NDE patients continues to exist independently from the body in an altered state. This cannot be explained by current mainstream scientific literature, and seems to contradict the commonly accepted claim that consciousness is just a byproduct of the brain and could therefore not exist independently of it. Some subjects upon returning to life have been able to report what was happening at the location of their physical body during death in such precise detail that many clinicians and other witnesses have had their world view turned completely upside down, left with no choice but to accept spirituality into their lives.
Subjects have been able to recall the specific details in operating theatres, such as how many doctors there were, what instruments they were using and on which parts of the body. In one case, a patient described a clinician's instrument that resembled an electric tooth brush in appearance, and the carrying case of a specific colour and structure. The owner of this tool was taken aback at the accuracy of the description, deeming it virtually impossible for anyone to know outside his field of interest.
Another patient exhibited an unusual characteristic not commonly documented amongst NDE patients. Whilst pregnant, the subject was diagnosed with a condition that can lead to excessive bleeding and death in rare circumstances. During premonitions, she saw the worst case scenario coming to fruition and, convinced of her destiny, shared this with her husband and doctor with unwavering certainty. During a C-section labour, the loss of blood caused her to be pronounced dead, but her baby survived. She had predicted this would be the precise outcome, even though ordinarily both mother and baby would not survive.
It is common in expanded states of awareness for the boundaries between the inner and outer world to dissolve and for consciousness to interact with the environment in a fluid way. When unbound from physical density, time is reported to dissolve and consciousness takes on a less linear trajectory. The separation between objects diminishes and consciousness appears to animate all things, even those that we recognise as inanimate in physical form. It is in this state where individuals report interacting with the spirits of loved ones who communicate words of comfort and wisdom to them, characterising such experiences as loving and blissful. Deceased relatives often tell their loved one that it is not yet their time and that they must return to their physical bodies to see out their destiny. It as at this point that the individual reports being thrust back into the body, feeling a pulling sensation like an energetic chord drawing them back to their body.
These accounts resemble the phenomenon of astral projection, where in the transitional state between wakefulness and sleep, known as the hypnagogic state, subjects experience a sensation known as sleep paralysis. In this state the body becomes completely immobile, though the subjects consciousness is still alert. Those unfamiliar or uncomfortable with the experience report this as terrifying and characterised as a complete loss of control over the physical body. It is this fear itself that seems to snap the person back into movement, but in situations where the subject embraces the relaxation, they feel their consciousness detaching from the physical body and are able to observe their dormant body as an outside observer. This tends to happen when the subject is on their back and there are numerous visual representations of this depicted as the etheric body rising above the physical body in a state of independence, yet still connected through an energetic (etheric cord).
Depending on the degree of experience or control over ones consciousness, individuals report entering the astral plane, able to navigate through conscious intent to different places. Subjects are able to report where they went and what others were doing who they visited at that precise time. Others report feeling states of extreme ecstasy/bliss as they detach from their bodies, like a weight has been lifted and the vibration has risen. This altered state can be accompanied by various sounds or bright lights, none of which are present in the room at the time, particularly as most instances occur during the night in the dark, and in many cases in solitude. Like NDEs, astral projection has been reported universally across generations, and with many similarities. Both phenomena grant plausibility for the existence of consciousness independent of the body, and so consciousness drives the body rather than the reverse, with the brain acting like a transducer.
Psychedelics have also enabled access to extra-sensory states of perception beyond the limited bandwidth of visible light perceived by the five senses. The term psychedelic is derived from the Greek words ψυχή (psyche, "soul, mind") and δηλείν (delein, "to manifest"), hence "soul-manifesting", implying the use of psychedelics to access the soul and untapped potential of the human mind. Recently, the term entheogenic has come to denote the use of psychedelic drugs in a religious/spiritual/mystical context. This exploration of the metaphysical realm gives rise to profound changes within the individual who is able to retrieve repressed aspects of the psyche embedded in the unconscious, providing an opportunity to confront and release trauma otherwise hard to access from a more sober state. For this reason, plants like ayahuasca and psilocybin mushrooms are classed as having medicinal value and have been revered throughout human history as a powerful tool to assist the individual with their healing and to expand their mind beyond the physical paradigm.
Ayahuasca is native to Latin America in the Amazon. Its active component, DMT, is responsible for inducing the psychedelic visions which some argue correspond to the pineal gland of the brain, recognised as the third eye in traditions such as Hinduism and Buddhism and referred to as 'the seat of the soul'. Because of the dream-like state that DMT induces, it has been theorised to play a role in sleeping and is connected to near death experiences, where similar perceptions are reported. Whether or not DMT corresponds directly with the pineal gland, its consciousness expanding properties are undeniable and have been documented throughout history in written and aesthetic form, particularly amongst indigenous cultures who have a powerful way of depicting the rich array of symbols and archetypes, in all its colourful and mystical splendour. This has captured the curiosity of people from all cultures across the world, and increasing numbers are venturing over to South America to delve into this hidden world. Though anecdotal, the commonalities lend credence to the existence of higher states of perception.
The mind is the tool for manifestation. Once we recognise that an observational awareness exists outside our thoughts, thoughts can be tailored in a constructive way to help master the art of reality creation. Rather than trying to completely clear our thoughts, we can learn to become the master of them, using visualisation techniques and neuro-linguistic programming to alchemize them into a force for creative expression. Being mindful in this way is different to being preoccupied and consumed by thought, which detracts from the ability to create from a place of presence. If we try to abolish our minds, then we put ourselves in a passive alpha state, opening ourselves up to potential interference, but if we become too identified with our thoughts the ego hijacks control and we lead from the head, bypassing intuitive awareness that channels information from source, keeping us in alignment with a higher intelligence that allows us to navigate reality with a higher degree of synchronicity.
When the mind is not kept in check, our thoughts can become possessive and drive us into negative feedback loops. These thoughts can become so pervasive that even a very self-aware individual can become identified with them, unable to discern between their mind and higher aspect. Repetitive thought loops that are consistent enough will embed themselves into the subconscious and drive self-destructive tendencies, which can manifest as mental, emotional and physical instability. Unable to identify the origin of our pain, we feel at mercy to the external world and can develop victim complexes or over exert trying to control the outside, rather than accessing internal solutions through surrendering to the body's intelligence.
A useful method to stop the mind from hijacking our behaviour is to practice mindfulness and capture the thoughts as they first consciously arise, asking ourselves whether they pose a real threat to us, or are just fleeting intrusions. Each time they try to lock in we can replace them with self-empowering thoughts. In cases where we can't associate our behaviours to any particular mind states or conscious beliefs, we need to dig deeper into the repressed unconscious.
Biologist, Bruce Lipton, talks of epi-genetics, which translates literally as 'above genetics'. In other words, the environment or perception of the environment controls genetics, as opposed to simply our heredity. If you change your mind/perception you change the biology. So you are a master of your life, rather than a victim. In an example he explains how people may feel victimized due to their genetics if there is a history of cancer in their family. The acceptance that you are more likely to get cancer as a result of these genes means that the placebo effect kicks in and you may actually become at a greater risk as a result. When you restructure your beliefs, this rewrites our coding down at the level of DNA.
Lipton conducted two experiments to prove that our environment can affect our genes, as opposed to the reverse – the idea pushed by the current mainstream. First, he removed the nucleus of the cell, containing the genes, and the cell survived for 2 and a half or more months carrying out all the complexities of life. Therefore it was not the gene controlling the cells. The cells do eventually die because the proteins that make up the machinery break down and wear out and if they break down they need to be replaced otherwise they will die. In the second experiment, he isolated one stem cell and put it in a petri dish. The cell would divide every 10 hours producing thousands of cells, but because they all came from one cell, they were genetically identical. However when splitting these cells up into 3 groups, putting them in 3 separate petri dishes and changing the growth medium (the constituents of the environment) of each dish, in one dish they formed bone, one muscle and one fat. You must ask yourself therefore what controls the fate of a cell.
We can compare our bodies to a petri dish. Think of ourselves as skin covered petri dishes, where the culture medium in this instance is our blood. When we change the culture medium, the fate of the cells changes. So what changes the culture medium? Our thoughts influence the brain, which releases chemistry, which matches our thoughts. For example, stress releases cortisol and in a state of love dopamine and oxytocin are released by the brain into the blood. Stress and love release a completely different chemistry. Thus we can see how thoughts can influence our cells. More positive perceptions will lead to greater harmony between the cells.
Dr Bruce Lipton expresses:
'If I could put energy into a capsule then today the pharmaceutical company would be promoting energy healing. But you cannot sell energy so it is not in the interests of a corporation that sells chemical products to sponsor or push the nature of energy healing because it actually undermines the corporate structure.'
~ Dr. Bruce Lipton
What we visualise in our minds tells us a lot about the underlying beliefs that give rise to them. If we envisage a future of limitation and struggle, then there is likely an unconscious program driving that belief that is translating through our cognitions. Though best addressed at the root, the mind can be trained to transmute negative thoughts through visualising favourable realities where we have a high vibrational state of being.
Whatever we can conjure up in our minds is a potential reality, because the imagery and the symbols carry an energy, just like everything in existence. The more we can encapsulate the full essence of the imagery with all our senses, the closer it will resemble physical form and the greater likelihood it will have to materialise. What's most important is the way that desired reality makes us feel. By feeling the joy associated with that place we aspire to be, we can bring back and embody those feelings in the present moment. The more we can hold this state through a positive mindset, the greater the likelihood that reality will conspire to continue to keep us in that state, and so we are already moving in the positive direction.
"The world in which we live is a world of imagination, and man — through his imaginal activities — creates the realities and the circumstances of life; this he does either knowingly or unknowingly. Men pay too little attention to this priceless gift — The Human Imagination — and a gift is practically nonexistent unless there is a conscious possession of it and a readiness to use it. The future will not be fundamentally different from the imaginal activities of man; therefore, the individual who can summon at will whatever imaginal activity he pleases and to whom the visions of his imagination are as real as the forms of nature, is master of his fate."
~ Neville Goddard


granite stone crushing business plan. Posted at July 27, 2012. Then we can start transfer our granite stone quarry business plan into practice.
crushing and screening of granite business plan. business plan for granite stone quarry Documents. stone crusher business plan Best Business Plan.
stone granite mining business plan. start up granite quarry business. Granite quarry in Nigeria, Stone Crushing Plant Project Report, stone crushing business plan .


Item 18 of the Tax return for individuals (supplementary section) 2016.
CGT summary worksheet 2016 (PDF, 166KB), go to steps 2 and 3 of part C.
Read part B if you are an individual and a CGT event happened in 2015–16 or you received a distribution from a trust (including a managed fund) that included a net capital gain.
If you have sold only a few shares or units, or have a managed fund distribution, you may find it easier to use the Personal investors guide to capital gains tax 2016.
The steps that follow explain how to calculate your net capital gain or net capital loss for 2015–16 and complete item 18 Capital gains on your Tax return for individuals (supplementary section) 2016.
If you have a number of the Capital gain or capital loss worksheets because several CGT events happened, you may wish to use the CGT summary worksheet (PDF, 166KB) to help you calculate your net capital gain or net capital loss. Read steps 2 and 3 in part C of this guide (ignoring the word 'entity') to find out how to complete the summary worksheet. Then complete item 18 on your tax return (supplementary section).


Are politicians just barometers of public opinion? Or do we deserve more than that?
There will be 'blood on the carpet' within the Labour movement following the 2015 General Election result. This is truly a low point. From where they stand now it seems a long way back. How can they reverse their current fortunes?
My fear is that there will be voices within the movement arguing that the Party should move further to the right in order to win back the support of the electorate. There are already stories appearing in the press of Ed's brother and 'New Labour' acolyte David Milliband returning to rescue the party. Shifting to the right would be a mistake in my view.


Police have taken a cleaning lady into custody after she broke into a Westlake, Ohio home, did a bit of light cleaning, then left a bill. "Victim" Sherry Bush thought a cleaning company had made a mistake and she called the number the intruder had left. But the "cleaning fairy" told her there was no mistake and to pay up.
While Bush was away and her daughter asleep upstairs, someone took out the rubbish, did a bit of washing up, hoovered the carpet and cleaned the playroom.
Bush called the number Sue Warren had left, thinking there was a mix-up.
Warren, who runs her own cleaning business, has done this before. Last month she was charged with criminal trespassing. However, nothing has been stolen from the homes she has forcibly cleaned.


text:
Picea pungens Engelm.
Article from Bean's Trees and Shrubs Hardy in the British Isles
Bean's Trees and Shrubs
Colorado or Blue Spruce
Synonyms: P. parryana Sarg.; Abies parryana Hort. Angl.
A tree 80 to 100, occasionally 150 ft, high; pyramidal as a small tree in cultivation with stiff horizontal branches; young twigs not downy; buds brownish yellow. Leaves arranged all round the branchlets, more thinly beneath, the upper ones pointing forward; they are 3⁄4 to 11⁄4 in. long, stiff, quadrangular, spine-tipped, dark green in the type, with three or four lines of stomata on all four faces. Cones cylindrical, shining, straw-coloured when ripe; 3 or 4 in. long, about 11⁄4 in. wide; scales wavy, oval, blunt and jaggedly toothed at the apex; seeds 1⁄8 in. long, with a wing 1⁄4 in. long.
Native of the Rocky Mountains, mainly in Colorado, E. Utah, E. New Mexico, and N. Arizona, but with scattered stands as far north as Montana; discovered by Dr Parry in 1862. It was in commerce in Britain by 1875, probably from seeds sent by the commercial collector Roezl, though some of those collected by Parry in 1865 may have been sent to Britain. Typical trees, with dark blue-green leaves, are very rare in gardens, where the species is almost wholly represented by the glaucous forms. There is an example at Westonbirt in Willesley Drive, measuring 56 × 4 ft (1969), and another at Leonardslee in Sussex.
P. pungens is allied to P. engelmannii, differing in its glabrous shoots, and in its bluer, more pungently pointed, leaves. Its bark becomes thick and furrowed on old trees, whereas in P. engelmannii it remains comparatively thin, and scaly.
f. glauca (Reg.) Beissn. and f. argentea Beissn. Blue Spruce. – P. pungens varies much in the more or less glaucous hue of its foliage; many shades may be selected in any batch of seedlings, and the most striking, with blue or silvery leaves, have been perpetuated by grafting. The oldest known clone descends from a tree that grew in Prof. Sargent's garden at Harvard, where it had been raised from the seeds sent by Parry in 1865. Cuttings from this were taken by Anthony Waterer during a visit to America in 1877 and plants distributed by his Knap Hill nursery under the name Abies parryana glauca. This clone, which has never received a distinctive name, received a First Class Certificate in 1890. Probably many of the older trees are of the Knap Hill clone, though some may be seedlings. One of the original propagations still grows in the Knap Hill Nursery and measures 65 × 53⁄4 ft (1974). Two of the finest specimens are: Westonbirt House, Glos., 73 × 51⁄2 ft (1967) and Tring Park, Herts, 65 ×6 ft.
To those who admire silvery trees the blue spruces may be recommended as some of the most handsome. This applies more to young specimens; with age they are apt to become rusty and thin of foliage at the bottom, especially those selected forms that have been grafted on common spruce.
The following are the more important named selections:
'Endtz'. – Of dense, conical habit, with horizontal branches. Leaves blue, silvery in winter, slightly falcate. Ultimate height at least 30 ft. Raised by L. J. Endtz of Boskoop, Holland.
'Erich Frahm'. – Leaves deep blue throughout the year. Of conical habit, attaining 30 ft at least. Raised by Timm & Co. of Elmshorn, Germany.
'Glauca Globosa' ('Globosa'). – A dwarf, rounded, flat-topped bush, attaining 3 ft or so in height, more in width. Leaves bluish white, more or less radial. Raised in Holland.
'Glauca Procumbens' and 'Glauca Prostrata'. – Of spreading or prostrate habit. It is uncertain whether these names really represent clones, since, as pointed out by Dr Krüssmann, similar plants can be raised from any of the varieties of blue spruce, by using lateral shoots as scions. The tree forms are always propagated from leading shoots.
'Koster'. Koster's Blue Spruce. – According to Den Ouden and Boom, this name does not represent a clone. The plants originally sent out by Koster towards the end of the last century were grafted from a number of selected seedlings with glaucous foliage. Later the firm of C. B. van Nes & Son made a re-selection of ten plants, uniform in habit and in their silvery-glaucous foliage, and the present commercial stock derives from these (Man. Cult. Conif. (1965), p. 283).
'Moerheim'. – Of slender, conical habit, ultimately 30 ft or more high. Leaves bluish white in both summer and winter. Raised by Ruys at the Moerheim nursery, Holland.
'Montgomery'. – A dwarf bush, forming a broad cone. Leaves grey-blue. Raised in the USA.
From the Supplement (Vol. V)
The most notable specimens all belong to the f. glauca: Knap Hill Nursery, Surrey (see page 194), 69 × 71⁄4 ft (1984); Tring Park, Herts., pl. 1906, 77 × 61⁄2 ft (1975); Eridge Castle, near Tunbridge Wells, Kent, pl. 1880, 75 × 51⁄4 ft and 74 × 31⁄2 ft (1984); Westonbirt House, Glos., 75 × 61⁄4 ft (1982); Batsford Park, Glos., 62 × 63⁄4 ft (1980); Highnam, Glos., 85 × 41⁄2 ft (1983).
† cv. 'Hoopsii'. – This is now considered to be the best of the silvery-leaved clones. It was raised in the Hoops nursery in Holland and put into commerce by Grootendorst's nursery in 1958.
'Picea pungens' from the website Trees and Shrubs Online (treesandshrubsonline.org/articles/picea/picea-pungens/). Accessed 2020-01-22.
P. parryana Sarg.
Abies parryana Hort. Angl.
Infraspecifics
Picea pungens 'Endtz'
Picea pungens 'Erich Frahm'
Picea pungens f. glauca
Picea pungens 'Glauca Globosa' ('Globosa')
Picea pungens 'Glauca Procumbens' and 'Glauca Prostrata'
Picea pungens 'Koster' Koster's Blue Spruce
Picea pungens 'Moerheim'
Picea pungens 'Montgomery'
Picea abies
Picea asperata
Picea bicolor
Picea brachytyla
Picea breweriana
Picea chihuahuana
Picea crassifolia
Picea engelmannii
Picea farreri
Picea glauca
Picea glehnii
Picea jezoensis
Picea koraiensis
Picea koyamae
Picea likiangensis
Picea linzhiensis
Picea × lutzii
Picea mariana
Picea martinezii
Picea maximowiczii
Picea meyeri
Picea morrisonicola
Picea obovata
Picea omorika
Picea polita
Picea retroflexa
Picea rubens
Picea schrenkiana
Picea sitchensis
Picea smithiana
Picea spinulosa
Picea wilsonii
(pl. apices) Tip. apical At the apex.
glabrous
Lacking hairs smooth. glabrescent Becoming hairless.
Grey-blue often from superficial layer of wax (bloom).
Picea pungens
'Endtz'
Of dense, conical habit, with horizontal branches. Leaves blue, silvery in winter, slightly falcate. Ultimate height at least 30 ft. Raised by L. J. Endtz of Boskoop, Holland.
'Erich Frahm'
Leaves deep blue throughout the year. Of conical habit, attaining 30 ft at least. Raised by Timm & Co. of Elmshorn, Germany.
f. glauca (Reg.) Beissn. and f.
argentea Beissn. Blue Spruce
P. pungens varies much in the more or less glaucous hue of its foliage; many shades may be selected in any batch of seedlings, and the most striking, with blue or silvery leaves, have been perpetuated by grafting. The oldest known clone descends from a tree that grew in Prof. Sargent's garden at Harvard, where it had been raised from the seeds sent by Parry in 1865. Cuttings from this were taken by Anthony Waterer during a visit to America in 1877 and plants distributed by his Knap Hill nursery under the name Abies parryana glauca. This clone, which has never received a distinctive name, received a First Class Certificate in 1890. Probably many of the older trees are of the Knap Hill clone, though some may be seedlings. One of the original propagations still grows in the Knap Hill Nursery and measures 65 × 5{3/4} ft (1974). Two of the finest specimens are: Westonbirt House, Glos., 73 × 5{1/2} ft (1967) and Tring Park, Herts, 65 ×6 ft.To those who admire silvery trees the blue spruces may be recommended as some of the most handsome. This applies more to young specimens; with age they are apt to become rusty and thin of foliage at the bottom, especially those selected forms that have been grafted on common spruce.The following are the more important named selections:
'Glauca Globosa' ('Globosa')
A dwarf, rounded, flat-topped bush, attaining 3 ft or so in height, more in width. Leaves bluish white, more or less radial. Raised in Holland.
'Glauca Procumbens' and 'Glauca Prostrata'
Of spreading or prostrate habit. It is uncertain whether these names really represent clones, since, as pointed out by Dr Krüssmann, similar plants can be raised from any of the varieties of blue spruce, by using lateral shoots as scions. The tree forms are always propagated from leading shoots.
'Koster' Koster's Blue Spruce
According to Den Ouden and Boom, this name does not represent a clone. The plants originally sent out by Koster towards the end of the last century were grafted from a number of selected seedlings with glaucous foliage. Later the firm of C. B. van Nes & Son made a re-selection of ten plants, uniform in habit and in their silvery-glaucous foliage, and the present commercial stock derives from these (Man. Cult. Conif. (1965), p. 283).
'Moerheim'
Of slender, conical habit, ultimately 30 ft or more high. Leaves bluish white in both summer and winter. Raised by Ruys at the Moerheim nursery, Holland.
'Montgomery'
A dwarf bush, forming a broad cone. Leaves grey-blue. Raised in the USA.