Virtual Reality Headsets | GameStop

Posted on by

Are You Ready for Virtual Reality?

The future of VR gaming is finally here! The Virtual Reality technology (VR headsets, VR glasses, VR goggles, etc.) that only existed in Science Fiction novels has gone mainstream and it's a natural fit for the video game industry.

What Is Virtual Reality?

Virtual Reality can be defined as a fully immersive computer simulated environment that gives one the feeling of being in a virtual world, instead of their actual world. VR is a super-realistic reality that replicates sensory experiences like sight, touch, hearing and smell.

Headset devices (like PSVR, Oculus VR, HTC Vive) use stereoscopic displays to make what you see three dimensional and give depth to the image that you are looking at. Sensors track your motion and allow the image to change with your perspective. Our other senses such as sound and touch help to convince our brains that the virtual reality is real. VR is all about immersion and the feeling of presence, so you can truly become the character that you are playing in the game.

Virtual Reality Cost

Virtual Reality gaming equipment is expected to cost anywhere from $19.99 to $1,500 (with a high-end computer to properly run the more expensive VR systems). From driving games to first person shooters, there are literally hundreds of Virtual Reality games in development right now. The price for each virtual reality game depends that particular game and the gaming system.

Stay Up-To-Date with Virtual Reality

Virtual Reality is the future of gaming and entertainment, and GameStop wants to make sure that you are in-the-know about the best VR headsets and all that virtual gaming has to offer. Be sure and sign up for our VR email updates above to stay current on the latest on PlayStation VR, Oculus Rift, HTC Vive and more!

Read the original here:

Virtual Reality Headsets | GameStop

Spirituality | Define Spirituality at Dictionary.com

Posted on by

[spir-i-choo-al-i-tee]

ExamplesWord Origin

Dictionary.com UnabridgedBased on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2018

Spirituality, after all, is not as marketable as sex appeal, so maybe the media-savvy McCarthy is exposing a true vulnerability.

Gay people have very often a heightened sensitivity to things of beauty and spirituality, Cain suggested.

He went, and the experience launched me into a lifelong passion for spirituality, meditation, and contemplation, he said.

Broken Open by Elizabeth Lesser I have searched for spirituality in different venues for half a century.

So clearly the Jesuit formation and the Jesuit spirituality has deeply influenced him.

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 2012 Digital Edition William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 HarperCollins Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2012

early 15c., from Middle French spiritualite, from Late Latin spiritualitatem (nominative spiritualitas), from Latin spiritualis (see spiritual). An earlier form was spiritualty (late 14c.).

Online Etymology Dictionary, 2010 Douglas Harper

Go here to read the rest:

Spirituality | Define Spirituality at Dictionary.com

spirituality – mindbodygreen – mindbodygreen

Posted on by

1618 Items Tagged

The year's only Aries full moon is an opportunity to acknowledge your inner badass.

Jupiter, the galactic gambler, also urges us to take a chance on romance. While he tours Libra, all things amorous are blessed by his beams. This...

Your luckiest day this year could arrive on October 26, when Jupiter and el Sol make their once-a-year conjunction.

This Thursday marks the final installment of a combustible cosmic series, so things in your life might finally start making sense. But given the...

The Virgonew moon re-establishes our connection to all things practical, sensible and stabilizing. Perfection-seeking Virgo is also one of the...

Ram Dass explains what a mindful union really entails.

Wellness is Virgo's domain, so use this lunar launch to get your fall fitness routine in motion.

"You may not need a new dream, just a new way of seeking it."

If you're looking for love, this transit may bring an epiphany that it's time to start pursuing people who are ready NOW, not some elusive "someday."

According to astrology, your Sun sign determines the essence of your personality. The Suns position in your natal chart will reveal how you approach...

Full moons are a powerful time to let go, and with the Pisces emphasis on surrender, we're invited to give up struggle. There's power to be found in...

Heads up: If there's a snake lurking in the grass, la luna is going to expose the venom. No more excuses! As the 12th and final sign of the zodiac,...

Whether the eclipses gently tapped you or shook your world upside down, the search for order begins.

Mercury is in retrograde until September 5. This is not a holiday weekend to leave up to chance. Pull back, get centered, and connect to your own...

The top wellness news you need to know today, including why people look like their names and what's up with plastic bottles in national parks.

Your moon sign shapes your emotions and your soul, coloring the subconscious stuff going on below the surface: your deepest needs and what helps you...

Get ready for action! Just as the magic of an eclipse lasts for a brief window of time, the opportunities it delivers can also be fleeting if we don't...

Plus a mantra to overcome each.

View original post here:

spirituality - mindbodygreen - mindbodygreen

Elon Musks Ultimatum to Tesla: Fight the S.E.C., or I …

Posted on by

Securities and Exchange Commission officials were understandably taken aback on Thursday morning when Teslas board and its chairman, Elon Musk abruptly pulled out of a carefully crafted settlement.

After the S.E.C. responded by accusing Mr. Musk, but not the company that he had co-founded, of securities fraud, the board further defied regulators, issuing a provocative statement saying that the directors were fully confident in Elon, his integrity, and his leadership of the company.

It was a stunning reversal: The board had rejected a settlement that was extraordinarily generous it would have allowed Mr. Musk to remain as chief executive, and required him to step down as chairman for only two years. Now, the company was at risk of losing Mr. Musk as chairman and chief executive if regulators prevailed in court.

What it tells us is this board, as a strategic plan, must be using the Jim Jones-Jonestown suicide pact, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, a professor at the Yale School of Management, said Friday on CNBC. They are drinking the Kool-Aid of the founder. It is completely as self-destructive as Musk is.

But Mr. Musk had given the board little choice: In a phone call with directors before their lawyers went back to federal regulators with a final decision, Mr. Musk threatened to resign on the spot if the board insisted that he and the company enter into the settlement. Not only that, he demanded the board publicly extol his integrity.

Threatened with the abrupt departure of the man who is arguably Teslas single most important asset, the board caved to his demands, according to three people familiar with the boards decision.

The next day, Teslas lawyers were back at the S.E.C., all but groveling for a second chance this time with Mr. Musks grudging approval.

One factor in Mr. Musks change of heart: Teslas stock plunged Friday morning as investors absorbed news of the rejected settlement and the possibility that the S.E.C. would force Mr. Musk to step down. It would finish down almost 14 percent on Friday.

On Saturday, the company and Mr. Musk finally agreed to settle the matter, ending a crisis that began with Mr. Musks now-infamous Twitter post saying that he had funding secured for a buyout at $420 a share.

Mr. Musks 48 hours of obstinance came at a significant price to him and the company. They had passed on Thursdays generous offer, and the S.E.C. felt compelled to extract greater concessions. The ban on Mr. Musks serving as chairman went from two years to three, and his fine doubled to $20 million. Tesla will also pay a $20 million fine, and Mr. Musk agreed to personally buy the same amount in Tesla stock.

The S.E.C. is also requiring the company to add two independent directors and to elect an independent director as chairman.

Rejecting such a favorable settlement is proof that he needs monitoring, said John C. Coffee Jr., a professor at Columbia Law School. He didnt have a legal leg to stand on, and Im sure his lawyer told him that. But he got very touchy about not being able to proclaim his innocence.

From Mr. Musks view, that had been a crucial problem with a settlement from the beginning. Mr. Musk neither admitted nor denied guilt as part of the agreement, and he cannot publicly contest the S.E.C.s allegations. He cannot say, as he did on Thursday, that I have always taken action in the best interests of truth, transparency and investors and the facts will show I never compromised this in any way.

Teslas stock has rebounded this week, reflecting investors relief that Mr. Musk will remain as chief executive while the company puts mechanisms in place to curb his increasingly impulsive behavior. The board will closely watch Mr. Musks communications with investors, and establish a permanent committee responsible for, among other things, monitoring disclosures.

But it remains to be seen how effective the board can be, given Mr. Musks erratic temperament and his dominant role in the company.

People involved in the boards deliberations this week told me that some directors have proposed their fellow director, James Murdoch the chief executive of 21st Century Fox, most of which is being sold to the Walt Disney Company as chairman. But Mr. Murdoch hasnt volunteered for the post nor has he discussed it with any other director. And another person close to the selection process said the board hadnt yet engaged in any serious discussions of who should be chairman. The people spoke on the condition of anonymity because the board discussions were private.

Under terms of the settlement, the board has 45 days before Mr. Musk must resign. Whether it is Mr. Murdoch or another similarly qualified candidate who takes over as chairman, managing Mr. Musk will be no easy challenge.

Independent directors frequently face difficulty asserting themselves in any company with an outsize figure like Mr. Musk, whether it be a founder, controlling shareholder or powerful chief executive, said Lucian Bebchuk, a professor at Harvard Law School and an expert in corporate governance. Such people can often replace any director who crosses them, he said.

Adding two independent directors can be expected to help, but its impact is likely to be limited, Professor Bebchuk said. As courts and governance researchers have long recognized, the presence of a dominant shareholder is likely to reduce the effectiveness of independent directors as overseers of the C.E.O.s decisions and behavior.

In the end, it took legal action by the S.E.C. to accomplish what had been increasingly obvious to most Tesla observers, including many of Teslas own directors: For all his brilliance, Mr. Musks reckless impulses must be kept in check.

Foremost among those should be threats to quit if he doesnt get his way.

Read the original post:

Elon Musks Ultimatum to Tesla: Fight the S.E.C., or I ...

Rationalism – New World Encyclopedia

Posted on by

Rationalism is a broad family of positions in epistemology. Perhaps the best general description of rationalism is the view that there are some distinctive aspects or faculties of the mind that (1) are distinct from passive aspects of the mind such as sense-perceptions and (2) someway or other constitute a special source (perhaps only a partial source) of knowledge. These distinctive aspects are typically associated or identified with human abilities to engage in mathematics and abstract reasoning, and the knowledge they provide is often seen as of a type that could not have come from other sources. Philosophers who resist rationalism are usually grouped under the heading of empiricists, who are often allied under the claim that all human knowledge comes from experience.

The debate around which the rationalism/empiricism distinction revolves is one of the oldest and most continuous in philosophy. Some of Plato's most explicit arguments address the topic and it was arguably the central concern of many of the Modern thinkers. Indeed, Kant's principal works were concerned with "pure" faculties of reason. Contemporary philosophers have advanced and refined the issue, though there are current thinkers who align themselves with either side of the tradition.

It is difficult to identify a major figure in the history to whom some rationalist doctrine has not been attributed at some point. One reason for this is that there is no question that humans possess some sort of reasoning ability that allows them to come to know some facts they otherwise wouldn't (for instance, mathematical facts), and every philosopher has had to acknowledge this fact. Another reason is that the very business of philosophy is to achieve knowledge by using the rational faculties, in contrast to, for instance, mystical approaches to knowledge. Nevertheless, some philosophical figures stand out as attributing even greater significance to reasoning abilities. Three are discussed here: Plato, Descartes, and Kant.

The most famous metaphysical doctrine of the great Greek philosopher Plato is his doctrine of "Forms," as espoused in The Republic and other dialogues. The Forms are described as being outside of the world as experience by the senses, but as somehow constituting the metaphysical basis of the world. Exactly how they fulfill this function is generally only gestured at through analogies, though the Timaeus describes the Forms as operating as blueprints for the craftsman of the universe.

The distinctiveness of Plato's rationalism lies in another aspect of his theory of Forms. Though the common sense position is that the senses are one's best means of getting in touch with reality, Plato held that human reasoning ability was the one thing that allowed people to approach the Forms, the most fundamental aspects of reality. It is worth pausing to reflect on how radical this idea is: On such a view, philosophical attempts to understand the nature of "good" or "just" are not mere analyses of concepts formed, but rather explorations of eternal things that are responsible for shaping the reality of the sensory world.

The French philosopher Ren Descartes, whose Meditations on First Philosophy defined the course of much philosophy from then up till the present day, stood near the beginning of the Western European Enlightenment. Impressed by the power of mathematics and the development of the new science, Descartes was confronted with two questions: How was it that people were coming to attain such deep knowledge of the workings of the universe, and how was it that they had spent so long not doing so?

Regarding the latter question, Descartes concluded that people had been mislead by putting too much faith in the testimony of their senses. In particular, he thought such a mistake was behind the then-dominant physics of Aristotle. Aristotle and the later Scholastics, in Descartes' mind, had used their reasoning abilities well enough on the basis of what their senses told them. The problem was that they had chosen the wrong starting point for their inquiries.

By contrast, the advancements in the new science (some of which Descartes could claim for himself) were based in a very different starting point: The "pure light of reason." In Descartes' view, God had equipped humans with a faculty that was able to understand the fundamental essence of the two types of substance that made up the world: Intellectual substance (of which minds are instances) and physical substance (matter). Not only did God give people such a faculty, Descartes claimed, but he made them such that, when using the faculty, they are unable to question its deliverances. Not only that, but God left humanity the means to conclude that the faculty was a gift from a non-deceptive omnipotent creator.

In some respects, the German philosophy Immanuel Kant is the paradigm of an anti-rationalist philosopher. A major portion of his central work, the 1781 Critique of Pure Reason, is specifically devoted to attacking rationalist claims to have insight through reason alone into the nature of the soul, the spatiotemporal/causal structure of the universe, and the existence of God. Plato and Descartes are among his most obvious targets.

For instance, in his evaluation of rationalist claims concerning the nature of the soul (the chapter of the Critique entitled "The Paralogisms of Pure Reason"), Kant attempts to diagnose how a philosopher like Descartes could have been tempted into thinking that he could accomplish deep insight into his own nature by thought alone. One of Descartes' conclusions was that his mind, unlike his body, was utterly simple and so lacked parts. Kant claimed that Descartes mistook a simple experience (the thought, "I think") for an experience of simplicity. In other words, he saw Descartes as introspecting, being unable to find any divisions within himself, and thereby concluding that he lacked any such divisions and so was simple. But the reason he was unable to find divisions, in Kant's view, was that by mere thought alone we are unable to find anything.

At the same time, however, Kant was an uncompromising advocate of some key rationalist intuitions. Confronted with the Scottish philosopher David Hume's claim that the concept of "cause" was merely one of the constant conjunction of resembling entities, Kant insisted that all Hume really accomplished was in proving that the concept of causation could not possibly have its origin in human senses. What the senses cannot provide, Kant claimed, is any notion of necessity, yet a crucial part of our concept of causation is that it is the necessary connection of two entities or events. Kant's conclusion was that this concept, and others like it, must be a precondition of sensory experience itself.

In his moral philosophy (most famously expounded in his Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals), Kant made an even more original claim on behalf of reason. The sensory world, in his view, was merely ideal, in that the spatiotemporal/sensory features of the objects people experience have their being only in humanity's representations, and so are not features of the objects in themselves. But this means that most everyday concepts are simply inadequate for forming any notion whatsoever of what the world is like apart from our subjective features. By contrast, Kant claimed that there was no parallel reason for thinking that objects in themselves (which include our soul) do not conform to the most basic concepts of our higher faculties. So while those faculties are unable to provide any sort of direct, reliable access to the basic features of reality as envisioned by Plato and Descartes, they and they alone give one the means to at least contemplate what true reality might be like.

In the early part of the twentieth century, a philosophical movement known as Logical Positivism set the ground for a new debate over rationalism. The positivists (whose ranks included Otto Neurath and Rudolf Carnap) claimed that the only meaningful claims were those that could potentially be verified by some set of experiential observations. Their aim was to do away with intellectual traditions that they saw as simply vacuous, including theology and the majority of philosophy, in contrast with science.

As it turned out, the Positivists were unable to explain how all scientific claims were verifiable by experience, thus losing their key motivation (for instance, no set of experiences could verify that all stars are hot, since no set of experiential observations could itself confirm that one had observed all the stars). Nevertheless, their vision retained enough force that later philosophers felt hard-pressed to explain what, if anything, was epistemically distinctive about the non-sensory faculties. One recent defense of rationalism can be found in the work of contemporary philosophers such as Laurence Bonjour (the recent developments of the position are, in general, too subtle to be adequately addressed here). Yet the charge was also met by a number of thinkers working in areas as closely related to psychology as to philosophy.

A number of thinkers have argued for something like Kant's view that people have concepts independently of experience. Indeed, the groundbreaking work of the linguist Noam Chomsky (which he occasionally tied to Descartes) is largely based on the assumption that there is a "universal grammar"that is, some basic set of linguistic categories and abilities that necessarily underlie all human languages. One task of linguistics, in Chomsky's view, is to look at a diversity of languages in order to determine what the innate linguistic categories and capacities are.

A similar proposal concerning human beliefs about mentality itself has been advanced by Peter Carruthers. One intuitive view is that each of us comes to attribute mental states to other people only after a long developmental process where people learn to associate observable phenomena with their own mental states, and thereby with others. Yet, Carruthers argues, this view simply cannot account for the speed and complexity of humans' understanding of others' psychology at very early ages. The only explanation is that some understanding of mentality is "hard-wired" in the human brain.

All links retrieved June 25, 2015.

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.

See the article here:

Rationalism - New World Encyclopedia

Cloning Fact Sheet – National Human Genome Research Institute …

Posted on by

CloningWhat is cloning?

The term cloning describes a number of different processes that can be used to produce genetically identical copies of a biological entity. The copied material, which has the same genetic makeup as the original, is referred to as a clone.

Researchers have cloned a wide range of biological materials, including genes, cells, tissues and even entire organisms, such as a sheep.

Top of page

Yes. In nature, some plants and single-celled organisms, such as bacteria, produce genetically identical offspring through a process called asexual reproduction. In asexual reproduction, a new individual is generated from a copy of a single cell from the parent organism.

Natural clones, also known as identical twins, occur in humans and other mammals. These twins are produced when a fertilized egg splits, creating two or more embryos that carry almost identical DNA. Identical twins have nearly the same genetic makeup as each other, but they are genetically different from either parent.

Top of page

There are three different types of artificial cloning: gene cloning, reproductive cloning and therapeutic cloning.

Gene cloning produces copies of genes or segments of DNA. Reproductive cloning produces copies of whole animals. Therapeutic cloning produces embryonic stem cells for experiments aimed at creating tissues to replace injured or diseased tissues.

Gene cloning, also known as DNA cloning, is a very different process from reproductive and therapeutic cloning. Reproductive and therapeutic cloning share many of the same techniques, but are done for different purposes.

Top of page

Gene cloning is the most common type of cloning done by researchers at the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI). NHGRI researchers have not cloned any mammals and NHGRI does not clone humans.

Top of page

Researchers routinely use cloning techniques to make copies of genes that they wish to study. The procedure consists of inserting a gene from one organism, often referred to as "foreign DNA," into the genetic material of a carrier called a vector. Examples of vectors include bacteria, yeast cells, viruses or plasmids, which are small DNA circles carried by bacteria. After the gene is inserted, the vector is placed in laboratory conditions that prompt it to multiply, resulting in the gene being copied many times over.

Top of page

In reproductive cloning, researchers remove a mature somatic cell, such as a skin cell, from an animal that they wish to copy. They then transfer the DNA of the donor animal's somatic cell into an egg cell, or oocyte, that has had its own DNA-containing nucleus removed.

Researchers can add the DNA from the somatic cell to the empty egg in two different ways. In the first method, they remove the DNA-containing nucleus of the somatic cell with a needle and inject it into the empty egg. In the second approach, they use an electrical current to fuse the entire somatic cell with the empty egg.

In both processes, the egg is allowed to develop into an early-stage embryo in the test-tube and then is implanted into the womb of an adult female animal.

Ultimately, the adult female gives birth to an animal that has the same genetic make up as the animal that donated the somatic cell. This young animal is referred to as a clone. Reproductive cloning may require the use of a surrogate mother to allow development of the cloned embryo, as was the case for the most famous cloned organism, Dolly the sheep.

Top of page

Over the last 50 years, scientists have conducted cloning experiments in a wide range of animals using a variety of techniques. In 1979, researchers produced the first genetically identical mice by splitting mouse embryos in the test tube and then implanting the resulting embryos into the wombs of adult female mice. Shortly after that, researchers produced the first genetically identical cows, sheep and chickens by transferring the nucleus of a cell taken from an early embryo into an egg that had been emptied of its nucleus.

It was not until 1996, however, that researchers succeeded in cloning the first mammal from a mature (somatic) cell taken from an adult animal. After 276 attempts, Scottish researchers finally produced Dolly, the lamb from the udder cell of a 6-year-old sheep. Two years later, researchers in Japan cloned eight calves from a single cow, but only four survived.

Besides cattle and sheep, other mammals that have been cloned from somatic cells include: cat, deer, dog, horse, mule, ox, rabbit and rat. In addition, a rhesus monkey has been cloned by embryo splitting.

Top of page

Despite several highly publicized claims, human cloning still appears to be fiction. There currently is no solid scientific evidence that anyone has cloned human embryos.

In 1998, scientists in South Korea claimed to have successfully cloned a human embryo, but said the experiment was interrupted very early when the clone was just a group of four cells. In 2002, Clonaid, part of a religious group that believes humans were created by extraterrestrials, held a news conference to announce the birth of what it claimed to be the first cloned human, a girl named Eve. However, despite repeated requests by the research community and the news media, Clonaid never provided any evidence to confirm the existence of this clone or the other 12 human clones it purportedly created.

In 2004, a group led by Woo-Suk Hwang of Seoul National University in South Korea published a paper in the journal Science in which it claimed to have created a cloned human embryo in a test tube. However, an independent scientific committee later found no proof to support the claim and, in January 2006, Science announced that Hwang's paper had been retracted.

From a technical perspective, cloning humans and other primates is more difficult than in other mammals. One reason is that two proteins essential to cell division, known as spindle proteins, are located very close to the chromosomes in primate eggs. Consequently, removal of the egg's nucleus to make room for the donor nucleus also removes the spindle proteins, interfering with cell division. In other mammals, such as cats, rabbits and mice, the two spindle proteins are spread throughout the egg. So, removal of the egg's nucleus does not result in loss of spindle proteins. In addition, some dyes and the ultraviolet light used to remove the egg's nucleus can damage the primate cell and prevent it from growing.

Top of page

No. Clones do not always look identical. Although clones share the same genetic material, the environment also plays a big role in how an organism turns out.

For example, the first cat to be cloned, named Cc, is a female calico cat that looks very different from her mother. The explanation for the difference is that the color and pattern of the coats of cats cannot be attributed exclusively to genes. A biological phenomenon involving inactivation of the X chromosome (See sex chromosome) in every cell of the female cat (which has two X chromosomes) determines which coat color genes are switched off and which are switched on. The distribution of X inactivation, which seems to occur randomly, determines the appearance of the cat's coat.

Top of page

Reproductive cloning may enable researchers to make copies of animals with the potential benefits for the fields of medicine and agriculture.

For instance, the same Scottish researchers who cloned Dolly have cloned other sheep that have been genetically modified to produce milk that contains a human protein essential for blood clotting. The hope is that someday this protein can be purified from the milk and given to humans whose blood does not clot properly. Another possible use of cloned animals is for testing new drugs and treatment strategies. The great advantage of using cloned animals for drug testing is that they are all genetically identical, which means their responses to the drugs should be uniform rather than variable as seen in animals with different genetic make-ups.

After consulting with many independent scientists and experts in cloning, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided in January 2008 that meat and milk from cloned animals, such as cattle, pigs and goats, are as safe as those from non-cloned animals. The FDA action means that researchers are now free to using cloning methods to make copies of animals with desirable agricultural traits, such as high milk production or lean meat. However, because cloning is still very expensive, it will likely take many years until food products from cloned animals actually appear in supermarkets.

Another application is to create clones to build populations of endangered, or possibly even extinct, species of animals. In 2001, researchers produced the first clone of an endangered species: a type of Asian ox known as a guar. Sadly, the baby guar, which had developed inside a surrogate cow mother, died just a few days after its birth. In 2003, another endangered type of ox, called the Banteg, was successfully cloned. Soon after, three African wildcats were cloned using frozen embryos as a source of DNA. Although some experts think cloning can save many species that would otherwise disappear, others argue that cloning produces a population of genetically identical individuals that lack the genetic variability necessary for species survival.

Some people also have expressed interest in having their deceased pets cloned in the hope of getting a similar animal to replace the dead one. But as shown by Cc the cloned cat, a clone may not turn out exactly like the original pet whose DNA was used to make the clone.

Top of page

Reproductive cloning is a very inefficient technique and most cloned animal embryos cannot develop into healthy individuals. For instance, Dolly was the only clone to be born live out of a total of 277 cloned embryos. This very low efficiency, combined with safety concerns, presents a serious obstacle to the application of reproductive cloning.

Researchers have observed some adverse health effects in sheep and other mammals that have been cloned. These include an increase in birth size and a variety of defects in vital organs, such as the liver, brain and heart. Other consequences include premature aging and problems with the immune system. Another potential problem centers on the relative age of the cloned cell's chromosomes. As cells go through their normal rounds of division, the tips of the chromosomes, called telomeres, shrink. Over time, the telomeres become so short that the cell can no longer divide and, consequently, the cell dies. This is part of the natural aging process that seems to happen in all cell types. As a consequence, clones created from a cell taken from an adult might have chromosomes that are already shorter than normal, which may condemn the clones' cells to a shorter life span. Indeed, Dolly, who was cloned from the cell of a 6-year-old sheep, had chromosomes that were shorter than those of other sheep her age. Dolly died when she was six years old, about half the average sheep's 12-year lifespan.

Top of page

Therapeutic cloning involves creating a cloned embryo for the sole purpose of producing embryonic stem cells with the same DNA as the donor cell. These stem cells can be used in experiments aimed at understanding disease and developing new treatments for disease. To date, there is no evidence that human embryos have been produced for therapeutic cloning.

The richest source of embryonic stem cells is tissue formed during the first five days after the egg has started to divide. At this stage of development, called the blastocyst, the embryo consists of a cluster of about 100 cells that can become any cell type. Stem cells are harvested from cloned embryos at this stage of development, resulting in destruction of the embryo while it is still in the test tube.

Top of page

Researchers hope to use embryonic stem cells, which have the unique ability to generate virtually all types of cells in an organism, to grow healthy tissues in the laboratory that can be used replace injured or diseased tissues. In addition, it may be possible to learn more about the molecular causes of disease by studying embryonic stem cell lines from cloned embryos derived from the cells of animals or humans with different diseases. Finally, differentiated tissues derived from ES cells are excellent tools to test new therapeutic drugs.

Top of page

Many researchers think it is worthwhile to explore the use of embryonic stem cells as a path for treating human diseases. However, some experts are concerned about the striking similarities between stem cells and cancer cells. Both cell types have the ability to proliferate indefinitely and some studies show that after 60 cycles of cell division, stem cells can accumulate mutations that could lead to cancer. Therefore, the relationship between stem cells and cancer cells needs to be more clearly understood if stem cells are to be used to treat human disease.

Top of page

Gene cloning is a carefully regulated technique that is largely accepted today and used routinely in many labs worldwide. However, both reproductive and therapeutic cloning raise important ethical issues, especially as related to the potential use of these techniques in humans.

Reproductive cloning would present the potential of creating a human that is genetically identical to another person who has previously existed or who still exists. This may conflict with long-standing religious and societal values about human dignity, possibly infringing upon principles of individual freedom, identity and autonomy. However, some argue that reproductive cloning could help sterile couples fulfill their dream of parenthood. Others see human cloning as a way to avoid passing on a deleterious gene that runs in the family without having to undergo embryo screening or embryo selection.

Therapeutic cloning, while offering the potential for treating humans suffering from disease or injury, would require the destruction of human embryos in the test tube. Consequently, opponents argue that using this technique to collect embryonic stem cells is wrong, regardless of whether such cells are used to benefit sick or injured people.

Top of page

Last Reviewed: March 21, 2017

More:

Cloning Fact Sheet - National Human Genome Research Institute ...

Fourth Amendment – Official Site

Posted on by

ABA Journal Web 100, Best Law Blogs (2017); ABA Journal Blawg 100 (2015-16)

by John Wesley Hall Criminal Defense Lawyer and Search and seizure law consultant Little Rock, Arkansas Contact: forhall @ aol.com / The Book http://www.johnwesleyhall.com

2003-18,online since Feb. 24, 2003

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fourth Amendment cases, citations, and links

Latest Slip Opinions: U.S. Supreme Court (Home) Federal Appellate Courts Opinions First Circuit Second Circuit Third Circuit Fourth Circuit Fifth Circuit Sixth Circuit Seventh Circuit Eighth Circuit Ninth Circuit Tenth Circuit EleventhCircuit D.C. CircuitFederal CircuitForeign Intell.Surv.Ct.FDsys, many district courts, other federal courtsMilitary Courts: C.A.A.F., Army, AF, N-M, CG, SF State courts (and some USDC opinions)

Google Scholar Advanced Google Scholar Google search tips LexisWeb LII State Appellate Courts LexisONE free caselaw Findlaw Free Opinions To search Search and Seizure on Lexis.com $

Research Links: Supreme Court: SCOTUSBlog S. Ct. Docket Solicitor General's site SCOTUSreport Briefs online (but no amicus briefs) Oyez Project (NWU) "On the Docket"Medill S.Ct. Monitor: Law.com S.Ct. Com't'ry: Law.com

General (many free): LexisWeb Google Scholar | Google LexisOne Legal Website Directory Crimelynx Lexis.com $ Lexis.com (criminal law/ 4th Amd) $ Findlaw.com Findlaw.com (4th Amd) Westlaw.com $ F.R.Crim.P. 41 http://www.fd.org Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Resources FBI Domestic Investigations and Operations Guide (2008) (pdf) DEA Agents Manual (2002) (download) DOJ Computer Search Manual (2009) (pdf)Stringrays (ACLU No. Cal.) (pdf)

Congressional Research Service: --Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012) --Overview of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (2012) --Outline of Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012) --Federal Statutes Governing Wiretapping and Electronic Eavesdropping (2012) --Federal Laws Relating to Cybersecurity: Discussion of Proposed Revisions (2012) ACLU on privacy Privacy FoundationElectronic Frontier Foundation NACDLs Domestic Drone Information Center Electronic Privacy Information Center Criminal Appeal (post-conviction) (9th Cir.) Section 1983 Blog

"If it was easy, everybody would be doing it. It isn't, and they don't." Me

I am still learning.Domenico Giuntalodi (but misattributed to Michelangelo Buonarroti (common phrase throughout 1500's)).

"Love work; hate mastery over others; and avoid intimacy with the government." Shemaya, in the Thalmud

"A system of law that not only makes certain conduct criminal, but also lays down rules for the conduct of the authorities, often becomes complex in its application to individual cases, and will from time to time produce imperfect results, especially if one's attention is confined to the particular case at bar. Some criminals do go free because of the necessity of keeping government and its servants in their place. That is one of the costs of having and enforcing a Bill of Rights. This country is built on the assumption that the cost is worth paying, and that in the long run we are all both freer and safer if the Constitution is strictly enforced." Williams v. Nix, 700 F. 2d 1164, 1173 (8th Cir. 1983) (Richard Sheppard Arnold, J.), rev'd Nix v. Williams, 467 US. 431 (1984).

"The criminal goes free, if he must, but it is the law that sets him free. Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence."Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643, 659 (1961).

"Any costs the exclusionary rule are costs imposed directly by the Fourth Amendment."Yale Kamisar, 86 Mich.L.Rev. 1, 36 n. 151 (1987).

"There have been powerful hydraulic pressures throughout our history that bear heavily on the Court to water down constitutional guarantees and give the police the upper hand. That hydraulic pressure has probably never been greater than it is today." Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 39 (1968) (Douglas, J., dissenting).

"The great end, for which men entered into society, was to secure their property." Entick v. Carrington, 19 How.St.Tr. 1029, 1066, 95 Eng. Rep. 807 (C.P. 1765)

"It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have frequently been forged in controversies involving not very nice people. And so, while we are concerned here with a shabby defrauder, we must deal with his case in the context of what are really the great themes expressed by the Fourth Amendment." United States v. Rabinowitz, 339 U.S. 56, 69 (1950) (Frankfurter, J., dissenting)

"The course of true law pertaining to searches and seizures, as enunciated here, has notto put it mildlyrun smooth." Chapman v. United States, 365 U.S. 610, 618 (1961) (Frankfurter, J., concurring).

"A search is a search, even if it happens to disclose nothing but the bottom of a turntable." Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 325 (1987)

"For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. ... But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected." Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 351 (1967)

Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Governments purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding. United States v. Olmstead, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1925) (Brandeis, J., dissenting)

Libertythe freedom from unwarranted intrusion by governmentis as easily lost through insistent nibbles by government officials who seek to do their jobs too well as by those whose purpose it is to oppress; the piranha can be as deadly as the shark. United States v. $124,570, 873 F.2d 1240, 1246 (9th Cir. 1989)

"You can't always get what you want / But if you try sometimes / You just might find / You get what you need." Mick Jagger & Keith Richards

"In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for meand by that time there was nobody left to speak up." Martin Niemller (1945) [he served seven years in a concentration camp]

You know, most men would get discouraged by now. Fortunately for you, I am not most men!---Pep Le Pew

Website design by Wally Waller, Little Rock

See the rest here:

Fourth Amendment - Official Site

Mesothelioma Cancer | Prognosis, Treatment and Survival

Posted on by

Mesothelioma Cancer | Prognosis, Treatment and Survival

Mesothelioma is a rare, aggressive form of cancer that develops in the lining of the lungs, abdomen, or heart. Caused by asbestos, mesothelioma has no known cure and has a very poor prognosis.

According to a 2017 report by the Centers for Disease Control, 2,400 2,800 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma in the United States each year. People who have worked with or been exposed to asbestos have the highest risk of developing mesothelioma. After being exposed to asbestos, mesothelioma symptoms can take 20 50 years to appear.

The life expectancy for mesothelioma patients is poor, as there is no cure for the disease.

The stage of the disease, cell type, and location of the tumor(s) are the most important factors for a patients survival. Factors such as the patients overall health, age, and whether the cancer has spread also impact prognosis.

After receiving a mesothelioma diagnosis, there are a number of vital decisions that must be made. The Mesothelioma Cancer Alliance is dedicated to providing patients with the best resources available on current treatment, stories of survival and hope, and financial assistance.

Heather Von St. James is a 12-year pleural mesothelioma survivor who has become a spokeswoman for mesothelioma awareness and a proponent of banning asbestos.

She also works with newly diagnosed mesothelioma patients as a mentor and advocate, helping them understand their treatment and legal options.

Heather offers valuable insights into her successful treatment approach with Dr. David Sugarbaker. She has a unique perspective on life after surviving a mesothelioma diagnosis and enjoys sharing her story. Click here to connect with Heather.

Mesothelioma is most commonly classified by the location in the body where it develops. Specifically, the cancer forms in the lining of certain organs or spaces within the body, known as the mesothelium. Mesothelioma typically develops in one of three specific areas.

The most common type, pleural mesothelioma is caused by the inhalation of asbestos fibers.

Inhaled or swallowed asbestos fibers can become trapped in the lining of the abdomen (the peritoneum).

In rare cases, asbestos fibers can get lodged in the pericardium, the lining around the heart cavity.

Mesothelioma symptoms can take 20 50 years to appear after the first exposure to asbestos. The signs of mesothelioma often look like those of other diseases, which can lead to misdiagnosis.

When someone exhibits mesothelioma symptoms, doctors perform a variety of tests to rule out other diseases. It normally takes weeks or months for doctors to arrive at an accurate mesothelioma diagnosis.

Doctors will use a number of different tests and techniques including blood tests, imaging and biopsies to diagnose the cancer and assign it a stage. The stage and other diagnostic details are used to determine your prognosis and to predict what your life expectancy may be.

Upon diagnosis, the doctor will categorize the disease into one of four stages. While there are several staging systems, the TNM System which stands for tumor, lymph nodes, and metastasis is the most commonly used.

The mesothelioma tumor is located in only one area and has not spread to other parts of the body.

A large tumor may have progressed to nearby areas and/or the lymph nodes, but has not gone on any further.

Tumors have typically spread beyond the local area to several nearby locations and the lymph nodes.

The tumors have spread into multiple areas and throughout the lymphatic system, invading other organs throughout the body.

Typically, Stage 1 and Stage 2 mesothelioma can be treated effectively with surgery and other forms of therapy. However, Stage 3 and Stage 4 mesothelioma are often treated palliatively.

Treatment for mesothelioma is similar to other types of cancer. The most common treatments are surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. Newer treatments are being studied as part of clinical trials and may be available for some patients who do not respond to conventional therapies.

In some cases, treatment can improve a patient's prognosis, extending his/her life significantly. Treatment can also be used palliatively to reduce pain and discomfort caused by the symptoms of mesothelioma.

Finding a mesothelioma doctor and creating a custom treatment plan based on your diagnosis is the most important decision you can make to improve prognosis. Browse our catalog of top mesothelioma doctors around the country.

Mesothelioma clinics and cancer centers offer patients a way to get the most comprehensive care, using the latest technology and techniques available. Locate the best mesothelioma clinics near you.

The costs of treating mesothelioma are significant. If you were exposed to asbestos on the job, in your home, or elsewhere, you have the right to recover these expenses from those responsible for the exposure.

Financial assistance is available to help offset the high cost of mesothelioma treatment. The primary ways mesothelioma patients and their families can receive compensation are:

Those who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma or other types of terminal cancer can find tremendous comfort in the support they get from family, friends and caregivers.

The Mesothelioma Cancer Alliance is also part of the larger community dedicated to promoting mesothelioma research and preventing new cases through a worldwide asbestos ban.

FREE Mesothelioma Awareness Wristbands and Treatment Guide.

We work with and donate to the following organizations whose missions complement our own: Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation, National Foundation for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, American Society of Clinical Oncology and the Cancer Research Institute. The mesothelioma community gets together often at various events around the country.

Remember the Fallen, Honor the Brave, Fight for the Cure! The 7th annual 5K Walk for Mesothelioma will be held at the Paramount Ranch in Agoura Hills, and funds raised will go toward mesothelioma research at the PMCs Punch Worthington Lab at UCLA and the Pacific Mesothelioma Center. The event begins with a walk, followed by a catered lunch, vendors, an opportunity drawing, and more.

American Public Health Association's APHA's Annual Meeting and Expo is the largest annual gathering of public health professionals. More than 12,000 people attend, and thousands of new abstracts are presented each year, making APHA 2018 the most influential meeting in public health. For more information, please visit the APHA's conference site via the link below.

Editor in Chief, Mesothelioma Cancer Alliance

JM Mazurek; G Syamlal; JM Wood; SA Hendricks, A Weston. U.S. Centers for Disease Control. Malignant Mesothelioma Mortality United States, 19992015. March 3, 2017:66(8);214218. DOI: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6608a3

National Cancer Institute Malignant Mesothelioma (Source)

Wagner, J.C., Sleggs, C.A., and Marchand, Paul. Diffuse Pleural Mesothelioma and Asbestos Exposure in the North Western Cape Province. Department of Thoracic Surgery: University of The Witswatersrand. Johannesburg, South Africa. 1960.

Grondin, Sean C., Sugarbaker, David J. Pleuropneumonectomy in the Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Chest December 1999 116:suppl 3 450S-454S;

Rusch, Valerie W. Indications for pneumoctomy. Extrapleural pneumonectomy

Roggli VL, Sharma A, Butnor KJ, Sporn T, Vollmer RT (2002). "Malignant mesothelioma and occupational exposure to asbestos: a clinicopathological correlation of 1445 cases". Ultrastruct Pathol 26(2): 5565.

Brigham and Womens Hospital International Mesothelioma Program (Source)

Please fill in the form below to request our FREE Mesothelioma Treatment Guide. It will be sent to you within 24 hours.

Visit link:

Mesothelioma Cancer | Prognosis, Treatment and Survival

Malignant Mesothelioma Cancer | Prognosis, Treatment & Legal Help

Posted on by

What is asbestosis disease?

Asbestosis disease is a chronic lung condition that is caused by inhaling asbestos fibers.

The asbestos fibers lodge in tiny sacs in the lungs, known as alveoli. Symptoms of asbestosis include shortness of breath, tightness and pain in the chest, chronic cough, loss of appetite, weight loss, and clubbing of fingers and toes.

Treatment can include use of an oxygen tube or mask, pulmonary rehabilitation exercises, or a lung transplant in extreme cases.

Are asbestosis and mesothelioma the same?

No. Although both of these diseases, along with lung cancer, are associated with exposure to asbestos, they are not the same.

Asbestosis is a chronic lung disease, not a cancer. It is caused by inhalation of asbestos fibers, which can get stuck in the small sacs in the lungs. Having asbestosis can increase a patients chances for developing asbestos-related lung cancer.

Malignant mesothelioma is a cancer. It affects the mesothelium tissue, which lines the lungs and chest wall, as well as the abdominal cavity, heart, and testicles. Malignant mesothelioma is caused by the inhalation or ingestion of asbestos fibers, which lodge in the mesothelium tissue.

Continued here:

Malignant Mesothelioma Cancer | Prognosis, Treatment & Legal Help

Risks and causes | Mesothelioma | Cancer Research UK

Posted on by

Find out what causes mesothelioma and who is more likely to getit.

In the UK more than 2,600 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year. About 5 times moremen thanwomenget it. This is probably because mesothelioma is oftencaused by exposure to asbestos at work.

Mesothelioma is quite a rare cancer, but it is becoming more common.Mesothelioma in the chest (pleural mesothelioma) is much more common than mesothelioma in the abdomen (peritoneal mesothelioma).

Anything that can increase your risk of getting a disease is called a risk factor.

Different cancers have different risk factors.Having one or more of these risk factors doesn't mean you will definitely get that cancer.

The risk factors for mesothelioma are explained below.

We know thatasbestoscauses most cases of pleural mesothelioma. The risk is greater if you were exposed to large amounts of it from an early age for a very long period of time. Many people with peritoneal mesothelioma have also been exposed to asbestos.

We have known of a link between asbestos and lung disease since the beginning of the 18th century. But the link with mesothelioma has only been known since the 1960's. Unfortunately, the number of cases of mesothelioma in the UK each year is expected to rise sharply for the next few years. This is because of the heavy use of asbestos in industry from the end of the second world war up until the mid 1970s.

It is estimated that in the UK more than 9 out of 10 men with mesothelioma and more than 8 out of 10 women have been in contact with asbestos. But some people say they have no history of any exposure to asbestos.

Many people who get mesothelioma because of asbestos exposure might be able to claim compensation. Talk to a solicitor about this as early as possible. Your specialist doctor or nurse might be able to tell you more about this. There are alsomesothelioma organisationswho can can help and advise you.

Asbestos is an insulating material thats heat and fire resistant. It was widely used in:

There are three main types of asbestos blue, brown and white. Blue and brown asbestos are strongly linked with mesothelioma and have been banned in the UK since the late 1980s. White asbestos is now also thought to be harmful. The use of any asbestos was banned in 1999 in the UK.

Asbestos is made up of tiny fibres. You can breathe these fibres in when you come into contact with asbestos.

The fibres work their way into thepleura lining the lung. They irritate the pleura and may cause gene changes (mutations) that lead to the growth of cancer. Some of the fibres can be coughed up and swallowed. This is probably the cause ofperitoneal mesothelioma.

If you have been exposed to asbestos, your family may also have been exposed. Asbestos fibres can be carried home on your clothes. The families of people exposed to asbestos also have a higher risk of developing mesothelioma.

Mesothelioma is most common in men who have:

Risks are particularly high for metal plate workers (mainly in shipbuilding) and carpenters.

The risk is higher in people exposed to asbestos before the age of 30. An estimated 1 out of 17 (nearly 6%) of British men born in the 1940s who worked in carpentry for more than 10 years before the age of 30 get mesothelioma.

People who worked as plumbers or mechanics also have an increased risk.

Asbestos was widely used in the years after the war (after 1945). Mesothelioma may not develop until 15 to 60 years after you have been exposed to asbestos, which is why we have seen an increase in cases in recent years. The number of people dying from mesothelioma each year is expected to peak around 2020 and then start to go down.

Research has looked into a virus called SV40 (the SV stands for simian virus).

In people who have been exposed to asbestos, contact with the SV40 virus could make it more likely that they will develop mesothelioma. So SV40 is thought of as a possible co factor. But this is not completely clear.

Some people in the UK and elsewhere were exposed to polio vaccines contaminated with SV40 virus between 1955 and 1963.

Pleural and peritonealmesotheliomahas been shown to develop after exposure to radiation from the chemical thorium dioxide (Thorotrast). This chemical was used until the 1950s in some x-ray tests.

Some research studies show an increased risk of mesothelioma in people treated with radiotherapy for a previous cancer. But other studies show no increased risk. If radiotherapy does increase the risk of mesothelioma, this is likely to happen only in a very small number of people.

A mineral found in Turkey called erionite (a type of Zeolite fibre) has been shown to cause mesothelioma.

Working as a painter has been linked with an increased risk of mesothelioma, possibly due to chemicals in the paint.

Stories about potential causes of cancer are often in the media. Itisnt always clear which ideas are supported by good evidence.

You might hear aboutpossible causes we havent included here. This is because there is no evidence about them or because the evidence isnt clear.

Read the original:

Risks and causes | Mesothelioma | Cancer Research UK

Food supplements – European Commission

Posted on by

As an addition to a normal diet, food business operators market food supplements, which are concentrated sources of nutrients (or other substances) with a nutritional or physiological effect. Such food supplements can be marketed in dose form, such as pills, tablets, capsules, liquids in measured doses, etc.

The objective of the harmonised rules on those products in Directive 2002/46/EC is to protect consumers against potential health risks from those products and to ensure that they are not provided with misleading information.

With respect to the safety of food supplements, the Directive lays down a harmonised list of vitamins and minerals that may be added for nutritional purposes in food supplements (in Annex I to the Directive). Annex II of the Directive contains a list of permitted sources (vitamin and mineral substances) from which those vitamins and minerals may be manufactured.

This list has been amended by the following Regulations and Directive to include additional substances:

The trade of products containing vitamins and minerals not listed in Annex II has been prohibited from the 1st of August 2005.

Directive 2002/46/EC has been aligned with the new Regulatory Procedure with scrutiny by Regulation (EC) No 1137/2008.

Directive 2002/46/EC on food supplements envisages the setting of maximum and minimum amounts of vitamins and minerals in supplements via the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed ( PAFF Committee) procedure.

The Commission has issued a Discussion Paper on the setting of maximum and minimum amounts for vitamins and minerals in foodstuffs , which identified the main issues to be considered in this exercise and originated a set of Responses.

Although the Commission has consulted extensively with EU countries and interested stakeholders on the issue, no proposal has not yet been presented due to the complex nature of the issue and the divergent views that were expressed. All the available data on the potential effects on economic operators and consumers of the setting of maximum amounts of vitamins and minerals in foods, including food supplements, will be taken into account. Every effort will be made to ensure that the maximum amounts set will take into account the concerns expressed by all interested parties.

The EC commissioned a study on the use of substances with nutritional or physiological effects other than vitamins and minerals in food supplements.

Taking into account this study and other available information, the Commission - in accordance with the requirement set out in Article 4(8) of Directive 2002/46/EC on food supplements - has prepared a report to the Council and the European Parliament on the use of substances other than vitamins and minerals in food supplements.

The report is accompanied by two Commission staff working documents.

EU countries may, for monitoring purposes, request notification to their competent authority of the placing on the market in their territory of a food supplement product in accordance with Article 10 of the Directive. The list of competent authorities may be found here:

Go here to see the original:

Food supplements - European Commission

Nikola Tesla | Biography, Facts, & Inventions | Britannica.com

Posted on by

Nikola Tesla, (born July 9/10, 1856, Smiljan, Austrian Empire [now in Croatia]died January 7, 1943, New York, New York, U.S.), Serbian American inventor and engineer who discovered and patented the rotating magnetic field, the basis of most alternating-current machinery. He also developed the three-phase system of electric power transmission. He immigrated to the United States in 1884 and sold the patent rights to his system of alternating-current dynamos, transformers, and motors to George Westinghouse. In 1891 he invented the Tesla coil, an induction coil widely used in radio technology.

Tesla was from a family of Serbian origin. His father was an Orthodox priest; his mother was unschooled but highly intelligent. As he matured, he displayed remarkable imagination and creativity as well as a poetic touch.

Training for an engineering career, he attended the Technical University at Graz, Austria, and the University of Prague. At Graz he first saw the Gramme dynamo, which operated as a generator and, when reversed, became an electric motor, and he conceived a way to use alternating current to advantage. Later, at Budapest, he visualized the principle of the rotating magnetic field and developed plans for an induction motor that would become his first step toward the successful utilization of alternating current. In 1882 Tesla went to work in Paris for the Continental Edison Company, and, while on assignment to Strassburg in 1883, he constructed, after work hours, his first induction motor. Tesla sailed for America in 1884, arriving in New York with four cents in his pocket, a few of his own poems, and calculations for a flying machine. He first found employment with Thomas Edison, but the two inventors were far apart in background and methods, and their separation was inevitable.

In May 1888 George Westinghouse, head of the Westinghouse Electric Company in Pittsburgh, bought the patent rights to Teslas polyphase system of alternating-current dynamos, transformers, and motors. The transaction precipitated a titanic power struggle between Edisons direct-current systems and the Tesla-Westinghouse alternating-current approach, which eventually won out.

Tesla soon established his own laboratory, where his inventive mind could be given free rein. He experimented with shadowgraphs similar to those that later were to be used by Wilhelm Rntgen when he discovered X-rays in 1895. Teslas countless experiments included work on a carbon button lamp, on the power of electrical resonance, and on various types of lighting.

In order to allay fears of alternating currents, Tesla gave exhibitions in his laboratory in which he lit lamps by allowing electricity to flow through his body. He was often invited to lecture at home and abroad. The Tesla coil, which he invented in 1891, is widely used today in radio and television sets and other electronic equipment. That year also marked the date of Teslas U.S. citizenship.

Westinghouse used Teslas alternating current system to light the Worlds Columbian Exposition at Chicago in 1893. This success was a factor in their winning the contract to install the first power machinery at Niagara Falls, which bore Teslas name and patent numbers. The project carried power to Buffalo by 1896.

In 1898 Tesla announced his invention of a teleautomatic boat guided by remote control. When skepticism was voiced, Tesla proved his claims for it before a crowd in Madison Square Garden.

In Colorado Springs, Colorado, where he stayed from May 1899 until early 1900, Tesla made what he regarded as his most important discoveryterrestrial stationary waves. By this discovery he proved that Earth could be used as a conductor and made to resonate at a certain electrical frequency. He also lit 200 lamps without wires from a distance of 40 km (25 miles) and created man-made lightning, producing flashes measuring 41 metres (135 feet). At one time he was certain he had received signals from another planet in his Colorado laboratory, a claim that was met with derision in some scientific journals.

Returning to New York in 1900, Tesla began construction on Long Island of a wireless world broadcasting tower, with $150,000 capital from the American financier J. Pierpont Morgan. Tesla claimed he secured the loan by assigning 51 percent of his patent rights of telephony and telegraphy to Morgan. He expected to provide worldwide communication and to furnish facilities for sending pictures, messages, weather warnings, and stock reports. The project was abandoned because of a financial panic, labour troubles, and Morgans withdrawal of support. It was Teslas greatest defeat.

Teslas work then shifted to turbines and other projects. Because of a lack of funds, his ideas remained in his notebooks, which are still examined by enthusiasts for unexploited clues. In 1915 he was severely disappointed when a report that he and Edison were to share the Nobel Prize proved erroneous. Tesla was the recipient of the Edison Medal in 1917, the highest honour that the American Institute of Electrical Engineers could bestow.

Tesla allowed himself only a few close friends. Among them were the writers Robert Underwood Johnson, Mark Twain, and Francis Marion Crawford. He was quite impractical in financial matters and an eccentric, driven by compulsions and a progressive germ phobia. But he had a way of intuitively sensing hidden scientific secrets and employing his inventive talent to prove his hypotheses. Tesla was a godsend to reporters who sought sensational copy but a problem to editors who were uncertain how seriously his futuristic prophecies should be regarded. Caustic criticism greeted his speculations concerning communication with other planets, his assertions that he could split the Earth like an apple, and his claim of having invented a death ray capable of destroying 10,000 airplanes at a distance of 400 km (250 miles).

After Teslas death the custodian of alien property impounded his trunks, which held his papers, his diplomas and other honours, his letters, and his laboratory notes. These were eventually inherited by Teslas nephew, Sava Kosanovich, and later housed in the Nikola Tesla Museum in Belgrade. Hundreds filed into New York Citys Cathedral of St. John the Divine for his funeral services, and a flood of messages acknowledged the loss of a great genius. Three Nobel Prize recipients addressed their tribute to one of the outstanding intellects of the world who paved the way for many of the technological developments of modern times.

Read more here:

Nikola Tesla | Biography, Facts, & Inventions | Britannica.com

TSLA Stock Price – Tesla Inc. Stock Quote (U.S.: Nasdaq …

Posted on by

Tesla's debt looms and company continues to face 'challenges,' Moody's says

Changes mandated by U.S. securities regulators for Tesla Inc. will reduce corporate-governance risk at the Silicon Valley car maker, but the company "continues to face important governance, financial and operational challenges," analyst Bruce Clark of Moody's Investors Service said in a comment earlier this week. About $1.15 billion in debt matures between November and March, and the company's cash stands around $2.2 billion as of June, Clark said. Tesla's current cash position and its Model 3 production and sales ramp increase the likelihood that the company will be able to repay the debt, but trade tensions with China could dampen Tesla's ability to generate cash, Clark said. "China is an important long-term market for Tesla and exports to the country represented approximately 20% of automotive revenues during 2017," he said. Departures of senior executives is another sore point, as they have been disruptive to the company at a critical time, he said. Moreover, Tesla's competitive advantage has lost some of its luster, he said. With delivery delays and initially low rate production for the Model 3, "as well as a delivered cost to the consumer that is well above the initial expected price of about $35,000, Tesla's advantage of being first to market with a unique product is less formidable than it had been," Clark said. Tesla shares fell 2.4% on Wednesday, bringing weekly gains to 11% so far. The stock is down 6% in the year, versus advances of 10% and 9% for the S&P 500 index and the Dow Jones Industrial Average. .

Visit link:

TSLA Stock Price - Tesla Inc. Stock Quote (U.S.: Nasdaq ...

Bitcoin Cash: Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash (BCH) – reddit

Posted on by

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) Website:

https://www.bitcoincash.org/

Bitcoin Discussion

/r/BitcoinCash is for discussion focused on Bitcoin Cash (BCH) news, information, and development! For general Bitcoin discussion please continue to use /r/btc.

What is Bitcoin Cash?

Bitcoin Cash brings sound money to the world. Merchants and users are empowered with low fees and reliable confirmations. The future shines brightly with unrestricted growth, global adoption, permissionless innovation, and decentralized development.

All Bitcoin holders as of block 478558 are now owners of Bitcoin Cash. All Bitcoiners are welcome to join the Bitcoin Cash community as we move forward in creating sound money accessible to the whole world. The ticker symbol for Bitcoin Cash is "BCH", but is sometimes referred to as "BCC" on some exchanges/wallets. Please do not confuse "BitConnect" (which also uses the ticker symbol "BCC") with Bitcoin Cash.

Development:

Wallets

Exchanges

Blockchain Explorers

Mining Pools

Resources

Subreddit Rules to Remember

View original post here:

Bitcoin Cash: Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash (BCH) - reddit

Gordon Moore – Wikipedia

Posted on by

Gordon Earle Moore (born January 3, 1929) is an American businessman, engineer, co-founder and chairman emeritus of Intel Corporation, and the author of Moore's law.[3][4][5][6][7] As of 2017, his net worth is $8.4billion.[8]

Moore was born in San Francisco, California, and grew up in nearby Pescadero; his father was the county sheriff. He attended Sequoia High School in Redwood City.Initially he went to San Jose State University.[9]After two years he transferred to the University of California, Berkeley, from which he received a B.S. degree in chemistry in 1950.[10]

In September 1950, Moore matriculated at the California Institute of Technology.[11] Moore received a Ph.D. degree[12] in chemistry and minor in physics from Caltech in 1954.[10][13] Moore conducted postdoctoral research at the Applied Physics Laboratory at Johns Hopkins University from 1953 to 1956.[10]

Moore met his wife, Betty Irene Whitaker, while attending San Jose State University.[11] Gordon and Betty were married September 9, 1950,[14] and left the next day to move to the California Institute of Technology. The couple has two sons, Kenneth and Steven.[15]

Moore joined MIT and Caltech alumnus William Shockley at the Shockley Semiconductor Laboratory division of Beckman Instruments, but left with the "traitorous eight", when Sherman Fairchild agreed to back them and created the influential Fairchild Semiconductor corporation.[16][17]

In 1965, Moore was working as the director of research and development (R&D) at Fairchild Semiconductor. He was asked by Electronics Magazine to predict what was going to happen in the semiconductor components industry over the next ten years. In an article published on April 19, 1965, Moore observed that the number of components (transistors, resistors, diodes or capacitors)[18] in a dense integrated circuit had doubled approximately every year, and speculated that it would continue to do so for at least the next ten years. In 1975, he revised the forecast rate to approximately every two years.[19] Carver Mead popularized the phrase "Moore's law." The prediction has become a target for miniaturization in the semiconductor industry, and has had widespread impact in many areas of technological change.[3][17]

In July 1968, Robert Noyce and Moore founded NM Electronics which later became Intel Corporation.[20][21] Moore served as executive vice president until 1975 when he became president. In April 1979, Moore became chairman and chief executive officer, holding that position until April 1987, when he became chairman. He was named chairman emeritus in 1997.[22] Under Noyce, Moore, and later Andrew Grove, Intel has pioneered new technologies in the areas of computer memory, integrated circuits and microprocessor design.[21]

In 2000 Betty and Gordon Moore established the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, with a gift worth about $5billion. Through the Foundation, they initially targeted environmental conservation, science, and the San Francisco Bay Area.[23]

The foundation gives extensively in the area of environmental conservation, supporting major projects in the Andes-Amazon Basin and the San Francisco Bay area, among others.[24] Moore was a director of Conservation International for some years. In 2002, he and Conservation International senior vice president Claude Gascon received the Order of the Golden Ark from Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld for their outstanding contributions to nature conservation.[25]

Moore has been a member of Caltech's board of trustees since 1983, chairing it from 1993 to 2000, and is now a life trustee.[26][27][28] In 2001, Moore and his wife donated $600million to Caltech, at the time the largest gift ever to an institution of higher education.[29] He said that he wants the gift to be used to keep Caltech at the forefront of research and technology.[23]

In December 2007, Moore and his wife donated $200million to Caltech and the University of California for the construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT), expected to become the world's second largest optical telescope once it and the European Extremely Large Telescope are completed in the mid-2020s. The TMT will have a segmented mirror 30 meters across and be built on Mauna Kea in Hawaii. This mirror will be nearly three times the size of the current record holder, the Large Binocular Telescope.[30] The Moores, as individuals and through their foundation, have also, through a series of gifts and grants, given over $110 million to the University of California, Berkeley.[31]

In addition, through the Foundation, Betty Moore has created the Betty Irene Moore Nursing Initiative, targeting nursing care in the San Francisco Bay Area and Greater Sacramento.[23][32] In 2007, the foundation pledged $100 million over 11 years to establish a nursing school at the University of California, Davis.[31]

In 2009, the Moores received the Andrew Carnegie Medal of Philanthropy.[23][33]

Moore has received many honors. He became a member of the National Academy of Engineering in 1976.[34]

In 1990, Moore was presented with the National Medal of Technology and Innovation by President George H.W. Bush, "for his seminal leadership in bringing American industry the two major postwar innovations in microelectronics - large-scale integrated memory and the microprocessor - that have fueled the information revolution."[35]

In 1998 he was inducted as a Fellow of the Computer History Museum "for his fundamental early work in the design and production of semiconductor devices as co-founder of Fairchild and Intel."[36]

In 2001, Moore received the Othmer Gold Medal for outstanding contributions to progress in chemistry and science.[37][38]

Moore is also the recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the United States' highest civilian honor, as of 2002.[39] He received the award from President George W. Bush. In 2002, Moore also received the Bower Award for Business Leadership.

In 2003, he was elected a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Moore was awarded the 2008 IEEE Medal of Honor for "pioneering technical roles in integrated-circuit processing, and leadership in the development of MOS memory, the microprocessor computer and the semiconductor industry."[40] Moore was featured in the documentary film Something Ventured which premiered in 2011.

In 2009, Moore was inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame.

He was awarded the 2010 Future Dan David Prize for his work in the areas of Computers and Telecommunications.[41]

The library at the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge is named after him and his wife Betty,[42] as are the Moore Laboratories building (dedicated 1996) at Caltech and the Gordon and Betty Moore Materials Research Building at Stanford.

The Electrochemical Society presents an award in Moore's name, the Gordon E. Moore Medal for Outstanding Achievement in Solid State Science and Technology, every two years to celebrate scientists' contributions to the field of solid state science.[43] The Society of Chemical Industry (American Section) annually presents the Gordon E. Moore Medal in his honor to recognize early career success in innovation in the chemical industries.[44][45]

Moore actively pursues and enjoys any type of fishing and has extensively traveled the world catching species from black marlin to rainbow trout. He has said his conservation efforts are partly inspired by his interest in fishing.[46]

In 2011, Moore's genome was the first human genome sequenced on Ion Torrent's Personal Genome Machine platform, a massively parallel sequencing device, which uses field effect transistor sensors.[47]

More here:

Gordon Moore - Wikipedia

Clothing Optional Resorts, Negril, Jamaica | Hedonism II

Posted on by

Departure City

Albany, Ny [ALB]Albuquerque, Nm [ABQ]Allentown, Pa [ABE]Amarillo, Tx [AMA]Anchorage, Ak [ANC]Appleton, Mn [AQP]Arcata, Ca [ACV]Asheville, Nc [AVL]Aspen, Co [ASE]Atlanta, Ga [ATL]Atlantic City, Nj [ACY]Austin, Tx [AUS]Baltimore, Md [BWI]Bangor, Me [BGR]Beaumont, Tx [BPT]Bethel, Ak [BET]Billings, Mt [BIL]Binghamton, Ny [BGM]Birmingham, Al [BHM]Bismarck, Nd [BIS]Bloomington, Il [BMI]Boise, Id [BOI]Boston, Ma [BOS]Brownsville, Tx [BRO]Brunswick, Ga [BQK]Buffalo, Ny [BUF]Burbank, Ca [BUR]Burlington, Vt [BTV]Calgary [YYC]Cedar Rapids, Ia [CID]Charleston, Sc [CHS]Charleston, Wv [CRW]Charlotte, Nc [CLT]Charlottesville, Va [CHO]Chicago (Midway), Il [MDW]Chicago (O'Hare), Il [ORD]Cincinnati, Oh [CVG]Cleveland, Oh [CLE]College Station, Tx [CLL]Colorado Springs, Co [COS]Columbia, Mo [COU]Columbia, Sc [CAE]Columbus, Oh [CMH]Cordova, Ak [CDV]Corpus Christi, Tx [CRP]Dallas Love Field, Tx [DAL]Dallas/Fort Worth, Tx [DFW]Dayton, Oh [DAY]Denver, Co [DEN]Des Moines, Ia [DSM]Detroit, Mi [DTW]Duluth, Mn [DLH]Durango, Co [DRO]Edmonton Intntl [YEG]Eastern Iowa, Ia [CID]El Paso, Tx [ELP]Erie, Pa [ERI]Eugene, Or [EUG]Eureka, Ca [EKA]Fairbanks, Ak [FAI]Fargo, Nd [FAR]Flint, Mi [FNT]Fresno, Ca [FAT]Ft. Lauderdale, Fl [FLL]Ft. Myers, Fl [RSW]Ft. Walton/Okaloosa [VPS]Ft. Wayne, In [FWA]Gainesville, Fl [GNV]Grand Forks, Nd [GFK]Grand Rapids, Mi [GRR]Great Falls, Mt [GTF]Green Bay, Wi [GRB]Greensboro, Nc [GSO]Greenville, Sc [GSP]Gulfport, Ms [GPT]Halifax Intntl [YHZ]Harlingen [HRL]Harrisburg, Pa [MDT]Hartford, Ct [BDL]Helena, Mt [HLN]Hilo, Hi [ITO]Hilton Head, Sc [HHH]Honolulu, Hi [HNL]Houston Hobby, Tx [HOU]Houston Busch, Tx [IAH]Huntington, Wv [HTS]Huntsville Intl, Al [HSV]Idaho Falls, Id [IDA]Indianapolis, In [IND]Islip, Ny [ISP]Ithaca, Ny [ITH]Jackson Hole, Wy [JAC]Jackson Int'L, Ms [JAN]Jacksonville, Fl [JAX]Juneau, Ak [JNU]Kahului, Hi [OGG]Kansas City, Mo [MCI]Kapalua, Hi [JHM]Kauai, Hi [LIH]Key West, Fl [EYW]Knoxville, Tn [TYS]Kona, Hi [KOA]Lanai, Hi [LNY]Lansing, Mi [LAN]Las Vegas, Nv [LAS]Lexington, Ky [LEX]Lincoln, Ne [LNK]Little Rock, Ar [LIT]Long Beach, Ca [LGB]Los Angeles, Ca [LAX]Louisville, Ky [SDF]Lubbock, Tx [LBB]Lynchburg, Va [LYH]Montreal Mirabel [YMX]Montreal Trudeau [YUL]Madison, Wi [MSN]Manchester, Nh [MHT]Maui, Hi [OGG]Mcallen, Tx [MFE]Medford, Or [MFR]Melbourne, Fl [MLB]Memphis, Tn [MEM]Miami, Fl [MIA]Midland/Odessa, Tx [MAF]Milwaukee, Wi [MKE]Minneapolis/St. Paul [MSP]Missoula, Mt [MSO]Mobile Regional, Al [MOB]Molokai, Hi [MKK]Monterey, Ca [MRY]Montgomery, Al [MGM]Myrtle Beach, Sc [MYR]Naples, Fl [APF]Nashville, Tn [BNA]New Braunfels, Tx [BAZ]New Orleans, La [MSY]New York Kennedy, Ny [JFK]New York Laguardia [LGA]Newark, Nj [EWR]Norfolk, Va [ORF]Ottawa Mcdonald [YOW]Oakland, Ca [OAK]Oklahoma City, Ok [OKC]Omaha, Ne [OMA]Ontario, Ca [ONT]Orange County, Ca [SNA]Orlando, Fl [MCO]Palm Springs, Ca [PSP]Panama City, Fl [PFN]Pensacola, Fl [PNS]Peoria, Il [PIA]Philadelphia, Pa [PHL]Phoenix, Az [PHX]Pittsburgh, Pa [PIT]Port Angeles, Wa [CLM]Portland Intl, Or [PDX]Portland, Me [PWM]Providence, Ri [PVD]Quebec Intntl [YQB]Raleigh/Durham, Nc [RDU]Rapid City, Sd [RAP]Redmond, Or [RDM]Reno, Nv [RNO]Richmond, Va [RIC]Roanoke, Va [ROA]Rochester, Ny [ROC]Rockford, Il [RFD]Sacramento, Ca [SMF]Saginaw, Mi [MBS]Salem, Or [SLE]Salt Lake City, Ut [SLC]San Antonio, Tx [SAT]San Diego, Ca [SAN]San Francisco, Ca [SFO]San Jose, Ca [SJC]Santa Barbara, Ca [SBA]Santa Rosa, Ca [STS]Sarasota/Bradenton [SRQ]Savannah, Ga [SAV]Seattle/Tacoma, Wa [SEA]Shreveport, La [SHV]Sioux City, Ia [SUX]Sioux Falls, Sd [FSD]Spokane, Wa [GEG]Springfield, Il [SPI]Springfield, Mo [SGF]St. Louis, Mo [STL]St. Petersburg, Fl [PIE]Syracuse, Ny [SYR]Toronto Pearson [YYZ]Tallahassee, Fl [TLH]Tampa, Fl [TPA]Traverse City, Mi [TVC]Tucson, Az [TUS]Tulsa, Ok [TUL]Vancouver Intntl [YVR]Victoria Intntl [YYJ]Winnipeg Intntl [YWG]Washington Natl, Dc [DCA]Washington/Dulles, Dc [IAD]Wenatchee, Wa [EAT]West Palm Beach, Fl [PBI]White Plains, Ny [HPN]Wichita, Ks [ICT]Wilkes-Barre/Scranton [AVP]

Link:

Clothing Optional Resorts, Negril, Jamaica | Hedonism II

First Amendment FAQ | Freedom Forum Institute

Posted on by

This is one of the most confusing and controversial areas of the current school-prayer debate. While the courts have not clarified all of the issues, some are clearer than others.

For instance, inviting outside adults to lead prayers at graduation ceremonies is clearly unconstitutional. The Supreme Court resolved this issue in the 1992 case Lee v. Weisman, which began when prayers were delivered by clergy at a middle schools commencement exercises in Providence, Rhode Island. The school designed the program, provided for the invocation, selected the clergy, and even supplied guidelines for the prayer.

Therefore, the Supreme Court held that the practice violated the First Amendments prohibition against laws respecting an establishment of religion. The majority based its decision on the fact that (1) it is not the business of schools to sponsor or organize religious activities, and (2) students who might have objected to the prayer were subtly coerced to participate. This psychological coercion was not resolved by the fact that attendance at the graduation was voluntary. In the Courts view, few students would want to miss the culminating event of their academic career.

A murkier issue is student-initiated, student-led prayer at school-sponsored events. On one side of the debate are those who believe that student religious speech at graduation ceremonies or other school-sponsored events violates the establishment clause. They are bolstered by the 2000 Supreme Court case Santa Fe v. Doe, which involved the traditional practice of student-led prayers over the public-address system before high school football games.

According to the district, students would vote each year on whether they would have prayers at home football games. If they decided to do so, they would then select a student to deliver the prayers. To ensure fairness, the school district said it required these prayers to be non-sectarian [and] non-proselytizing.

A 6-to-3 majority of the Supreme Court still found the Santa Fe policy to be unconstitutional. The majority opinion first pointed out that constitutional rights are not subject to a vote. To the contrary, the judges said the purpose of the Bill of Rights was to place some rights beyond the reach of political majorities. Thus, the Constitution protects a persons right to freedom of speech, press, or religion even if no one else agrees with the ideas a person professes.

In addition, the Court found that having a student, as opposed to an adult, lead the prayer did not solve the constitutional dilemma. A football game is still a school-sponsored event, they held, and the school was still coercing the students, however subtly, to participate in a religious exercise.

Finally, the Court ruled that the requirement that the prayer be non-sectarian and non-proselytizing not only failed to solve the problems addressed in Lee v. Weisman, it may have aggravated them. In other words, while some might like the idea of an inclusive, nonsectarian civil religion, others might not. To some people, the idea of nonsectarian prayer is offensive, as though a prayer were being addressed to whom it may concern. Moreover, the Supreme Court made clear in Lee v. Weisman that even nondenominational prayers or generic religiosity may not be established by the government at graduation exercises.

Another thorny part of this issue is determining whether a particular prayer tends to proselytize. Such determinations entangle school officials in religious matters in unconstitutional ways. In fact, one Texas school district was sued for discriminating against those who wished to offer more-sectarian prayers at graduation exercises.

On the other side of this debate are those who contend that not allowing students to express themselves religiously at school events violates the students free exercise of religion and free speech.

Case law indicates, however, that this may be true only in instances involving strictly student speech, and not when a student is conveying a message controlled or endorsed by the school. As the 11th Circuit case of Adler v. Duval County (2001) suggests, it would seem possible for a school to provide a forum for student speech within a graduation ceremony when prayer or religious speech might occur.

For example, a school might allow the valedictorian or class president an opportunity to speak during the ceremony. If such a student chose to express a religious viewpoint, it seems unlikely it would be found unconstitutional unless the school had suggested or otherwise encouraged the religious speech. (See Doe v. Madison School Dist., 9th Cir. 1998.) In effect, this means that in order to distance itself from the students remarks, the school must create a limited open forum for student speech in the graduation program.

Again, there is a risk for school officials in this approach. By creating a limited open forum for student speech, the school may have to accept almost anything the student wishes to say. Although the school would not be required to allow speech that was profane, sexually explicit, defamatory, or disruptive, the speech could include political or religious views offensive to many, as well as speech critical of school officials.

If school officials feel a solemnizing event needs to occur at a graduation exercise, a neutral moment of silence might be the best option. This way, everyone could pray, meditate, or silently reflect on the previous years efforts in her own way.

Read more:

First Amendment FAQ | Freedom Forum Institute

Trumps ambassador to NATO sets off diplomatic incident with …

Posted on by

Paul Sonne

National security reporter focusing on the U.S. military

BRUSSELS The U.S. ambassador to NATO set off alarm bells Tuesday when she suggested that the United States might take out Russian missiles that U.S. officials say violate a landmark arms control treaty.

Although Ambassador Kay Bailey Hutchisons comments were somewhat ambiguous, arms control experts said they could be interpreted to mean a preemptive strike. Such a move could lead to nuclear war.

Only after the comments drew a furious response from the Russian Foreign Ministrydid Hutchison clarify on Twitter that shewas not talking about preemptively striking Russia. But the diplomatic damage was already done.

The impression is that people making such claims are unaware of the degree of their responsibility and the danger of aggressive rhetoric, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told reporters, the Interfax news agency reported. Who authorized this lady to make such allegations? The American people? Do ordinary Americans know that they are paying out of their pockets for so-called diplomats who behave so aggressively and destructively?

Russia denies violating the treaty.

Asked during a news conference at NATO headquarters what the United States might do about a new class of Russian missiles that appear to violate the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, Hutchison said, The countermeasures would be to take out the missiles that are in development by Russia in violation of the treaty.

Before Hutchison clarified her position, more than nine hours after her initial remarks, it was unclear whether she meant that the United States would target Russias banned missile installations if Moscow doesnt come back into compliance, or whether she was warning that the United States would enhance its missile defenses so it could take out any banned missiles Russia decided to launch at U.S. or allied targets. The United States currently has limited ability to defend against cruise missile threats.

The question was what would you do if this continues to a point where we know that they are capable of delivering the banned missiles, Hutchison said. And at that point we would then be looking at a capability to take out a missile that could hit any of our countries in Europe and hit America in Alaska.

The treaty, which the United States and the Soviet Union signed in 1987, prohibits the production and deployment of nuclear and conventional missiles that fly from 500 to 5,500 kilometers. It applies to ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles.

NATO defense ministers plan to address the alleged Russian violations at a Brussels meeting on Wednesday and Thursday.

Hutchison, a former Republican senator from Texas, has been President Trumps ambassador to NATO for just over a year.

She does threaten preemption. She just didnt mean it, said Jeffrey Lewis, an arms control scholar at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.

Welcome to NATO! You have one job: to not start nuclear war with Russia, he joked. As an expert, I am used to politicians, including politicians who have been appointed as ambassadors, badly mangling simple things. So my default assumption was that she was badly mangling pretty common talking points.

Hutchisons comments set off a flurry of anxiety on Twitter, where arms control experts speculated about what she meant. Several pointed out that taking countermeasures against undeployed missiles that are still in development by definition would be a preemptive strike.

Russia has long feared that U.S. missile shields could be used covertly to preemptively target the man who controls the Russian nuclear arsenal Russian President Vladimir Putin. Although U.S. officials have long denied that is the purpose of their missile defense efforts, Hutchisons comments fed directly into the Russian concerns.

Zakharova said that Russian military experts were preparing a more technical response to Hutchison.

During the final years of the Obama administration, the State Department regularly stated that Russia was violating the treaty but stopped short of specifying which Russian weapon was going against the pact. Last year, Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Russia had violated the treatys spirit and intent by deploying a ground-based cruise missile.

Russia has accused the United States of violating the treaty with its Aegis Ashore missile defense installations in Romania and a similar installation still in the works in Poland, claiming that those platforms could launch Tomahawk cruise missiles in violation of the treaty. The United States has denied those accusations, saying the system launches only SM-3 interceptor missiles not covered by the pact.

Efforts by U.S. diplomats to bring Russia back into compliance with the treaty, including meetings between American and Russian officials as part of the pacts enforcement mechanism, have so far come up short. Under direction from Congress and to ratchet up pressure, the Pentagon has begun drawing up plans for a banned missile that the United States could deploy quickly if the treaty formally falls apart.

The treaty bans only production, testing and use of intermediate-range missiles; research and development isnt prohibited.

The dispute over the INF Treaty has also prompted the U.S. military to consider stepping up defenses against cruise missile threats from Russia in Europe. The Pentagon had drawn up a draft of the Trump administrations new missile defense policy early this year, but top officials sent it back to the drawing board after demanding that itmore thoroughly address the Russian cruise missile threat in Europe.

One possible step would be to stand up a better sensor network that could track any Russian cruise missiles from the moment of their launch at a European target. The Pentagon is also looking at technologies that could be put in place to shoot down missiles heading toward specific targets an effort Hutchison might have been referencing in her remarks.

This treaty is in danger because of Russias actions, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenbergtold reporters. All allies agree that the most plausible assessment would be that Russia is in violation of the treaty. It is therefore urgent that Russia addresses these concerns in a substantial and transparent manner.

paul.sonne@washpost.com

Sonne reported from Washington.

Read more

In Russias Far East, villagers recognize a Skripal poisoning suspect

In a blow to Israel, Russia says it will send Syria powerful antiaircraft missiles

Todays coverage from Post correspondents around the world

Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news

See the article here:

Trumps ambassador to NATO sets off diplomatic incident with ...

Hedonism II Resort – Negril, Jamaica. Be wicked for a week

Posted on by

The rumors, the legends, the myths are all true. For more than 30 years, Hedonism clothing optional resorts have enjoyed a reputation for shattering inhibitions and provoking the kind of behavior people dont talk about in polite circles. Its what happens when you combine warm water, a white-sand beach, open bars, and open minds. Our lifestyle resort is about as far as you can get from your everyday life. And best of all, just about everything you can eat, drink, and do is included.

The primal urge to just let go, unwind, and unplug. Hedonism II on world-famous Negril Beach of Negril, Jamaica was created as a reward for all those times youve had to deny your basic instincts. In these lush gardens of pure pleasure, the word no is seldom heard.

After a week at Hedonism II, youll view the world from a slightly different angle. Youll be tanned and relaxed, and at times youll find yourself smiling for no reason whatsoever. Hedonism II, unlike all other clothing optional resorts.

Hedonism II is the only resort of its kind in the world. Its the resort where you can do what you want, when you want, in a way that you only can at Hedonism. From the nude beach to piano bar to the disco, Hedonism II is the best resort for adult only, all inclusive clothing optional travel. If you dont have fun at Hedonism II, you probably wont have fun anywhere.

And the best place to book your Hedonism II vacation is right here at Dream Pleasure Tours. Why? Dream Pleasure Tours is you main source for the best prices and best service for Hedonism II reservation.

Read the rest here:

Hedonism II Resort - Negril, Jamaica. Be wicked for a week

AN INTRODUCTION TO PANTHEISM – Personal/Professional

Posted on by

by Jan GarrettContents

What is Pantheism?

Pantheism and Western Monotheism

Differences With Western Monotheism

Pantheism and Personal Divinity

Pantheism and Immortality

Pantheism and Atheism

Is Pantheist Love of Nature Objectively Grounded?

Pantheism and Humanism

The Sacredness of the Earth

Pantheism and Progress

The Question of Divine Providence

For Further Information about Pantheism What is pantheism? Pantheism is the view that the natural universe is divine, the proper object of reverence;or the view that the natural universe is pervaded with divinity. Negatively, it is the idea that wedo not need to look beyond the universe for the proper object of ultimate respect.

Paul Harrison writes,

One of the chief clues to understanding modern pantheism is its consistent refusal toengage in anthropomorphism. "Anthropomorphism" here means the practice of attributingfamiliar human qualities to objects outside us when there is no good evidence that they have suchqualities.

Refusal of anthropomorphism explains one of the key differences between pantheism andpaganism. In ancient times, "pagans" referred to adherents of polytheistic pre-Christian religionswhich Christianity was trying to suppress. Pagans, or people who worship gods and divinities innature, obviously have much in common with pantheism. But there was a tendency, at least inthe paganism of the past, to impose familiar human qualities on natural objects that may not havethem, for example, to regard a tree as if it could perceive in the way that animals do or even as ifit were a self-conscious being. Most contemporary pantheists would refuse to do this and wouldregard such an attitude as anthropomorphic. Pantheism and Western Monotheism How does pantheism relate to traditional Judaeo-Christian conceptions of God? As PaulHarrison ("Defining the Cosmic Divinity," SP website) points out, traditional (Western) religiondescribes a God who is ultimately a mystery, beyond human comprehension; awe-inspiring;overwhelmingly powerful; creator of the universe; eternal and infinite; and transcendent. Thedivine universe fits some of these descriptions without modification and it fits others if we allowourselves to interpret the terms flexibly.

The divine universe is mysterious. Though we can understand the universe moreadequately as scientific research proceeds, there will always be questions to which we will notyet have answers; and explanations of ultimate origins will always remain speculative (they aretoo far in the past for us to decipher clearly).

The divine universe is awe-inspiring. Would a creator behind it be any more awe-inspiring than the universe itself?

The universe is clearly very powerful. It creates and it destroys on a vast scale.

So far as we know, the universe created all that exists; which is to say that, the universeas it is now was created by the universe as it was a moment ago, and that universe by theuniverse that existed a moment before that, and so on. If we view universe in this way, we cankeep the idea of creator and creation and yet have no need to imagine a being apart from theuniverse who created it. The divine being is indeed a creator, in the pantheist view. Indeed, thecreativity of the natural universe is probably the best evidence for its divinity.

Is the universe eternal? Well, it depends on how you understand eternity. TraditionalWestern theology understands eternity as a quality of a God that exists altogether outside time. Yet the dynamic and changing universe is very much bound up with time, so it is not eternal inthe theological sense. Possibly it is everlasting, maybe it had no first moment and will nevercease to exist. Scientific evidence does point to a Big Bang several billion years ago, from whichour universe in roughly its current form originated, but if we accept the time-honored precept thatnothing comes from nothing, we cannot rule out the existence of a material universe before thisBig Bang.

Is the universe transcendent? In Western theology transcendence is a term often pairedwith eternity. A transcendent being is essentially outside and independent of the universe. Ofcourse, the divinity which pantheists revere is not transcendent in that way. However, inordinary language, to transcend is to surpass. Well, the universe which includes us also certainlysurpasses us, as it surpasses everything we are capable of knowing or observing. Differences with Western Monotheism

Pantheism has clear differences with the traditional description of God. It departs fromthe picture of God given in the Old Testament to the extent that the Old Testament attributeshuman attributes to the divine being, such as a willingness to make deals (You worship me and I'll make you my Chosen People) and anger (for example, Yahweh's anger at the Israelites'worship of the Golden Calf).

Pantheism also avoids some features of the theological conception of God which arisesfrom a mix of Greek philosophical influences and Judaeo-Christian thought. For example,pantheism does not hold that the divinity we revere is a first cause wholly independent of matter,or that the divine being freely creates the physical universe from nothing but its own will. Pantheism and Personal Divinity Do pantheists believe that the universe is a personal God? Possibly some do, but mostcontemporary pantheists do not. We can stand in awe of creative or divine nature withoutregarding it as a father. One can be thankful that it supports us and heals us, without attributingto it a deliberate plan to help or hinder us, without believing that it loves us as a mother or fathermight. Pantheists can observe and respect the divine creativity of being without engaging inwishful thinking. They tend to believe that talk of God as a father or mother who cares for us ina parental way engages in anthropomorphism.

C. Alan Anderson and Deb Whitehouse, authors of New Thought: A Practical AmericanSpirituality, have married the process theology of Alfred N. Whitehead and others with thereligious tradition known as New Thought. They have criticized pantheism for its resistance tothe idea of a personal divinity. Their criticisms are interesting because process theology agreeswith pantheism in bringing God and Nature together. But process theologians Anderson andWhitehouse are not pantheists--they are panentheists. That is, they regard the material universeas the body of God--everything material is in God--but God's mind or personhood is somehowsomething extra or more than the universe. God is impartial, they say, but he is not impersonal--he loves us all as a good father loves his children. Whitehouse accuses pantheists of replacingGod as a loving father by a "formless, impersonal Ground of All Being into which we allultimately melt, or get ground!" On this scenario, says Whitehouse, "we [humans] are illusion,without individuality, smothered by a God that Alan Anderson calls the universal wet blanket'"(cited in D. Whitehouse, "God: Person, Eternal, and New," Unity Magazine April 1996).

Several charges are made here, in just a few words. The charge that the pantheist divinityis a "universal wet blanket" seems to boil down to the charge that pantheists do not accept theview that the divinity literally loves us as a parent would. To that the pantheist response issimple: there is almost as much evidence that the universe hates us as there is that it loves us, inother words, not much. On the other hand, the fact that we are still here is evidence that theuniverse nurtures us and supports us, at least for the time being. We can certainly be thankful forthat.

Deb Whitehouse's charge that pantheism denies the reality of the human individual doesactually fit some pantheist philosophies of earlier times, for instance, the seventeenth-centuryphilosophy of Spinoza. But it does not fit modern pantheism as expressed, for example, in mostof the publications of the Universal Pantheist Society or the text of Paul Harrison's "ScientificPantheism" website. Nor is the divine being as conceived by these pantheists "the formless . . .Ground of All Being" (as Whitehouse puts it) since for them, as for modern scientists, the divineuniverse is anything but formless. Immortality of the Soul Do pantheists believe in the immortality of the soul? Not usually. And they have lessmotivation to do so than mainstream Western traditions. Pantheists do not find nature eitherrepulsive or without vitality. Thus they do not feel horror at the prospect of dissolution back intonature at the time of their individual deaths. Of course, there is immortality in the sense that ourmaterial components re-enter natural cycles; indeed, that goes on simultaneously with life itself. More significantly, as even Plato recognized, our deeds live on after us, insofar as they areremembered. And the ideas which we have made part of our lives continue to exert influenceafter we are gone--this sort of imperfect immortality is not denied to us. Pantheists will askwhether it is not better to rely on the possibility of such imperfect immortality, for which there isgood evidence, than on the idea that the soul can be detached from everything material and attainperfect immortality. To my knowledge, nobody has ever made a persuasive case for this kind ofimmortality. The greatest thinkers in the Christian tradition, such as Thomas Aquinas, admit thatthe existence of an immortal soul is a teaching which cannot be rationally proved. True, Platolong ago, in a beautiful dialogue called the Phaedo, offered several proofs for the immortality ofthe soul, but while they are all interesting, none of them are logically persuasive. Plato's proofscould convince neither his student Aristotle, who shared quite a few assumptions with him, norThomas Aquinas, who, as a Christian, would have liked to have had a proof for this teaching. Why should he be able to convince modern pantheists? Pantheism and Atheism Pantheists are sometimes accused of being atheists in disguise. Are they? We cannotanswer that question until we define "atheism." Is it literally a denial that there is anythingdivine or worthy of ultimate reverence? If that is what atheism is, then by definition pantheistsare not atheists. Is it the denial of divinity beyond the sphere of human beings? If that is whatatheism is, then once again pantheists are not atheists. Pantheism can be equated with atheism,of course, if atheism is defined as disbelief in the existence of a God who is a person. Mostmodern pantheists do not conceive the divinity as a person.

Now, some people who call themselves atheists might really be pantheists because theyvalue the natural world and only reject the concept of a personal God or gods, which they havemistaken for the only possible conception of divinity. On the other hand, some people whomight think of themselves as atheists are humanists and not pantheists because they place allultimate value in things human or some characteristic which only human beings possess. Is Pantheist Love of Nature Objectively Grounded? Pantheists are clearly quite impressed by beauty in nature, and infer from this beauty thatnature itself is worthy of our reverence and respect. But, a critic might say, aren't they justmistaking their own aesthetic experiences of nature for value of nature itself? The objectionseems to be that pantheists find something to be revered in nature only because they confuse theirperceptions of nature with nature itself.

Although it's risky to generalize about all pantheists, many pantheists reject the idea that when ahuman being has an aesthetic experience of nature and sees beauty in it, this is nothing but ahuman projection upon nature. They don't mind admitting that humans who experience naturalbeauty are contributing something to the experience, but let us remember , they say, (1) that nature hasherself given humans the capacity to recognize her beauty and (2) that nature provides the objectwhich we recognize as beautiful. Human beings do not invent the beauty and value of nature--we only recognize it. And we are not the only beings who do. As process philosopher CharlesHartshorne argues, birdsong cannot be entirely explained in terms of its Darwinian function inbiological survival and finding a mate. It is probable that birdsong is sometimes a bird's open-hearted response to the natural beauty the bird itself experiences. Pantheism and Humanism How does pantheism relate to humanism? Humanism, like atheism, can be understood inmany ways. If humanism is the view that human things--actions, experiences, products,customs, institutions, and history--are of immense interest and importance, then there is nothingcontradictory in being both a humanist and a pantheist. (A teacher of the humanities who is a pantheist is entirely possible, for example.) But if humanism is the view that humanbeings are the best things in the universe, then pantheists are not humanists. If humanism is theview that only human beings have inherent worth and are deserving of being treated as ends, thenpantheists are not humanists. And if humanism is the doctrine that everything else in theuniverse exists for the sake of human beings, then pantheists are most emphatically nothumanists.

A pantheist might well agree with humanists that all or at least most human beings haveinherent value and are worthy of our basic moral respect, and that there are many importanthuman achievements worth preserving and transmitting. But a commitment to the idea thathuman beings and many human achievements are valuable cannot justify blindness to the valueswhich we humans can discover beyond culture in nature.

The pantheist refusal of the idea that humans are the best things in the universe is notmerely a matter of faith or attitude. Pantheists might even grant that we do not know whether thereare other biological individuals that are superior to humans, e.g., aliens with higher intelligenceor greater capacities of cooperation. But pantheism can make the following case:

(1) Surely humans have some value, but clearly

(2) non-human individuals on the earth have some value as well, even if pantheists have to granttheir critics that the value of a non-human individual is less than a human's. Well, then, consider the biosphere or the living Earth.

(3) It includes both humans, with their value, and non-humans, with their value, howeverminimal you want to claim it is.

(4) This collective being must contain at least as much value as these humans and non-humansput together.

Conclusion: (5) there is a being more valuable than humans, namely, the biosphere whichincludes both humans and non-humans.

Similar reasoning can support the conclusion that the cosmos itself is of still greater value.

For historical reasons, moreover, pantheists are suspicious of the claim that humans arethe best things in nature. They are especially aware of the perverse use to which this idea hasbeen put over the last four centuries. It is part of the myth that has been used to justify Westernhumanity's domination of nature on Earth and the eradication of many cultures, species, andecosystems as part of the cost of taming nature and allegedly perfecting it, i.e., making it over to fit our human whims, which means, to a great extent, the whims of the industrial and post-industrial growth economy.

For those who believe the idea that humans are the best species, it is more anunquestioned article of faith than an empirically verifiable proposition--in fact, given whatmembers of the human species have done to each other and other species, it appears that humansdo not on the whole have a very good record. It is a bad argument to use the rare cases--theAristotles, the Shakespeares, the Beethovens, the Schweitzers, the Gandhis--as arguments for thesurpassing nobility of the human species. Such highly creative or eminently ethical heroes andheroines are far from the average. The Earth Is Sacred It should be clear by now that pantheism is attractive for some people today because it is a way ofdissociating themselves from the kind of "humanism" that can be used to rationalize ecologicaldestruction. Environmental concern is so strong among pantheists that Paul Harrison lists as thesecond of pantheism's central tenets the claim that "the earth is sacred." He explains it asfollows:

Is pantheism essentially a reverence for nature apart from the section of naturetransformed by human culture? Well, the Universal Pantheist Society, the only pantheistmember organization of which I am aware, seems to encourage open air ceremonies that evokerespect for nature, and it insists that a building is not necessary for the experience of the divine,that sometimes a building can get in the way of that experience. But I do not think thatpantheism implies that you can only contemplate the divinity when you are out in the woods farfrom artifacts that human beings have created.

Still, respect for nature independent of human interference is essential to pantheism. Pantheists are bound to look with mixed feelings upon most social institutions and technologicalmarvels. They know how often those institutions and that technology have given humans thecollective strength and the material means for mounting an assault upon nonhuman nature. Pantheism and Progress

Are pantheists opposed to scientific and technological progress? Modern pantheists are definitely not opposed to the scientific method as a method for understanding nature. They are not inclined touse pre-scientific myths to explain inclement weather, for example, as sent by angry gods. Theyfavor scientific explanations whenever we can get them. They recognize that some explanationsare better than others, so that if a person first accepts one theory, then another, and still later athird, and each successive theory gives a better explanation of the same phenomenon than thepreceding one, that surely is scientific progress worth celebrating. Seen in this light, scientificprogress is mainly about understanding, not about control over nature.

Technological progress usually refers to increasing control over the environment. Tocontrol something is to render it passive, to make it into something that can be manipulated bythe controller. But nature is nothing if it is not active, if it does not have "a source of motion initself" (Aristotle, Physics ii). Therefore, technological progress in this sense is profoundlydisturbing for a pantheist.

It is not a healthy form of pantheism to celebrate the absorption of nature into the humaneconomic-technological machine, as one website which calls itself pantheist (www.the-truth.com) does. Not only is this tantamount to celebrating the "death of nature" on Earth, but itis guilty of overweening pride. For it assumes that because we have the power to push aside thebiological diversity that evolved over millions of years and the cultural diversity that developedalongside it over the last several thousand years, it follows that we and our puny Westerntechnology can substitute ourselves for the richness of what we are displacing. The perverseform of anthropocentric "pantheism" to which I am now referring is also guilty of ignorance: it confuses thetemporary domination of the planet by the economic-technological machine with the totalabsorption of nature and God by human (that is, Western) culture. No matter how totally humans control the planet, they cannot control much beyond the planet. There is a lot more universe outthere, as pictures and data from the Hubble Space Telescope strikingly confirm. Besides, we probablycannot even control as much as of the planet as we would like. For example, we can't figure outhow to reverse the damage we have caused the stratospheric ozone layer, only how to slow downthe rate of additional damage in the hope that natural processes will revive the ozone layer afterseveral decades. And we cannot figure out how to do away safely with our nuclear wastes oreven how to store them safely over the very long period in which they remain toxic.

If technological progress is a problem, and in many instances an abomination, when itworks at dominating nature and making it into something passive and a mere resource, it doesnot follow that there is no acceptable technical progress. Some technologies are less invasive ofnature than others. For example, those which use wind power for augmenting human energy andpassive solar collection for heating are ethically less ambiguous than fossil fuels or nuclearenergy. One can imagine continuously improved technical solutions of this sort. It is possible thatexperience in organic farming and composting since the 1960's has developed a battery of soft-technological practices that would constitute an acceptable kind of technical progress. In anycase, pantheism as a religious perspective strongly endorses our learning how to live more lightlyupon the earth. The Question of Divine Providence

Do pantheists believe that the divine universe cares whether we are good or bad, and thatit punishes us if we are bad and do not get punished appropriately in this life? Since ancient times, political leaders have held that beneficial social consequences derive from belief in powerful gods who see what we do even when no humans see it and who punish wrongdoing, either in this life or in an afterlife. On their view, people must be convinced that nothing that we do escapes the attention of the divine being. We find political philosophers, both ancient and modern, who do not really believe in a wrathful god but think that it is not a bad idea if most people do.

Even if they were right about human psychology and the crime rate--and, it is not, so far as I know, empirically proven that they are--this fact would not settle the issue of whether the divine being, in the pantheist case, the universe as a whole, really knows and cares about what we do. And pantheists will generally deny this, because it would require that the divine universe has or is a single mind, and that would amount to saying that the universe is a divine person, an idea most modern pantheists would prefer to abandon. Therefore most pantheists do not conceive the divine power as an observer of our misdeeds and as a punisher of the ones that our fellow humans fail to catch.

However, pantheists can admit that there is at least a metaphorical sense in which the universe hasprovidentially arranged for punishment and reward. Here they can borrow a page from the Stoics, whowere also pantheists of a sort. The Stoics observed that human beings are endowed with a greatcapacity for wisdom as well as ignorance, and claimed that if we judge ignorantly we receivemisery while if we judge wisely we receive tranquillity. They had in mind the insight that wemake ourselves miserable by setting our hearts on things beyond our control. These things, theysay, are not truly our private possessions and in claiming them for our own, or acting as if theyshould be, we are sinning or transgressing against nature. Yet if we do this, we are quicklydisappointed and so the ignorance associated with this transgression is swiftly and automatically"punished" by our undergoing fear and distress (Cf. Seneca, De providentia). The Stoic insightis that, in producing us as beings with capacity for reason, the universe has created us with thepower to interpret events so as to avoid at least the more extreme forms of emotional turmoil. Such internal turmoil besets individuals who do not have their priorities in proper order and tryto treat as their own and under their control things which are actually beyond their control.

For further information about pantheism, see Paul Harrison's Scientific Pantheism website.

or contact:

See the article here:

AN INTRODUCTION TO PANTHEISM - Personal/Professional