How To Put A Weavon On With A Fringe

The thing in itself

The world that surrounds us is filled with all sorts of stuff. Proper vacuum must be laboriously prepared at great expense ; in the wild, there is almost never - not more than in the intergalactic wasteland where found only about one atom per square meter. Otherwise, it abounds everywhere of matter - be it mere air. Before the emergence of the universe did not exist - neither space nor matter - and then suddenly it was something. A more radical change than from nothing to something, you can imagine. And one wonders at times - what is all around me exactly? What is the Kantian thing in itself ?

Well, that depends on who you ask.

If you ask the scientist, he would give no answer: It always has been asked what would happen if things ever further divided. The philosopher Democritus it dawned that the process would eventually stop, and he postulated from the sleeves out a basic element that could not be further divided, and called it atomos , the "Unzer cutable. Two millennia later, turned out experimentally : So unzerschneidbar the atoms were not: they had a core and a shell. The core of "collapsed" and continue into protons and neutrons, these later in quarks. But now you've found the ultimate, indivisible elementary particles, it was thought. But no, they are now after the string theory of small vibrating "strings" exist, the length is much about the smaller than a speck of dust, as this is smaller than the entire universe . Since these are so tiny, can also be described mathematically only in a room with eleven dimensions, and the man simply can not imagine this, the strings to help with the question of clarity further. As well as general information in quantum physics applies here: the smaller the object, the less his behavior and "appearance" with the common sense to do. We are simply too limited to understand what matter is "really".

If you ask the nihilists, he would say nothing. And he is right - because the atoms are to largely of empty space. Which is located in the center of the nucleus surrounded by electrons, and between them is - a gaping void! After a common size comparison would be a nucleus the size of a pinhead to cover the size of a football field. It is difficult to convince yourself that the hammer with which you have just cut to the thumb, largely consists of nothing, but it is so.

If you ask the pessimists, he might reply: From waste. And that's - bleak worldview provided - not to be dismissed out of hand. For the Big Bang created matter and antimatter - as if everything received a very strange, both would annihilate on contact with each other according to the normal course of events. The universe would hardly emerged spectacularly dissolve in a sea of light. For some mysterious reason it was accidental but a bit more matter than antimatter . The fireworks burnt up so not complete, there remained a few remnants, fragments and clumps, which has since haunted the room. This residual item now form the visible universe. Cosmic waste, unused ammunition for the party at the beginning of the luminous being.

And so would Kant's question after the "thing in itself", two centuries later does not really become smarter than before. And since you are a nobody in the full sense of that word figuratively can not imagine anyway (because as we also need to think away themselves, the viewer), it is the matter, whatever "is" on you, only as necessary to be grateful. Unless you get flat skin with the hammer thumb.

Calves Hurt From Skiing

Criminal Law and free will

We have already worked in a different place with the question of whether humans have free will. The result was that, regardless of how the "free will" means that man in any case under very specific conditions of each case - that his life story, his Experience, which he classified as important decision criteria, his present mood, etc. - can decide on only one way. Rewind back to the time 100 times and lets the people make the decision again, he will get the same result every time.

The question that arises then is: What do we actually punish the criminals? We have charged them each time that is before (legal category of personal " debt") that they have consciously decided against the law and the injustice and committed the crime. Should we rethink about the whole criminal law? Imagine a courtroom and the following dialogue between Defender and prosecutor before:

Attorney : According to the results of the investigation it is clear that you have stolen the Mona Lisa! Behind bars with you!

defender :
Not so hasty! My client has indeed confessed his crime. I still apply for acquittal! What do you wonder why at first glance, when you look closely and think about absolutely sincere and keen. For you see, my client was at the moment so not do otherwise, as the "Mona Lisa" to steal. As there is a "free", not hanging in the air will have, was the decision of my clients is an unavoidable product of numerous factors, the different can not be, but all are of equal weight for his decision! The specific electrical currents in his brain at the moment of decision for the theft were the result of his difficult childhood, his desperate financial situation, but even the mere fact of his birth, the birth of his mother and grandmother and millions of other small or large causes. Ultimately, his theft have necessarily caused the Renaissance, the extinction of the dinosaurs and the big bang. All of these events and circumstances linked an uninterrupted chain of causes that has tragically ended up in the slump in the Louvre. But he was nothing for it! The electrical impulses in his brain, although the last link in the chain of causes, but it is a random element picked out by another million. Punish but his mother that she was born, or Leonardo da Vinci, he painted the first picture! The fact that you, Judge, not now stand in its place, you owe only the happy coincidence that this endless chain of causation has not brought you to the crooks in the gutter, but on the tribunal. Do you want to punish my client really just for being in the lottery of the blind causality happens to be unlucky?

Attorney :
But Mr. defenders hesitate, but the time the consequences! First, there is no compelling If the conclusion from being . That man is not free in its decisions, may be a scientific fact. However, the consequences for our sense of justice, our value system, by which happen to be punishment of offenders, once nothing. In our society we have namely the subjective and inter-subjective idea that man is acting as autonomous beings ultimate author of his deeds, and not the extinction of the dinosaurs. This social consensus is like a menu in a restaurant: if there a free and a paid dining there, and the fee-based option, you can not tell the waiter, the cashier, too, you had it is compulsively decided and therefore not want to pay. So happens to be the rules of the game, Mr. defender. And secondly, keep in mind - if we can not punish someone for his guilt, we can also praise anyone for his services! The result of your view would accept a callous world of humanoid machines where you deny the existence of people, and their actions is as good or bad weather would have. Our identity as a human being is at stake here! Shakespeare and Beethoven were just machines? And guess what, your "knowledge" would talk about - the loss would be the result of any responsibility, and each could with the words "I could not help" save the impunity.

defender :
I ask not of outright sanctions freedom for the accused - I argue for a paradigm shift in criminal law. You, Mr. Attorney complain, not even an apple falling from a tree on your head - you are either wary of first place, or take any appropriate measures to ensure that nothing like this was repeated. And we must also deal with people - prevention above all else - or improvement of the offender. Only with the nonsense about "guilt" and "punishment" we should stop. There is increasing evidence so That even serious crime often has a clear biological catalysts - such as genetic defects or serotonin deficiency. We should start as well. And - yes, our mission should be reconsidered as a man - but it's just the lobes, for the children's education and artistic achievements nor acceptable to play your "party game" with the acceptance of personal responsibility, the fun does but at least then, if you a man for years of his life behind bars, lock and pretend that the problem was solved!

The age-old illusion is over, Mr. Prosecutor.

Lash Extensions Fredericton

a model kit for the world

It is in some ways like the ideal of the great romantic love: They are always looking for, but you will not, but at best rough approximations. Often you find yourself starting with what you have, and yet she hangs like a semi-transparent mirage for many generations before us, and we continually seek, for they and the search for it enriches our lives and gives it a hint of a meaning. Many people have gone crazy because of them, committed suicide or were killed. However, it is not a femme fatale, not even a person, it is - the truth.

The urge to understand the world and find out how it works is that people immanent - the earliest age, we crawl around curiously and suck everything in us that makes us understand our environment. The deeper understanding of the world is the evolutionary advantage of us, who are neither particularly fast nor particularly strong, or shipped, has allowed to survive. On the other hand, philosophers early have recognized that we will understand the truth about the world as it is "in reality," never to end.

the one hand, we rely on detection of the things on our feelings. We see not really what "is" an object, but only a construct of our brain because of the sensory stimuli. Let's take for example a red apple, we must be aware that the apple does not really red "is" - we see only red because our brain from the retina to the incoming data on electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of about 640 nm - 780 nm interpreted as red. The joke is that a red apple is actually anything, not just red - the red wavelengths are indeed the apple just thrown back (and get in our eyes). As the same wavelength is interpreted by a rabbit or a Martian, and whether their concept of "red" corresponds with ours, we do not know - but both are expected in each case a quite different model to build the "truth" about the red apple.

intellectually Also, our knowledge Limits - we humans are simply not smart enough to know "the truth" about the world. Even if, in view of us brought forth by supercomputers or Mars rovers first sounds stupid - the way the world is certainly too complicated for us. Or you can prove to me that we all are not just figures in a giant computer simulation known to our laws of nature, as we know it works? What can we do - and what is the role of science - is to us as in the perception of the red apple to construct a model that fits reality. It does not address, is said, but fit, not contradicts it. A police dog will never understand why he was trained to sniff out drugs in luggage compartments, but it is clear to him - if he does it, there's a treat and some tender loving care by the master. It penetrates the complexity of the world, but he learns to deal with it, so is he good. And in this position, we are ultimately human. The laws of nature, we discover, are nothing more than the law of the dog that there is a drug discovery Chappi a pound.

truth is always subjective, navigating a guide to the world with which we through the maze of being. It does not matter whether someone with a better knowledge (other advanced civilization etc.) has overtaken our model - as long as it works, it is our "truth." A good example is the placebo . If the model in our mind gives us an improvement - it will just be so, then this is our personal truth about the "reality" - even though we have "objectively" just a piece of white sugar eaten in tablet form. In a famous experiment "thought" birds that if they make a certain movement, the machine in her cage donated them food - in fact the machines were their dances matter, but they were tired at the end anyway. Its truth was so different from those of researchers who the weird contortions of the birds laughed, but both views were equal. And therefore, the theory of relativity "objective" might describe a very different way the world than we think - as long as it works, it is our useful placebo, our "truth" that we now do not even know better. But still looking

be constantly on.