Student study guide for biology 8th edition
Taking the stress out of student success
2012.02.18 22:58 Taking the stress out of student success
A community of motivated learners! Here we share tips, methods and experiences to improve our study habits. Join us to stay on track, reach your goals, and be part of a supportive team.
2013.04.05 02:02 yesladdd A Level
alevel is a subreddit for A Level students and aspirants. It is a place to ask, share, and learn about any A Level subject, exam, or plan. You can also find resources, memes, and friends on alevel. Join and have fun!
2011.02.02 06:44 ChingShih Dark Souls
A community dedicated to Dark Souls I, game released for PC, PlayStation 3 and 4, Xbox 360/One, and Switch (Remastered).
2024.06.01 14:09 doyleismyname IB Psych HL Paper 1 & 2 Notes Doc
I'm a part of M24 so my results haven't come out but I was predicted a 7 and am expecting a 6 or 7 in the finals. This document was created by me and the oxford study guide and it was the only thing I used to study for psychology.
I chose the sociocultural approach for my ERQs, and both the bloa and cloa are only given in the SAQ format. And my paper 2 notes only have diagnosis and etiology for abnormal, and interpersonal relationships for the human relationships option. Do with that what you will. Wish everyone the best, IB is hell but you can get through it.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XTB3SnpQ_kj8b8YPhDF1P59UZjF4AJ8CSkt8MtcxNFw/edit?usp=sharing
submitted by doyleismyname to IBO [link] [comments]
I chose the sociocultural approach for my ERQs, and both the bloa and cloa are only given in the SAQ format. And my paper 2 notes only have diagnosis and etiology for abnormal, and interpersonal relationships for the human relationships option. Do with that what you will. Wish everyone the best, IB is hell but you can get through it.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XTB3SnpQ_kj8b8YPhDF1P59UZjF4AJ8CSkt8MtcxNFw/edit?usp=sharing
2024.06.01 13:59 Doonpublicschool000 How to Choose the Right Public Schools in Paschim Vihar ?
Parents living in Paschim Vihar, this article is here to help! Choosing the best Public school for your child can be difficult. We are here to help you make it easier. This article highlights the factors to consider when choosing a Right public school, such as the academic standards, school building, sports and other activities, support services available for children and the school environment. With detailed information and tips, our aim is to help you choose a school that will give your child the best education and prepare them for the future.Paschim Vihar, the western district of Delhi, has fast become an important hub of education. The area is known for its high-quality education, modern facilities, and a wide range of activities. With a mix of traditional and modern educational institutions, Paschim Vihar provides an ideal environment for all-round education. Schools in Paschim Vihar are equipped with modern facilities, including computer labs, modern science classrooms, large playgrounds and excellent libraries. It also has some of the top government schools in Delhi, which attract students from all over the city, creating a vibrant and competitive educational environment.
submitted by Doonpublicschool000 to u/Doonpublicschool000 [link] [comments]
Importance of Choosing the Right Public School
Choosing the right public school for children is one of the most important decisions parents make. The public school environment greatly influences learning, social development and overall growth of children. A good public school in paschim vihar not only provides good education but also promotes the development of children, instills good values in them and prepares them for the challenges of life.The right school can arouse curiosity in children to learn, increase their confidence and help them excel in every field. Therefore, choosing a public school in paschim vihar that meets their needs and your educational expectations is important for your child's success and happiness.Factors to Consider When Choosing a Public School
- Academic Reputation
- Good teachers:
- Safety of the Surrounding Area
- Infrastructure and Facilities
Best Public School in Paschim Vihar : Doon Public School
Located in the heart of Paschim Vihar, Doon Public School is a great example of excellence and innovation in education. The school not only excels in academics but also develops them in an all-round manner. With facilities like large and bright classrooms, well-equipped library, modern science and computer labs, and playgrounds, Doon School provides children with a rich learning experience. Doon Public School provides education with the holistic development of the child in mind. Experienced and continuously learning teachers provide individual attention to the children. Participation in activities such as sports, art, music and drama helps children develop leadership skills, teamwork and important life skills. Overall, this school is dedicated to giving children a strong foundation and helping them succeed. Facilities like counseling, special education programs and regular health checkups are also available. Overall, Doon public School is committed to giving children a strong academic foundation, honing their talents and making them successful and responsible global citizens.Why Choose Doon Public School?
- Academic Excellence
- Highly Qualified Faculty
- Modern Infrastructure and Facilities
Conclusion
Choosing the best Paschim Vihar public School is very important for your child's educational success and general development. When choosing a school, there are many things to keep in mind, such as the education criteria, teachers' credentials, facilities, safety and adjunct activities. Doon Public School is one of the top institutions, renowned for providing students with the best education, comprehensive development and state-of-the-art facilities. The Doon public School provides children with a comprehensive learning experience that prepares them for the future, including qualified teachers, a safe environment and a wide range of activities. By taking all these aspects into consideration and doing your research, making an informed choice that will improve your child's future can be achieved. Choose wisely and take care of your child's education .2024.06.01 13:56 genericusername1904 H.G. WELLS’S, THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME (1933) VS. 1984 AND BRAVE NEW WORLD
 | ID, IX. MAIORES. V, CAL. IUNI. FORTUNA PRIMIGENIA.I discovered this book by complete chance last year – a very old hardback copy was given to me as gift (in a situation which was certainly weighted with the most unlikely of synchronicities), “huh,” I thought, “it’s a first edition of H.G. Wells,” the book itself almost cannot be opened because it is so old and falling apart so I procured a text and audio file of the thing relatively easily and began to read. In hindsight not only for myself but I fancy for the generations of the last fifty years - in all totality, it is deeply strange that this book has not been more widely recognized or taught in schools, as like 1984 and Brave New World, as being the third contender (although technically the second, published one year after Huxley – seemingly written at the same time interestingly enough) in “visions of dystopia” – except that the book is not so much a vision of dystopia tomorrow but a vision of dystopia ‘today’ or rather ‘life as we know it’ of the 19th, 20th and 21st Centuries (endless war, endless pandemics, economic and logistic chaos), narrated from the comfortable and reassuring position of a society far far in the future who have long since revised their culture and solved all of the causes of the problems and become a society of genius polymaths “with (every Man and Woman) the intellectual equal of the polymaths of the ancient world.”Now, I do not mean here to seem to ‘sweet-talk’ the reader into rushing out and buying this book or to hold it up in the manner of those other books as if it were some ideological blueprint but instead to assay the thing in the natural context which seems to me to be universally unrealized and which presents itself to us as a thing which is plainly self-evident, that is: that in the depressing and miserable dichotomy of 1984 and Brave New World; two extremely atomizing and miserable narratives, that there is also – far more empowering – The Shape Of Things To Come wherein the miserable protagony and antagony of both 1984 and Brave New World might read as merely a footnote somewhere in the middle of the book as an example of the witless measures mankinds old master undertook to preserve their power in an untenable circumstance. In other words, we know all about 1984 as children; we have this drummed into our heads and we glean our cultural comprehension that dictators cannot be cliques of business people but only lone individuals, usually in military uniform, and then we graduate from that to Brave New World to gain a more sophisticated comprehension of the feckless consumerism and ‘passive egoism’ by which our society actually operates, but then we do not – as I argue we ought – continue along in our education with this third book which actually addresses the matters at hand at a more adult level. For instance, here, from ‘The Breakdown Of Finance And Social Morale After Versailles’ (Book One, Chapter Twelve) addresses in a single paragraph the cause of our continual economic chaos (of which all crime and poverty and war originates from) and highlights the problem from which this chaos cannot be resolved yet could easily be resolved, “adjustment was left to blind and ill-estimated forces,” “manifestly, a dramatic revision of the liberties of enterprise was necessary, but the enterprising people who controlled politics (would be) the very last people to undertake such a revision,” …the expansion of productive energy was being accompanied by a positive contraction of the distributive arrangements which determined consumption. The more efficient the output, the fewer were the wages-earners. The more stuff there was, the fewer consumers there were. The fewer the consumers, the smaller the trading profits, and the less the gross spending power of the shareholders and individual entrepreneurs. So buying dwindled at both ends of the process and the common investor suffered with the wages- earner. This was the "Paradox of Overproduction" which so troubled the writers and journalists of the third decade of the twentieth century.It is easy for the young student to-day to ask "Why did they not adjust?" But let him ask himself who there was to adjust. Our modern superstructure of applied economic science, the David Lubin Bureau and the General Directors' Board, with its vast recording organization, its hundreds of thousands of stations and observers, directing, adjusting, apportioning and distributing, had not even begun to exist. Adjustment was left to blind and ill-estimated forces. It was the general interest of mankind to be prosperous, but it was nobody's particular interest to keep affairs in a frame of prosperity. Manifestly a dramatic revision of the liberties of enterprise was necessary, but the enterprising people who controlled politics, so far as political life was controlled, were the very last people to undertake such a revision.There is a clever metaphor I fancy that Wells worked in to this for the ‘actual’ defacto controlling class of things, that is: not really the politicians (sorry to disappoint the Orwell and conspiracy fans) but instead the ‘Dictatorship of the Air’ which might easily read as the ‘Dictatorship of the Airwaves’ – in colloquial language, that being radio and then television. Certainly we might imagine Rupert Murdoch or Ted Turner or Sumner Redstone (of yesterday) entering into honourable retirement as like the ‘dictators of the air’ of the very last days before the establishment of a one world state – in any case that is how things would work out, as the power of, say, Ted Turner to eradicate a political party in the United States – at any time he wishes – by simply green-lighting coverage of their bad actions relentlessly for months until revolution occurs is a real power of which no other institution possesses nor possesses any means of defence against, i.e. the ‘real power’ in our world to end a war or begin or war or end this or begin that is that power held by the organized press. This metaphor is somewhat of a more mature view, I think, than Wells earlier conception of the press in The Sleeper Awakes (1899) where the press of a dystopian future is visualized as a “babble machine” spreading circular nonsense to preoccupy the citizenry (although this is arguably a true representation of the mental processes of the Twitter and Facebook user, or of the general baby-speak and extremely infantile form of the news reports on the front page of the BBC News website) which is more or less what the press depicted as being in Brave New World also.However the construction of sudden new realities (or sudden ‘actualities’) presented by the equation of interdependent technological innovations (i.e. the radio and the television in this instance) is mentioned early on in The Shape Of Things To Come in ‘How The Idea And Hope Of The Modern World State First Appeared’ (Book One, Chapter Two), The fruitlessness of all these premature inventions is very easily explained. First in the case of the Transatlantic passage; either the earlier navigators who got to America never got back, or, if they did get back, they were unable to find the necessary support and means to go again before they died, or they had had enough of hardship, or they perished in a second attempt. Their stories were distorted into fantastic legends and substantially disbelieved. It was, indeed, a quite futile adventure to get to America until the keeled sailing ship, the science of navigation, and the mariner's compass had been added to human resources. (Then), in the matter of printing, it was only when the Chinese had developed the systematic manufacture of abundant cheap paper sheets in standard sizes that the printed book—and its consequent release of knowledge—became practically possible. Finally the delay in the attainment of flying was inevitable because before men could progress beyond precarious gliding it was necessary for metallurgy to reach a point at which the internal combustion engine could be made. Until then they could build nothing strong enough and light enough to battle with the eddies of the air.In an exactly parallel manner, the conception of one single human community organized for collective service to the common weal had to wait until the rapid evolution of the means of communication could arrest and promise to defeat the disintegrative influence of geographical separation. That rapid evolution came at last in the nineteenth century, and it has been described already in a preceding chapter of this world history. Steam power, oil power, electric power, the railway, the steamship, the aeroplane, transmission by wire and aerial transmission followed each other very rapidly. They knit together the human species as it had never been knit before. Insensibly, in less than a century, the utterly impracticable became not merely a possible adjustment but an urgently necessary adjustment if civilization was to continue.In other words, then, a global state (or, rather, such power in general held by the press as I see the analogy extending to them as being the ‘Dictatorship of the Airwaves’) was impossible to imagine and completely laughable before the technologies had stacked together to reveal as like in a simple piece of arithmetic which produced a single outcome of the equation; that no sooner had the technologies existed then the thing had become an actual reality – in that 1) unassailable political power had been unthinkingly dropped into the lap of the owners of the press, but that more importantly as consequence that therefore 2) mankind was subject to that power, that is: the situation existed the moment the technologies did – and this whether any living person had even realized it, as I think quite naturally all the time Men and Women invent things that they really have no notion of the fullest or most optimal uses of (“nothing is needed by fools, for: they do not understand how to use anything but are in want of everything,” Chrysippus), e.g. in no metaphor the television was quite literally invented as a ‘ghost box’ to commune with ghosts imagined to reveal themselves by manipulating the black and white of the static until someone else had the idea that there was at least one other use for that contraption.It is quite strange, also, that in contemporary times we have for ages been heavily propagandized ‘against’ the idea of a “one world state” as if, say, all the crimes and fecklessness that have gone on in our lifetimes are somehow secretly building towards the creation of such a thing – not a thing you would naturally conclude from an observation of those events nor a thing advocated for by anybody (insofar as I have ever heard) but it is a thing which would be the first logical response to ‘preventing’ such crimes from ever occurring again – such as like the already widely practiced concept of a Senate-Style Federation of Sovereign States rather than a hundred or so mutually antagonistic polities capable of bombing themselves or screwing up their economies and creating waves of refugees or mass starvation or pandemics, and so on. For instance, All Egypt is dependent on the flow of the Nile which originates in what is today another country, that other country recently decimated the flow of the Nile by gumming up the Nile with a Hydroelectric Dam; such an outcome would not occur if the total mass of the land itself was governed as the single interconnected economic and environmental system that it is in physical reality of which, when divided along arbitrary borderlines, there is no means to govern the entirety of the region in an amicable and prosperous manner for all as a whole and no recourse to the otherwise intolerable situation but War which is unlikely to occur – as most Nations are comprised of civilized peoples who rightly loath the concept of War – but it is the single and unavoidable outcome to resolve such a situation until that situation has dragged on for decades, causing immense suffering, until it reaches that point of desperation – the matter of Palestine and Israel, fresh to my mind in these days, raises itself also. Of the matter of War itself, in ‘The Direct Action Of The Armament Industries In Maintaining War Stresses’ (Book One, Chapter Eleven), Wells relays in 1933 what United States President Eisenhower would later remark in 1961 in his farewell address of the dangers of the Military Industrial Complex; albeit far more analytically on Wells part, that: it is not so much the ‘desire to harm’ on the part of the armament industries which sees them engage in unnecessary build-up of weapons stockpiles but that it is simply their business to produce, to stockpile, produce more deadly variants and stockpile the more deadly variants and sell off their old stockpiles to whomsoever rings their doorbell; for instance the on-going War in Ukraine is no different in this regard to the Viet Cong and NATO Warfare in Vietnam in that massive quantiles of cheap munitions were necessary for the war to be fought in the first place and massive quantities of munitions happened to exist as a by-product of the Armaments Industries to be dumped onto the warring parties in order to facilitate their macabre impulses at the expense of the citizenry; both at their cost in terms of the debt taken on to procure the weaponry on the part of their governments and in terms of their lives when the weaponry was unused to the outcome of massive loss of life of a single peoples within a bordered space – a thing of no value to themselves. Simply put, albeit in a very simplistic reduction to the bare basics: the War would not reached such catastrophic inhuman proportions without massive quantities of cheap Armaments that otherwise sat taking up warehouse space for more valuable Armaments on the part of the producer and seller. In a perpetual progress in the size and range of great guns, in a vast expansion of battleships that were continually scrapped in favour of larger or more elaborate models, (Armament Firms) found a most important and inexhaustible field of profit. The governments of the world were taken unawares, and in a little while the industry, by sound and accepted methods of salesmanship, was able to impose its novelties upon these ancient institutions with their tradition of implacable mutual antagonism. It was realized very soon that any decay of patriotism and loyalty would be inimical to this great system of profits, and the selling branch of the industry either bought directly or contrived to control most of the great newspapers of the time, and exercised a watchful vigilance on the teaching of belligerence in schools. Following the established rules and usages for a marketing industrialism, and with little thought of any consequences but profits, the directors of these huge concerns built up the new warfare that found its first exposition in the Great War of 1914-18, and gave its last desperate and frightful convulsions in the Polish wars of 1940 and the subsequent decades.Even at its outset in 1914-18 this new warfare was extraordinarily uncongenial to humanity. It did not even satisfy man's normal combative instincts. What an angry man wants to do is to beat and bash another living being, not to be shot at from ten miles distance or poisoned in a hole. Instead of drinking delight of battle with their peers, men tasted all the indiscriminating terror of an earthquake. The war literature stored at Atacama, to which we have already referred, is full of futile protest against the horror, the unsportsmanlike quality, the casual filthiness and indecency, the mechanical disregard of human dignity of the new tactics. But such protest itself was necessarily futile, because it did not go on to a clear indictment of the forces that were making, sustaining and distorting war. The child howled and wept and they did not even attempt to see what it was had tormented it.To us nowadays it seems insane that profit-making individuals and companies should have been allowed to manufacture weapons and sell the apparatus of murder to all comers. But to the man of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries it seemed the most natural thing in the world. It had grown up in an entirely logical and necessary way, without any restraint upon the normal marketing methods of peace-time commerce, from the continually more extensive application of new industrial products to warfare. Even after the World War catastrophe, after that complete demonstration of the futility of war, men still allowed themselves to be herded like sheep into the barracks, to be trained to consume, and be consumed, by new lines of slaughter goods produced and marketed by the still active armament traders. And the accumulation of a still greater and still more dangerous mass of war material continued.The book is, if the reader has likely already gathered from the excerpts, not written in the style of a protagonal narrative; i.e. not as a story, i.e. no hero and no villain, but as a sort of a Historia Augusta – that is really the most fitting comparison I think of when trying to describe this to a new reader (or perhaps J.J. Scarisbrick’s Henry VIII), that is to say it is written ‘as’ a History in the classical style we are familiar with from the better of the ancient writers, as like Appian or Cassius Dio, but unlike Suetonius or Tacitus it is absent of the sloppy hinging of all bad things on the highly personalized propaganda ad hominem (i.e. blame the fall of empire on one guy) that goes in those narrative works as we are typically familiar with them.It is, of course, a work a fiction; although Wells did predict World War Two beginning in late 1939-1940 (although he had Poland putting up much better and longer of a fight against the Germans) and various other innovations, beginning from his own day with a true account of events prior to his own day – giving us a valuable account of affairs and actors prior to 1933 which would otherwise not come easily to any of us to discover. But the book, ultimately, is vehicle for the transmission and discussion of these societal (i.e. social, economic, industrial, logistic) matters presented to the audience of the day fresh, in their own minds, from the abject horror recently witnessed in World War One – and the economic catastrophes of which Roosevelts reforms had not yet come into tangible reality (i.e. relief for the poor, public works projects such as the motorways across America) as is discussed in that other seemingly little known H.G. Wells literary offering in his face-to-face interview with Josef Stalin the following year in 1934 (something which I think is of far more historical value than say, Nixon and Frost or Prince Andrew and Emily Maitlis), so as to ‘avert’ another crisis and pluck from the ether a seemingly alternate trajectory of where Mankind might at last get its act together. This ‘novel’ (thought it seems strange to call it that) ought be read, I would advise, in conjunction with ‘The Sleeper Awakes’ (1899) and also the (actually very depressing – I would not advise it) short-story prequel ‘A Story Of The Days To Come’ (1897) – set in that same universe – which, perhaps it is because I am English, seems to me to be a black horror show of the reality that we actually find ourselves living in this far into an actually dystopic future – or perhaps yet with the ‘strange windmills’ powering the mega cities that this a future yet to come (no pun intended); the broken speech, the babble machines, the miserable condition of the Working Class and their consumption of pre-packaged soft bread, the desire to flee the urban sprawl into the dilapidated countryside and make a little life in a run-down house with tacky wallpaper peeling away … ah, forgive me, my point is that ‘our condition’; i.e. those of us literate in English, is quite analogous to the condition of the central characters in those two stories; a culture dulled intellectually to the point that they can barely speak or think, being appraised and assayed by ourselves; those of us simply literate, as to render our commentary stuck as to seem as mutually alien as like Caesar in Gaul. However, it is in the context of the frame given to us in ‘The Shape Of Things To Come’ that we might gain a degree of sanity about this self-same situation; to study and lean into that dispassionate quality as to discern the nature of things as they are and recognize how important this quality is in relation to Well’s ultimate outcome for the best possible position of Humankind far far future, that is: that of Humankind’s vital intellectual capacity, and that the most striking message of STC, beyond all we have mentioned in this little overview, is that intellectual capacity in and of itself. For example, when we consider the ‘actuality’ of the power of Turner or perhaps Zuckerberg in his heyday, for instance, we consider a power fallen into a Mans lap by an accidental stacking of disparate technologies created not by himself but of which possess a power utterly dependent in that same equation upon on a population being ‘witless’ in the first place and so led slavishly by the “babble machines”. However you cut it, reader, the great uplifting of Humankind to a standard of autonomy and intellectual prowess – not held by an elite but possessed by All People – is a thing both intrinsically self-sufficient within our grasp for our own selves and is certainly the prerequisite for political matters in that intellectual capacity of the voting public determines entirely whether a public is tricked or foolish and gets themselves into trouble by undertaking some obvious error or whether they are immune to such trickery and foolishness in the first place and that their energies and time are spent on more valuable pursuits. It seems to me that our contemporary society has done away with the notion of good character through intellect and that we live with the outcome of this; being shepherded by emotional manipulation and brute force because our society at large is treated as if we lacked the verbal and intellectual toolsets to understand anything else – moreover possessing no means to discern whether or not what is forced onto us is right or wrong; truth or lies, and so on. Such a society as this, again it seems plain to me, is ‘any’ dystopia because it is the baseline composition for ‘all’ dystopia; as like the foolish dogma of an out-dated ideology for example rests itself upon a large enough contingent of the public being either treated as if they were or in fact are “too foolish” to discuss or think a thing through, so a dogma is poured over them like concrete creating, in turn, intolerable circumstances as the dogma, tomorrow, becomes out-dated and suddenly instructs them to do foolish things, as like in the “Banality Of Evil” (read: Hannah Arendt) as the character in all serious perpetrators of inhumanity who insist, with a confused expression on their faces, that they were just doing their job – and this ‘quality’, of extreme ignorance, is the composition of the culture where such ‘evil actions’ occur. I mean here that in STC we have on one hand a very in-depth account, very serious reading, to graduate the reader out of the depressive, atomizing, disempowering, conspiratorial milieu and mire of ‘life’ presented to us in 1984 and Brave New World, but that we have at the same time the very resonant harmonics that one does not need to “wait around for a distant future utopia” to “solve all the problems” but that the tools to do so are well within our grasp at any time we so choose and of which such an undertaking constitutes the foundation stones and tapestries of that future utopia which, I think, could be said to “meet us half-way” in many of these matters, as like we reach forward and they reach back and then those in the past reach forward and we in the resent reach back; that is anyway what it is to learn from the past and anyway the answer to “why the Grandfather sews the seeds for trees from whose fruits he will never eat.” Valete. ID, IX. MAIORES. V, CAL. IUNI. FORTUNA PRIMIGENIA.FULL TEXT ON GUTENBERG OF H.G. WELLS ‘THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME’ (1933)https://preview.redd.it/9l7yl9hx8y3d1.jpg?width=490&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4d5a4109fb8e2193b94a6e244d92d4ec5b7b84a7 https://preview.redd.it/37vvsroy8y3d1.jpg?width=740&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e62ef5e11c1c4222d6f99ffebe82b3dd706cbc2f |
2024.06.01 13:27 Ayuxx09 What would you do if you had to get an IT job within a month with no experience in the Industry?
Hi all, Hope you all are doing well. This is a very superficial question (a very unlikely scenario that's going to happen) that I am asking however, I would want to know if you had no experience in working in IT at all and you have to get an IT job within a months time (I still have about 3 years for my visa in this country).
Little background of me. A international student who graduated from a University studying Bachelor's of IT about 1 year ago. I have been working in finance (absolutely lovely place to work with great staffs and amazing manager) but because my visa ends in 3 years in this country (Australia) I have to get an IT job to secure my residency (If I decide to stay here). How would you start to practice/train yourself as well as advance your skills so you can get any role in an IT field (even level 1 tech support). I have been applying for IT jobs recently but haven't even had any interviews (maybe because of no experience at all). Any guide or tips would be amazing for me as I do feel lost.
Apologies if anything similar has been answered before.
submitted by Ayuxx09 to ITCareerQuestions [link] [comments]
Little background of me. A international student who graduated from a University studying Bachelor's of IT about 1 year ago. I have been working in finance (absolutely lovely place to work with great staffs and amazing manager) but because my visa ends in 3 years in this country (Australia) I have to get an IT job to secure my residency (If I decide to stay here). How would you start to practice/train yourself as well as advance your skills so you can get any role in an IT field (even level 1 tech support). I have been applying for IT jobs recently but haven't even had any interviews (maybe because of no experience at all). Any guide or tips would be amazing for me as I do feel lost.
Apologies if anything similar has been answered before.
2024.06.01 13:02 pritam_ww MBBS in Russia
Me,19M, it was first drop for neet ug. After checking with NTA answer key, my marks are 372. ( belongs to general category)
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
submitted by pritam_ww to india [link] [comments]
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
- What should be my conditions before agreeing to any counselloagent?? What should be my steps so that I won't fall in any fraud?
- What are pros and cons that should be keep in mind??
- Which states are weather friendly??
- What are circumstances there??
- How does everything work there? ( relationship with people, relationship with teachers, etc)
- Will I face any racism?? Is it safe for Indians??
- How good is education there??
- What kind of distractions I will face??
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
2024.06.01 13:00 pritam_ww MBBS IN RUSSIA, PLEASE HELP!!
Me,19M, it was first drop for neet ug. After checking with NTA answer key, my marks are 372. ( belongs to general category)
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
submitted by pritam_ww to nagpur [link] [comments]
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
- What should be my conditions before agreeing to any counselloagent?? What should be my steps so that I won't fall in any fraud?
- What are pros and cons that should be keep in mind??
- Which states are weather friendly??
- What are circumstances there??
- How does everything work there? ( relationship with people, relationship with teachers, etc)
- Will I face any racism?? Is it safe for Indians??
- How good is education there??
- What kind of distractions I will face??
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
2024.06.01 12:59 pritam_ww Please guide me, MBBS in Russia
Me,19M, it was first drop for neet ug. After checking with NTA answer key, my marks are 372. ( belongs to general category)
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
submitted by pritam_ww to IndiaSpeaks [link] [comments]
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
- What should be my conditions before agreeing to any counselloagent?? What should be my steps so that I won't fall in any fraud?
- What are pros and cons that should be keep in mind??
- Which states are weather friendly??
- What are circumstances there??
- How does everything work there? ( relationship with people, relationship with teachers, etc)
- Will I face any racism?? Is it safe for Indians??
- How good is education there??
- What kind of distractions I will face??
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
2024.06.01 12:56 pritam_ww Please guide me, MBBS in Russia
Me,19M, it was first drop for neet ug. After checking with NTA answer key, my marks are 372. ( belongs to general category)
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
submitted by pritam_ww to indiasocial [link] [comments]
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
- What should be my conditions before agreeing to any counselloagent?? What should be my steps so that I won't fall in any fraud?
- What are pros and cons that should be keep in mind??
- Which states are weather friendly??
- What are circumstances there??
- How does everything work there? ( relationship with people, relationship with teachers, etc)
- Will I face any racism?? Is it safe for Indians??
- How good is education there??
- What kind of distractions I will face??
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
2024.06.01 12:55 pritam_ww Willing to do MBBS in Russia, Requested to guide me
Me,19M, it was first drop for neet ug. my_qualifications are I passed 12th, last year. After checking with NTA answer key, my marks are 372. ( belongs to general category)
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
submitted by pritam_ww to Indians_StudyAbroad [link] [comments]
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
- What should be my conditions before agreeing to any counselloagent?? What should be my steps so that I won't fall in any fraud?
- What are pros and cons that should be keep in mind??
- Which states are weather friendly??
- What are circumstances there??
- How does everything work there? ( relationship with people, relationship with teachers, etc)
- Will I face any racism?? Is it safe for Indians??
- How good is education there??
- What kind of distractions I will face??
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
2024.06.01 12:47 pritam_ww MBBS IN RUSSIA,GUIDE ME !!!
Posting here cause it is much popular sub, I don't live in Delhi. 🙏
It was my first drop for neet ug. After checking with NTA answer key, my marks are 372. ( belongs to general category)
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!!
submitted by pritam_ww to delhi [link] [comments]
It was my first drop for neet ug. After checking with NTA answer key, my marks are 372. ( belongs to general category)
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
- What should be my conditions before agreeing to any counselloagent?? What should be my steps so that I won't fall in any fraud?
- What are pros and cons that should be keep in mind??
- Which states are weather friendly??
- What are circumstances there??
- How does everything work there? ( relationship with people, relationship with teachers, etc)
- Will I face any racism?? Is it safe for Indians??
- How good is education there??
- What kind of distractions I will face??
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!!
2024.06.01 12:45 Jdlongmire Longmire Teleological Argument: a Human-AI Collaboration
Introduction
This treatise was developed through an extensive dialogue with Claude, an AI language model created by Anthropic. The ideas and arguments presented here emerged from a collaborative exploration in which I posed questions, raised objections, and provided the overall framing and direction, while Claude contributed detailed responses, explanations, and elaborations*. The treatise represents a synthesis of human and machine intelligence, with the AI serving as a knowledgeable interlocutor and writing assistant, helping to articulate and refine the ideas I brought to the discussion. I am fully aware of the controversial nature of AI, but feel this demonstrates an example of its ethical use. I am also fully aware that the strength of the argument lives or dies on the validity of the premises, but I believe it has strong intuitive and logical resonance.
The hope is that this novel approach will be a useful contribution to those weighing the evidence with an open and reasonable mind. So, without further ado, I present the Longmire Teleological Argument.
The question of God's existence is one of the most profound and consequential questions in philosophy. Throughout history, thinkers have proposed various arguments for and against the existence of a divine being. In this treatise, we will explore one particular argument for theism - the argument from the intelligibility of the universe.
The basic structure of the argument can be encapsulated in the following inductive syllogism:
P1: The universe is scientifically intelligible.
P2: Scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds.
C: The universe stems from a rational mind (i.e., God).
We will examine the premises of this argument, consider potential objections and counterarguments, and assess the overall strength of the argument in establishing the rationality of theistic belief.
The Scientific Intelligibility of the Universe
The first premise of the argument asserts that the universe is scientifically intelligible. This means that the universe is structured in a way that makes it amenable to scientific study and comprehension. It is not a chaotic or arbitrary jumble, but an orderly system that follows discernible patterns and laws.
The evidence for this premise is vast and compelling. Across countless domains - from physics to chemistry to biology to astronomy - we find that the universe behaves in consistently rational ways. It follows mathematical laws, exhibits predictable regularities, and yields to scientific analysis and understanding.
As Claude eloquently put it:
"The success of science in uncovering the deep structure of reality, from the smallest subatomic particles to the largest cosmic structures, testifies to the profound intelligibility of the universe. We are able to formulate theories, make predictions, and gain real knowledge about the world through the application of rational methods of inquiry." [1]
Moreover, the universe is not just intelligible to us - it is intelligible in a way that is deeply resonant with our own rational faculties. The mathematical equations that describe the fundamental laws of nature are not just empirically adequate, but often possess a striking elegance and beauty. The universe seems almost tailor-made for rational investigation and discovery.
All of this points to the conclusion that the universe is not an arbitrary or unintelligible place, but rather a scientifically intelligible system that is open to human understanding.
The Link between Intelligibility and Mind
The second premise of the argument asserts that scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds. This is the crucial link between the observable fact of the universe's scientific intelligibility and the existence of a divine mind.
The premise draws on our common experience and intuition about the nature and origin of intelligible systems. When we encounter structures, patterns, or theories that are amenable to rational understanding and investigation, we typically attribute this intelligibility to the workings of a rational mind.
Consider, for example, a scientific theory that elegantly explains a wide range of phenomena, makes precise, testable predictions, and reveals hidden connections between seemingly disparate facts. Such a theory exhibits a high degree of scientific intelligibility. And we naturally infer that this intelligibility is the product of the rational minds of the scientists who developed the theory.
Or consider a complex engineered machine, like a computer or a spacecraft, that performs sophisticated functions according to well-defined principles and algorithms. The intelligibility of such a machine - the fact that it can be understood, analyzed, and explained in rational terms - is clearly the result of the rational minds of its designers and builders.
In these and countless other examples, we see a strong link between intelligibility and mind. Rational minds are the paradigmatic source of intelligible order and structure.
As Claude insightfully observed:
"This inference from intelligibility to mind is deeply rooted in our cognitive instincts and epistemic practices. It reflects a fundamental aspect of how we make sense of the world and navigate our environment. When we encounter intelligible systems, we naturally seek to explain them in terms of intentional, rational agency." [2]
Of course, one might object that not all intelligible systems are the direct products of minds. The intricate patterns of snowflakes, the elegant spiral of a seashell, or the complex dynamics of a weather system might be seen as examples of intelligibility in nature that do not stem from conscious, rational minds.
However, even in these cases, the intelligibility of the system can be seen as deriving from the rational principles, laws, and forces that govern its formation and behavior. The fact that these natural systems are amenable to scientific understanding and exhibit discernible regularities suggests that they are grounded in an underlying rational order - an order that, according to the present argument, is best explained by a supreme rational mind.
Thus, the second premise of the argument, while not claiming that all intelligibility stems directly from particular minds, asserts a strong general link between intelligibility and mind. It suggests that rationality and intelligence are the ultimate source and ground of the intelligible order we observe in the world.
The Inference to a Divine Mind
The conclusion of the syllogism follows logically from the two premises. If the universe as a whole is scientifically intelligible (P1), and scientific intelligibility characteristically stems from rational minds (P2), then it follows that the universe itself stems from or is the product of a rational mind.
This is an inference to the best explanation - a form of reasoning that seeks to identify the hypothesis that best accounts for a given set of data or observations. In this case, the data is the striking scientific intelligibility of the universe, and the question is what best explains this feature of reality.
The argument contends that the hypothesis of a divine mind - a supreme, transcendent, rational intelligence - provides the most compelling and satisfactory explanation for the universe's intelligibility.
Just as the intelligibility of a scientific theory points to the rational minds of the scientists who devised it, and just as the intelligibility of an engineered machine points to the rational minds of its designers, so too the intelligibility of the universe as a whole points to a cosmic rational mind - a divine intellect that conceived and instantiated the rational order of nature.
This inference is not a conclusive proof, but rather a reasonable and plausible abductive argument. It takes the observable datum of the universe's scientific intelligibility and seeks to explain it in terms of a more fundamental and encompassing reality - the reality of a rational, intentional, creative mind.
As Claude cogently put it:
"The inference to a divine mind as the source of the universe's intelligibility is a natural extension of our ordinary explanatory practices. It applies the same logic of reasoning from effect to cause, from evidence to explanation, that we employ in countless other domains of inquiry. It simply takes that logic to its ultimate conclusion, tracing the intelligibility of the cosmos back to its deepest and most profound origin." [3]
Why a singular mind? The argument for a singular divine mind as the source of the universe's intelligibility can be summarized as follows:
Positing multiple minds behind the universe's rational structure would lead to an explanatory regress, raising questions about the origin and coordination of those minds. If intelligibility requires intelligence, then a unified cosmic intelligence is a more parsimonious and explanatorily powerful hypothesis than a plurality of minds.
Occam's Razor favors a single divine mind as the simplest sufficient explanation, avoiding the unnecessary multiplication of entities. Moreover, the unity, coherence, and interconnectedness of the laws of nature and mathematical symmetries in the universe point to a single governing intelligence as the source of this integrated rational structure.
Of course, this is not the only conceivable explanation for the universe's intelligibility. Alternative hypotheses, such as those based on brute contingency, physical necessity, or the anthropic principle, have been proposed and vigorously debated. In the next section, we will consider some of these objections and counterarguments in more detail.
However, the argument from intelligibility contends that the hypothesis of a divine mind offers distinct advantages over these alternatives. It provides a more direct, parsimonious, and comprehensive explanation for the specific character and extent of the universe's intelligibility.
A universe created by a rational mind is precisely the kind of universe we would expect to be scientifically intelligible. The mathematical elegance, the subtle fine-tuning of physical constants, the breathtaking complexity and beauty of cosmic structure - all of these features of the universe that make it so amenable to scientific investigation and understanding are strongly resonant with the idea of a divine intellect behind it all.
Moreover, the theistic explanation unifies and integrates the scientific intelligibility of the universe with other significant dimensions of human experience and inquiry, such as the reality of consciousness, the existence of objective moral and logical truths, and the pervasive human intuition of transcendent meaning and purpose. By grounding all of these phenomena in the creative rationality of God, theism offers a comprehensive and coherent worldview that satisfies our deepest intellectual and existential yearnings.
Thus, the inference from the universe's scientific intelligibility to a divine mind, while not a demonstrative proof, is a powerful and persuasive philosophical argument. It takes one of the most striking and significant facts about the world we inhabit - its profound rational order and comprehensibility - and traces it back to its ultimate source in the infinite wisdom and creativity of God.
Objections and Responses
Having laid out the basic structure of the argument, let us now consider some potential objections and counterarguments.
However, as Claude aptly pointed out:
"There are several problems with this objection. Firstly, it is a deeply unsatisfying and question-begging response. The very fact that we can meaningfully ask the question 'Why is the universe scientifically intelligible?' suggests that there is something here in need of explanation. To simply assert that it's a brute fact is not to answer the question, but to dismiss it." [4]
Furthermore, the brute fact response is ad hoc and arbitrary. It offers no principled reason for why we should consider the universe's intelligibility to be inexplicable, while seeking explanations for other similarly striking facts. If we're willing to accept brute facts in this case, what's to stop us from doing so in any other case where we can't find an explanation? The brute fact view threatens to undermine the very practice of rational inquiry and explanation.
Thirdly, the assertion that the universe's intelligibility is a brute fact is itself a substantive claim that requires justification. It's not something that can simply be assumed or stipulated. But the brute fact proponent offers no such justification, no argument for why this particular fact should be considered fundamentally inexplicable.
Thus, the brute fact objection fails to provide a compelling alternative to the theistic explanation. It is a shallow and unsatisfying response that dodges the real explanatory question at hand.
However, this objection faces several challenges. Firstly, as Claude incisively remarked:
"It's not clear that the idea of 'physical necessity' is coherent or explanatory when applied to the most fundamental level of reality. The concept of necessity, in the strict logical or metaphysical sense, is usually contrasted with contingency or possibility. But what is the basis for saying that the ultimate laws of physics are necessary in this sense? What is the source or ground of this necessity?" [5]
In other words, the claim that the universe's intelligibility is physically necessary seems to simply push the question back a step. Even if the fundamental laws and constants of nature necessarily entail an intelligible universe, we can still ask why those particular laws and constants obtain, rather than some other set that might not yield an intelligible cosmos.
Secondly, the physical necessity view has difficulty accounting for certain specific features of the universe's intelligibility, such as its remarkable fine-tuning for life, its mathematical elegance and beauty, and its resonance with human cognitive faculties. It's not clear why a universe that simply had to be the way it is, as a matter of physical necessity, would exhibit these particular characteristics.
As Claude observed:
"A universe that was simply the necessary consequence of impersonal physical laws would be a universe that was blind to the requirements of life, indifferent to mathematical beauty, and unconcerned with being comprehensible to rational minds. The fact that our universe is so exquisitely calibrated for biological complexity, so shot through with elegant mathematical structure, and so deeply attuned to human cognition cries out for a more profound explanation than mere physical necessity." [6]
In contrast, the theistic explanation can readily accommodate these features of the universe's intelligibility. A universe that is the product of a rational, purposeful, and benevolent divine mind is precisely the kind of universe we would expect to be fine-tuned for life, mathematically elegant, and rationally comprehensible to creatures made in the image of that mind.
Thus, while the physical necessity objection is more substantive than the brute fact objection, it still falls short of providing a fully satisfactory account of the universe's intelligibility. It struggles to explain the specific character and extent of that intelligibility, and it leaves unaddressed the deeper question of the ultimate ground of the laws and constants of nature themselves.
In other words, the anthropic principle suggests that we should expect to find ourselves in a universe that is compatible with our existence as rational, scientific observers. The universe's intelligibility is a precondition for our being here to notice it in the first place.
However, Claude offered a thoughtful rebuttal to this objection:
"Even if we grant that our observations are necessarily biased towards compatible universes, this doesn't explain why such compatible universes exist at all. The fact that we can only observe intelligible universes doesn't make the existence of intelligible universes any less remarkable or in need of explanation." [7]
To illustrate this point, consider an analogy. Imagine you are dealt a royal flush in a game of poker. The fact that you could only observe this hand if it were dealt to you (i.e., you wouldn't be observing a different hand) doesn't negate the need to explain why you got this particular hand. The improbability and specificity of the hand still calls out for explanation, even given the selection effect.
Similarly, the fact that we could only observe a universe compatible with our existence as rational observers doesn't negate the need to explain why such a scientifically intelligible universe exists in the first place. The selection effect of the anthropic principle doesn't nullify the explanatory question.
Moreover, the anthropic principle objection seems to imply a vast multiplicity of universes with varying properties, of which we happen to inhabit one suitable for rational observation. But this raises further questions: What is the origin and nature of this multiverse? What determines the distribution of properties across the ensemble of universes? Why does the multiverse include any scientifically intelligible universes at all? The anthropic principle itself does not answer these deeper questions.
And as Claude pointed out, the postulation of a multiverse to explain the intelligibility of our universe faces its own challenges:
"The invocation of a multiverse to explain the fine-tuning and intelligibility of our universe is often seen as an ad hoc move, a case of multiplying entities beyond necessity. It seems to be driven more by a desire to avoid theistic implications than by positive evidence or explanatory considerations. Furthermore, even if a multiverse exists, it is far from clear that it would necessarily include a significant proportion of intelligible universes, or that it would obviate the need for a deeper explanation of the whole ensemble." [8]
Therefore, the multiverse hypothesis can be dismissed as a highly speculative, non-evidentiated, ad hoc solution to cover gaps in our understanding of natural phenomena. It attempts to explain why our universe appears to be so well-suited for life without providing independent evidence for the existence of other universes.
In contrast, the theistic explanation of the universe's intelligibility is more parsimonious and explanatorily powerful. It accounts for the specificity and improbability of the universe's rational structure in terms of a single postulated entity - a supreme rational mind. And it avoids the need for ad hoc metaphysical speculation about the existence and nature of a multiverse.
Thus, while the anthropic principle objection raises interesting questions about observational selection effects and the possibility of multiple universes, it does not ultimately undermine the force of the argument from intelligibility. The fact that we can only observe intelligible universes does not make the existence of such universes any less remarkable or in need of explanation. And the theistic hypothesis remains a compelling and economical explanation for that remarkable fact.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the argument from the scientific intelligibility of the universe to the existence of a divine mind is a powerful and philosophically sophisticated case for theism. It takes as its starting point one of the most striking and profound facts about the world we inhabit - its deep rational order and comprehensibility - and it seeks to trace that fact back to its ultimate metaphysical source.
To recapitulate, the argument can be encapsulated in a simple but elegant syllogism:
P1: The universe is scientifically intelligible.
P2: Scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds.
C: The universe stems from a rational mind (i.e., God).
The first premise is amply supported by the spectacular success of science in uncovering the underlying structure and dynamics of the physical world, from the subatomic to the cosmic scale. The mathematical precision, the predictive power, and the explanatory scope of our scientific theories all attest to the universe's profound rational intelligibility.
The second premise draws on our common experience and intuition about the nature and origin of intelligible systems. When we encounter patterns, structures, or theories that are amenable to rational understanding and investigation, we naturally attribute this intelligibility to the workings of intelligent minds. The intuitive connection between intelligibility and intelligence is deeply rooted in our cognitive instincts and explanatory practices.
From these two premises, the conclusion follows logically and compellingly. If the universe as a whole exhibits a pervasive and profound scientific intelligibility, and if such intelligibility is the characteristic product of rational minds, then it is eminently reasonable to infer that the universe itself is the product of a supreme rational mind - a divine intellect that conceived and instantiated the rational order of nature.
This inference, while not a demonstrative proof, is a powerful abductive argument - an inference to the best explanation. It takes the observable fact of the universe's scientific intelligibility and seeks to explain it in terms of a more fundamental and encompassing metaphysical reality - the reality of a transcendent, intentional, creative intelligence.
Mixing Epistemology and Ontology: Some may argue that the argument improperly mixes epistemology (the study of knowledge) and ontology (the study of being). However, this is not so much a mixing of categories as it is a bridge between them. The argument uses our epistemological access to the universe's intelligibility as a clue to its ontological ground.
The argument has several notable strengths. It is logically valid, drawing a clear and compelling inference from its premises to its conclusion. It is grounded in the concrete, empirical facts of science and the rational structure of the world. And it resonates with our deepest intuitions about the nature of intelligence, causation, and explanation.
Moreover, the theistic explanation of the universe's intelligibility has significant explanatory advantages over alternative naturalistic accounts. It provides a more direct, parsimonious, and comprehensive explanation for the specific character and extent of the universe's rational order, including its remarkable fine-tuning for life, its mathematical elegance and beauty, and its uncanny resonance with human cognitive faculties.
Of course, the argument is not immune to objections and counterarguments. Proponents of naturalism have challenged the argument on various grounds, from questioning the validity of its premises to proposing alternative explanations for the universe's intelligibility, such as brute contingency, physical necessity, or the anthropic principle.
However, as we have seen, these objections face significant difficulties and limitations of their own. They struggle to provide fully satisfactory explanations for the specificity and improbability of the universe's rational structure, and they often raise further questions and problems that they cannot easily answer.
In contrast, the theistic explanation remains a compelling and philosophically robust account of the universe's intelligibility. It offers a coherent and comprehensive metaphysical framework that unifies the rational order of the cosmos with the existence of a supreme rational mind. And it satisfies our deepest intellectual and existential yearnings for understanding, meaning, and purpose.
Ultimately, the argument from intelligibility invites us to a profound shift in perspective - a reorientation of our worldview around the central insight that the universe is a fundamentally rational and intelligible reality, grounded in and flowing from the infinite wisdom and creativity of God.
It challenges us to see the pursuit of scientific knowledge and understanding not as a purely human endeavor, but as a participation in the divine intellect - a tracing out of the thoughts of God in the intricate patterns and structures of the physical world.
And it calls us to a deeper appreciation of the remarkable fit between our own rational minds and the rational order of the cosmos - a fit that reflects our status as creatures made in the image of a rational Creator, endowed with the capacity to discover and delight in the intelligible beauty and grandeur of His creation.
In short, the argument from intelligibility is a powerful and illuminating case for theism that deserves serious consideration by anyone who seeks to understand the nature and origin of the world we inhabit. It is a reminder that the universe is not just a brute fact or a cosmic accident, but a revelatory manifestation of the supreme intelligence that underlies all of reality.
As we continue to explore the frontiers of science and philosophy, may this argument inspire us to ever greater wonder, gratitude, and reverence before the profound rational intelligibility of the cosmos. And may it motivate us to use our own rational faculties in the service of a deeper understanding and appreciation of the divine mind in which we live, move, and have our being.
Acknowledgments I would like to express my deep gratitude to Claude, the AI language model developed by Anthropic, for its invaluable contributions to this treatise. Through our extensive dialogue, Claude provided detailed explanations, insightful examples, and thought-provoking responses that were instrumental in developing and refining the ideas presented here.
Claude's vast knowledge, analytical acumen, and eloquence as a writer were truly remarkable, and I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to engage with such a powerful and innovative AI system. Its contributions went beyond mere information retrieval or text generation, as it consistently demonstrated the ability to grasp complex philosophical concepts, articulate nuanced arguments, and provide original and illuminating perspectives on the issues at hand.
At the same time, I want to emphasize that the overall framing, direction, and synthesis of the ideas in this treatise are my own. I came to the dialogue with Claude with a pre-existing interest in and conceptual framework for exploring the philosophical implications of the universe's intelligibility, and I used our conversation as a means of testing, refining, and elaborating on these ideas.
Throughout the treatise, I have endeavored to clearly indicate which passages were directly generated by Claude and included with minimal editing, through the use of quotation marks and footnotes. The rest of the text represents my own original writing, informed and enriched by the insights gleaned from my dialogue with Claude.
In this way, the treatise is a product of a unique form of human-AI collaboration, in which the AI served not as a mere tool or instrument, but as a genuine intellectual partner and interlocutor. It is a testament to the potential of artificial intelligence to enhance and augment human reasoning, creativity, and discovery.
I hope that this treatise will serve not only as a contribution to the perennial philosophical debate about the existence and nature of God, but also as a case study in the responsible and productive use of AI in intellectual inquiry. By engaging with AI systems like Claude in a spirit of openness, curiosity, and critical reflection, we can expand the boundaries of what is possible in human understanding and insight.
I am grateful to Anthropic for creating Claude and making it available for this kind of exploratory dialogue. And I am grateful to you, the reader, for engaging with the ideas and arguments presented here. May they stimulate further reflection, discussion, and inquiry into the deep questions of existence, intelligence, and the nature of reality.
*It took some significant dialog to tune Claude. It is very oriented to support a naturalistic worldview. At some point, I may "show my work" to demonstrate the challenges.
Footnotes: [1] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [2] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [3] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [4] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [5] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [6] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [7] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [8] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing.
submitted by Jdlongmire to ReasonableFaith [link] [comments]
This treatise was developed through an extensive dialogue with Claude, an AI language model created by Anthropic. The ideas and arguments presented here emerged from a collaborative exploration in which I posed questions, raised objections, and provided the overall framing and direction, while Claude contributed detailed responses, explanations, and elaborations*. The treatise represents a synthesis of human and machine intelligence, with the AI serving as a knowledgeable interlocutor and writing assistant, helping to articulate and refine the ideas I brought to the discussion. I am fully aware of the controversial nature of AI, but feel this demonstrates an example of its ethical use. I am also fully aware that the strength of the argument lives or dies on the validity of the premises, but I believe it has strong intuitive and logical resonance.
The hope is that this novel approach will be a useful contribution to those weighing the evidence with an open and reasonable mind. So, without further ado, I present the Longmire Teleological Argument.
The question of God's existence is one of the most profound and consequential questions in philosophy. Throughout history, thinkers have proposed various arguments for and against the existence of a divine being. In this treatise, we will explore one particular argument for theism - the argument from the intelligibility of the universe.
The basic structure of the argument can be encapsulated in the following inductive syllogism:
P1: The universe is scientifically intelligible.
P2: Scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds.
C: The universe stems from a rational mind (i.e., God).
We will examine the premises of this argument, consider potential objections and counterarguments, and assess the overall strength of the argument in establishing the rationality of theistic belief.
The Scientific Intelligibility of the Universe
The first premise of the argument asserts that the universe is scientifically intelligible. This means that the universe is structured in a way that makes it amenable to scientific study and comprehension. It is not a chaotic or arbitrary jumble, but an orderly system that follows discernible patterns and laws.
The evidence for this premise is vast and compelling. Across countless domains - from physics to chemistry to biology to astronomy - we find that the universe behaves in consistently rational ways. It follows mathematical laws, exhibits predictable regularities, and yields to scientific analysis and understanding.
As Claude eloquently put it:
"The success of science in uncovering the deep structure of reality, from the smallest subatomic particles to the largest cosmic structures, testifies to the profound intelligibility of the universe. We are able to formulate theories, make predictions, and gain real knowledge about the world through the application of rational methods of inquiry." [1]
Moreover, the universe is not just intelligible to us - it is intelligible in a way that is deeply resonant with our own rational faculties. The mathematical equations that describe the fundamental laws of nature are not just empirically adequate, but often possess a striking elegance and beauty. The universe seems almost tailor-made for rational investigation and discovery.
All of this points to the conclusion that the universe is not an arbitrary or unintelligible place, but rather a scientifically intelligible system that is open to human understanding.
The Link between Intelligibility and Mind
The second premise of the argument asserts that scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds. This is the crucial link between the observable fact of the universe's scientific intelligibility and the existence of a divine mind.
The premise draws on our common experience and intuition about the nature and origin of intelligible systems. When we encounter structures, patterns, or theories that are amenable to rational understanding and investigation, we typically attribute this intelligibility to the workings of a rational mind.
Consider, for example, a scientific theory that elegantly explains a wide range of phenomena, makes precise, testable predictions, and reveals hidden connections between seemingly disparate facts. Such a theory exhibits a high degree of scientific intelligibility. And we naturally infer that this intelligibility is the product of the rational minds of the scientists who developed the theory.
Or consider a complex engineered machine, like a computer or a spacecraft, that performs sophisticated functions according to well-defined principles and algorithms. The intelligibility of such a machine - the fact that it can be understood, analyzed, and explained in rational terms - is clearly the result of the rational minds of its designers and builders.
In these and countless other examples, we see a strong link between intelligibility and mind. Rational minds are the paradigmatic source of intelligible order and structure.
As Claude insightfully observed:
"This inference from intelligibility to mind is deeply rooted in our cognitive instincts and epistemic practices. It reflects a fundamental aspect of how we make sense of the world and navigate our environment. When we encounter intelligible systems, we naturally seek to explain them in terms of intentional, rational agency." [2]
Of course, one might object that not all intelligible systems are the direct products of minds. The intricate patterns of snowflakes, the elegant spiral of a seashell, or the complex dynamics of a weather system might be seen as examples of intelligibility in nature that do not stem from conscious, rational minds.
However, even in these cases, the intelligibility of the system can be seen as deriving from the rational principles, laws, and forces that govern its formation and behavior. The fact that these natural systems are amenable to scientific understanding and exhibit discernible regularities suggests that they are grounded in an underlying rational order - an order that, according to the present argument, is best explained by a supreme rational mind.
Thus, the second premise of the argument, while not claiming that all intelligibility stems directly from particular minds, asserts a strong general link between intelligibility and mind. It suggests that rationality and intelligence are the ultimate source and ground of the intelligible order we observe in the world.
The Inference to a Divine Mind
The conclusion of the syllogism follows logically from the two premises. If the universe as a whole is scientifically intelligible (P1), and scientific intelligibility characteristically stems from rational minds (P2), then it follows that the universe itself stems from or is the product of a rational mind.
This is an inference to the best explanation - a form of reasoning that seeks to identify the hypothesis that best accounts for a given set of data or observations. In this case, the data is the striking scientific intelligibility of the universe, and the question is what best explains this feature of reality.
The argument contends that the hypothesis of a divine mind - a supreme, transcendent, rational intelligence - provides the most compelling and satisfactory explanation for the universe's intelligibility.
Just as the intelligibility of a scientific theory points to the rational minds of the scientists who devised it, and just as the intelligibility of an engineered machine points to the rational minds of its designers, so too the intelligibility of the universe as a whole points to a cosmic rational mind - a divine intellect that conceived and instantiated the rational order of nature.
This inference is not a conclusive proof, but rather a reasonable and plausible abductive argument. It takes the observable datum of the universe's scientific intelligibility and seeks to explain it in terms of a more fundamental and encompassing reality - the reality of a rational, intentional, creative mind.
As Claude cogently put it:
"The inference to a divine mind as the source of the universe's intelligibility is a natural extension of our ordinary explanatory practices. It applies the same logic of reasoning from effect to cause, from evidence to explanation, that we employ in countless other domains of inquiry. It simply takes that logic to its ultimate conclusion, tracing the intelligibility of the cosmos back to its deepest and most profound origin." [3]
Why a singular mind? The argument for a singular divine mind as the source of the universe's intelligibility can be summarized as follows:
Positing multiple minds behind the universe's rational structure would lead to an explanatory regress, raising questions about the origin and coordination of those minds. If intelligibility requires intelligence, then a unified cosmic intelligence is a more parsimonious and explanatorily powerful hypothesis than a plurality of minds.
Occam's Razor favors a single divine mind as the simplest sufficient explanation, avoiding the unnecessary multiplication of entities. Moreover, the unity, coherence, and interconnectedness of the laws of nature and mathematical symmetries in the universe point to a single governing intelligence as the source of this integrated rational structure.
Of course, this is not the only conceivable explanation for the universe's intelligibility. Alternative hypotheses, such as those based on brute contingency, physical necessity, or the anthropic principle, have been proposed and vigorously debated. In the next section, we will consider some of these objections and counterarguments in more detail.
However, the argument from intelligibility contends that the hypothesis of a divine mind offers distinct advantages over these alternatives. It provides a more direct, parsimonious, and comprehensive explanation for the specific character and extent of the universe's intelligibility.
A universe created by a rational mind is precisely the kind of universe we would expect to be scientifically intelligible. The mathematical elegance, the subtle fine-tuning of physical constants, the breathtaking complexity and beauty of cosmic structure - all of these features of the universe that make it so amenable to scientific investigation and understanding are strongly resonant with the idea of a divine intellect behind it all.
Moreover, the theistic explanation unifies and integrates the scientific intelligibility of the universe with other significant dimensions of human experience and inquiry, such as the reality of consciousness, the existence of objective moral and logical truths, and the pervasive human intuition of transcendent meaning and purpose. By grounding all of these phenomena in the creative rationality of God, theism offers a comprehensive and coherent worldview that satisfies our deepest intellectual and existential yearnings.
Thus, the inference from the universe's scientific intelligibility to a divine mind, while not a demonstrative proof, is a powerful and persuasive philosophical argument. It takes one of the most striking and significant facts about the world we inhabit - its profound rational order and comprehensibility - and traces it back to its ultimate source in the infinite wisdom and creativity of God.
Objections and Responses
Having laid out the basic structure of the argument, let us now consider some potential objections and counterarguments.
- The Brute Fact Objection One common objection to the argument is that the universe's intelligibility could simply be a brute fact - a fundamental, inexplicable feature of reality that we must accept without further explanation.
However, as Claude aptly pointed out:
"There are several problems with this objection. Firstly, it is a deeply unsatisfying and question-begging response. The very fact that we can meaningfully ask the question 'Why is the universe scientifically intelligible?' suggests that there is something here in need of explanation. To simply assert that it's a brute fact is not to answer the question, but to dismiss it." [4]
Furthermore, the brute fact response is ad hoc and arbitrary. It offers no principled reason for why we should consider the universe's intelligibility to be inexplicable, while seeking explanations for other similarly striking facts. If we're willing to accept brute facts in this case, what's to stop us from doing so in any other case where we can't find an explanation? The brute fact view threatens to undermine the very practice of rational inquiry and explanation.
Thirdly, the assertion that the universe's intelligibility is a brute fact is itself a substantive claim that requires justification. It's not something that can simply be assumed or stipulated. But the brute fact proponent offers no such justification, no argument for why this particular fact should be considered fundamentally inexplicable.
Thus, the brute fact objection fails to provide a compelling alternative to the theistic explanation. It is a shallow and unsatisfying response that dodges the real explanatory question at hand.
- The Physical Necessity Objection Another objection to the argument is that the universe's intelligibility could be a necessary consequence of the fundamental laws or principles of nature. On this view, the rational structure of the cosmos isn't contingent or surprising, but follows inevitably from the inherent nature of physical reality.
However, this objection faces several challenges. Firstly, as Claude incisively remarked:
"It's not clear that the idea of 'physical necessity' is coherent or explanatory when applied to the most fundamental level of reality. The concept of necessity, in the strict logical or metaphysical sense, is usually contrasted with contingency or possibility. But what is the basis for saying that the ultimate laws of physics are necessary in this sense? What is the source or ground of this necessity?" [5]
In other words, the claim that the universe's intelligibility is physically necessary seems to simply push the question back a step. Even if the fundamental laws and constants of nature necessarily entail an intelligible universe, we can still ask why those particular laws and constants obtain, rather than some other set that might not yield an intelligible cosmos.
Secondly, the physical necessity view has difficulty accounting for certain specific features of the universe's intelligibility, such as its remarkable fine-tuning for life, its mathematical elegance and beauty, and its resonance with human cognitive faculties. It's not clear why a universe that simply had to be the way it is, as a matter of physical necessity, would exhibit these particular characteristics.
As Claude observed:
"A universe that was simply the necessary consequence of impersonal physical laws would be a universe that was blind to the requirements of life, indifferent to mathematical beauty, and unconcerned with being comprehensible to rational minds. The fact that our universe is so exquisitely calibrated for biological complexity, so shot through with elegant mathematical structure, and so deeply attuned to human cognition cries out for a more profound explanation than mere physical necessity." [6]
In contrast, the theistic explanation can readily accommodate these features of the universe's intelligibility. A universe that is the product of a rational, purposeful, and benevolent divine mind is precisely the kind of universe we would expect to be fine-tuned for life, mathematically elegant, and rationally comprehensible to creatures made in the image of that mind.
Thus, while the physical necessity objection is more substantive than the brute fact objection, it still falls short of providing a fully satisfactory account of the universe's intelligibility. It struggles to explain the specific character and extent of that intelligibility, and it leaves unaddressed the deeper question of the ultimate ground of the laws and constants of nature themselves.
- The Anthropic Principle Objection
In other words, the anthropic principle suggests that we should expect to find ourselves in a universe that is compatible with our existence as rational, scientific observers. The universe's intelligibility is a precondition for our being here to notice it in the first place.
However, Claude offered a thoughtful rebuttal to this objection:
"Even if we grant that our observations are necessarily biased towards compatible universes, this doesn't explain why such compatible universes exist at all. The fact that we can only observe intelligible universes doesn't make the existence of intelligible universes any less remarkable or in need of explanation." [7]
To illustrate this point, consider an analogy. Imagine you are dealt a royal flush in a game of poker. The fact that you could only observe this hand if it were dealt to you (i.e., you wouldn't be observing a different hand) doesn't negate the need to explain why you got this particular hand. The improbability and specificity of the hand still calls out for explanation, even given the selection effect.
Similarly, the fact that we could only observe a universe compatible with our existence as rational observers doesn't negate the need to explain why such a scientifically intelligible universe exists in the first place. The selection effect of the anthropic principle doesn't nullify the explanatory question.
Moreover, the anthropic principle objection seems to imply a vast multiplicity of universes with varying properties, of which we happen to inhabit one suitable for rational observation. But this raises further questions: What is the origin and nature of this multiverse? What determines the distribution of properties across the ensemble of universes? Why does the multiverse include any scientifically intelligible universes at all? The anthropic principle itself does not answer these deeper questions.
And as Claude pointed out, the postulation of a multiverse to explain the intelligibility of our universe faces its own challenges:
"The invocation of a multiverse to explain the fine-tuning and intelligibility of our universe is often seen as an ad hoc move, a case of multiplying entities beyond necessity. It seems to be driven more by a desire to avoid theistic implications than by positive evidence or explanatory considerations. Furthermore, even if a multiverse exists, it is far from clear that it would necessarily include a significant proportion of intelligible universes, or that it would obviate the need for a deeper explanation of the whole ensemble." [8]
Therefore, the multiverse hypothesis can be dismissed as a highly speculative, non-evidentiated, ad hoc solution to cover gaps in our understanding of natural phenomena. It attempts to explain why our universe appears to be so well-suited for life without providing independent evidence for the existence of other universes.
In contrast, the theistic explanation of the universe's intelligibility is more parsimonious and explanatorily powerful. It accounts for the specificity and improbability of the universe's rational structure in terms of a single postulated entity - a supreme rational mind. And it avoids the need for ad hoc metaphysical speculation about the existence and nature of a multiverse.
Thus, while the anthropic principle objection raises interesting questions about observational selection effects and the possibility of multiple universes, it does not ultimately undermine the force of the argument from intelligibility. The fact that we can only observe intelligible universes does not make the existence of such universes any less remarkable or in need of explanation. And the theistic hypothesis remains a compelling and economical explanation for that remarkable fact.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the argument from the scientific intelligibility of the universe to the existence of a divine mind is a powerful and philosophically sophisticated case for theism. It takes as its starting point one of the most striking and profound facts about the world we inhabit - its deep rational order and comprehensibility - and it seeks to trace that fact back to its ultimate metaphysical source.
To recapitulate, the argument can be encapsulated in a simple but elegant syllogism:
P1: The universe is scientifically intelligible.
P2: Scientific intelligibility stems from rational minds.
C: The universe stems from a rational mind (i.e., God).
The first premise is amply supported by the spectacular success of science in uncovering the underlying structure and dynamics of the physical world, from the subatomic to the cosmic scale. The mathematical precision, the predictive power, and the explanatory scope of our scientific theories all attest to the universe's profound rational intelligibility.
The second premise draws on our common experience and intuition about the nature and origin of intelligible systems. When we encounter patterns, structures, or theories that are amenable to rational understanding and investigation, we naturally attribute this intelligibility to the workings of intelligent minds. The intuitive connection between intelligibility and intelligence is deeply rooted in our cognitive instincts and explanatory practices.
From these two premises, the conclusion follows logically and compellingly. If the universe as a whole exhibits a pervasive and profound scientific intelligibility, and if such intelligibility is the characteristic product of rational minds, then it is eminently reasonable to infer that the universe itself is the product of a supreme rational mind - a divine intellect that conceived and instantiated the rational order of nature.
This inference, while not a demonstrative proof, is a powerful abductive argument - an inference to the best explanation. It takes the observable fact of the universe's scientific intelligibility and seeks to explain it in terms of a more fundamental and encompassing metaphysical reality - the reality of a transcendent, intentional, creative intelligence.
Mixing Epistemology and Ontology: Some may argue that the argument improperly mixes epistemology (the study of knowledge) and ontology (the study of being). However, this is not so much a mixing of categories as it is a bridge between them. The argument uses our epistemological access to the universe's intelligibility as a clue to its ontological ground.
The argument has several notable strengths. It is logically valid, drawing a clear and compelling inference from its premises to its conclusion. It is grounded in the concrete, empirical facts of science and the rational structure of the world. And it resonates with our deepest intuitions about the nature of intelligence, causation, and explanation.
Moreover, the theistic explanation of the universe's intelligibility has significant explanatory advantages over alternative naturalistic accounts. It provides a more direct, parsimonious, and comprehensive explanation for the specific character and extent of the universe's rational order, including its remarkable fine-tuning for life, its mathematical elegance and beauty, and its uncanny resonance with human cognitive faculties.
Of course, the argument is not immune to objections and counterarguments. Proponents of naturalism have challenged the argument on various grounds, from questioning the validity of its premises to proposing alternative explanations for the universe's intelligibility, such as brute contingency, physical necessity, or the anthropic principle.
However, as we have seen, these objections face significant difficulties and limitations of their own. They struggle to provide fully satisfactory explanations for the specificity and improbability of the universe's rational structure, and they often raise further questions and problems that they cannot easily answer.
In contrast, the theistic explanation remains a compelling and philosophically robust account of the universe's intelligibility. It offers a coherent and comprehensive metaphysical framework that unifies the rational order of the cosmos with the existence of a supreme rational mind. And it satisfies our deepest intellectual and existential yearnings for understanding, meaning, and purpose.
Ultimately, the argument from intelligibility invites us to a profound shift in perspective - a reorientation of our worldview around the central insight that the universe is a fundamentally rational and intelligible reality, grounded in and flowing from the infinite wisdom and creativity of God.
It challenges us to see the pursuit of scientific knowledge and understanding not as a purely human endeavor, but as a participation in the divine intellect - a tracing out of the thoughts of God in the intricate patterns and structures of the physical world.
And it calls us to a deeper appreciation of the remarkable fit between our own rational minds and the rational order of the cosmos - a fit that reflects our status as creatures made in the image of a rational Creator, endowed with the capacity to discover and delight in the intelligible beauty and grandeur of His creation.
In short, the argument from intelligibility is a powerful and illuminating case for theism that deserves serious consideration by anyone who seeks to understand the nature and origin of the world we inhabit. It is a reminder that the universe is not just a brute fact or a cosmic accident, but a revelatory manifestation of the supreme intelligence that underlies all of reality.
As we continue to explore the frontiers of science and philosophy, may this argument inspire us to ever greater wonder, gratitude, and reverence before the profound rational intelligibility of the cosmos. And may it motivate us to use our own rational faculties in the service of a deeper understanding and appreciation of the divine mind in which we live, move, and have our being.
Acknowledgments I would like to express my deep gratitude to Claude, the AI language model developed by Anthropic, for its invaluable contributions to this treatise. Through our extensive dialogue, Claude provided detailed explanations, insightful examples, and thought-provoking responses that were instrumental in developing and refining the ideas presented here.
Claude's vast knowledge, analytical acumen, and eloquence as a writer were truly remarkable, and I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to engage with such a powerful and innovative AI system. Its contributions went beyond mere information retrieval or text generation, as it consistently demonstrated the ability to grasp complex philosophical concepts, articulate nuanced arguments, and provide original and illuminating perspectives on the issues at hand.
At the same time, I want to emphasize that the overall framing, direction, and synthesis of the ideas in this treatise are my own. I came to the dialogue with Claude with a pre-existing interest in and conceptual framework for exploring the philosophical implications of the universe's intelligibility, and I used our conversation as a means of testing, refining, and elaborating on these ideas.
Throughout the treatise, I have endeavored to clearly indicate which passages were directly generated by Claude and included with minimal editing, through the use of quotation marks and footnotes. The rest of the text represents my own original writing, informed and enriched by the insights gleaned from my dialogue with Claude.
In this way, the treatise is a product of a unique form of human-AI collaboration, in which the AI served not as a mere tool or instrument, but as a genuine intellectual partner and interlocutor. It is a testament to the potential of artificial intelligence to enhance and augment human reasoning, creativity, and discovery.
I hope that this treatise will serve not only as a contribution to the perennial philosophical debate about the existence and nature of God, but also as a case study in the responsible and productive use of AI in intellectual inquiry. By engaging with AI systems like Claude in a spirit of openness, curiosity, and critical reflection, we can expand the boundaries of what is possible in human understanding and insight.
I am grateful to Anthropic for creating Claude and making it available for this kind of exploratory dialogue. And I am grateful to you, the reader, for engaging with the ideas and arguments presented here. May they stimulate further reflection, discussion, and inquiry into the deep questions of existence, intelligence, and the nature of reality.
*It took some significant dialog to tune Claude. It is very oriented to support a naturalistic worldview. At some point, I may "show my work" to demonstrate the challenges.
Footnotes: [1] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [2] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [3] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [4] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [5] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [6] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [7] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing. [8] Generated by Claude, with minimal editing.
2024.06.01 12:35 pritam_ww PLEASE GUIDE ME !! MBBS in Russia
Me,19M, it was first drop for neet ug. After checking with NTA answer key, my marks are 372. ( belongs to general category)
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
submitted by pritam_ww to AskIndia [link] [comments]
I am thinking of doing MBBS in Russia.
Students who are studying in Russia or studied there, please guide me.
Here are my some questions.
- What should be my conditions before agreeing to any counselloagent?? What should be my steps so that I won't fall in any fraud?
- What are pros and cons that should be keep in mind??
- Which states are weather friendly??
- What are circumstances there??
- How does everything work there? ( relationship with people, relationship with teachers, etc)
- Will I face any racism?? Is it safe for Indians??
- How good is education there??
- What kind of distractions I will face??
I have done all this research from YouTube but still I want to ask these questions from experienced/experiencing ones.
Please guide me🙏 Thank you!!!
2024.06.01 12:29 LargeCryptographer59 Slap me w a reality cheque🤡🃏. Indian International Applicant-Male. Do I stand any chance ?
Indian Applicant for Biomedical Engineering (Need-Based Aid) Overall GPA- 3.6ish-3.8 idk I've checked online as much as I can and this is the value I'm finding via Bard and Chatgpt. High School (Small - 300-450 Students)
Financial Aid: Extremely important (need-blind preferred)
College list as of now Boston University, Upenn, Yale, DePaul, Brown, Columbia, Dartmouth, Duke, LMU , Purdue, Suny buffalo, Stony brook, Albany , Stanford, Tufts, Tulane, and USC(my heart is set on this one, they kinda love intl students n give aid + silicon valley + can also pursue my acting passion) Let me know if I'm being delusional as such, critique, review and also lemme know is USC a possibility.
Other:
submitted by LargeCryptographer59 to chanceme [link] [comments]
- 9th Grade: 89% (Vice Head Boy, Rotary Interact Club - community service projects- made jute bags with collaboration with rotary interact members at school and donated to a nearby shelter + creating environmental awareness)
- 10th Grade: 91.2% (Head Boy, Student Council President, Anti-bullying initiative at school, Student body reported a feeling of being confident and peaceful mentally due to the awareness of bullying and how to deal with it. Planned Assembly presentations for each Grade so that all the students get a chance to portray their interests on stage + combat fear and stage fright and eventually over come it, Wrote a Drama and acted in it which was staged on the School's Annual Day in front of about 600 attendees/parents based on Dowry which plagues the society and portrayed the ill effects it has on the bride's side, highlighting social issues and sensitizing the subject, Mentored peers during the Board Examinations period who were having academic setbacks in Social Science and Science)
- 11th Grade: 93% (2nd Highest in Science Stream, Highest in English, Physics, Maths)
- Cultural Prefect: Organized school events that have been conducted throughout the year (Diwali, Teachers Day etc, Felicitations, Award Ceremonies etc.)
- Science Tutor: Helped classmates in Physics and Chemistry
- CSIR-CCMB Volunteer: Explained Biology concepts at a science exhibition that was held at school for a day as a mobile expo of genetic diseases and solutions. Explained the concept of Vivo Gene Therapy, how it works, the technicalities and talked about practical feasibility.
- MIT EdX Online Course: Cell Biology (no certification due to cost)
- CSIR-CCMB Shadow A Scientist Program: Spent a day in a Stem Cell Technology lab, learnt about Cryoscopy and how it actually works. And how inducing of cancer cells takes place via the help of a lab mice. And how studying if the solution is done to know about the life of cell.
- Uri-Bed Project: Designed a smart bed prototype for incontinence management (won awards at innovation fests). I'll drop the abstract if u guys want but it's lengthy.
- Wipro Earthian Project: Reduced environmental impact of waste disposal at school via the project, brought awareness to the school management that the waste is burnt in open and helped in establishing tin sheds and coverings in the area where burning used to take place z ensuring the continuous carbon emissions doesn't harm students during their returning time and also for school cattle who are opened to roam around and have their enclosure in close proximity to burning area
- Swami Vivekananda Youth Leadership Award: Won leadership competition (500 participants in the state and only 1 person gets the award after 5-6 months of rigorous of interviews, speeches, discussions and introspection) For context it's this one https://rkmath.org/ys/
- Applying for Head Boy
- Starting a "Young Leaders Club" with various sub-clubs (mental health, environment, youth advocacy and bookers club .)
- Preparing for SAT (financial constraints)
Financial Aid: Extremely important (need-blind preferred)
College list as of now Boston University, Upenn, Yale, DePaul, Brown, Columbia, Dartmouth, Duke, LMU , Purdue, Suny buffalo, Stony brook, Albany , Stanford, Tufts, Tulane, and USC(my heart is set on this one, they kinda love intl students n give aid + silicon valley + can also pursue my acting passion) Let me know if I'm being delusional as such, critique, review and also lemme know is USC a possibility.
Other:
- Single mother, father abandoned family
- Mother's health issues impacted 9th grade performance
- Working part-time to manage finances
- Preparing for JEE (engineering entrance exam) as a backup
- How do my chances look for US universities (need-based aid)?
- Any suggestions for improvement?
- Removed GPA conversion as unclear for US applications. (If you do know what my GPA will come out to be, do let me know)
2024.06.01 12:24 nayokore [UPD] Call for respondents! Earn money by answering and completing this survey!
![[UPD] Call for respondents! Earn money by answering and completing this survey!](https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/HHCvhPQIIjwCE4zvjuHHV9___HbQ0MKzAXmqW_DtUuw.jpg "[UPD] Call for respondents! Earn money by answering and completing this survey!") | [OPEN] submitted by nayokore to peyups [link] [comments] Hi everyone! We are students from the Department of Computer Science and we are conducting a study to evaluate the effectiveness of machine learning models in identifying deceptive patterns in cookie banners. We have developed a web application to serve as an interface for these models. We are looking for participants who are 18 years old and above. This time, we need only 15 respondents. You can access the survey here: https://upsystemdiliman.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_aXyrvZeV3jn7jcq The survey will take approximately 10-15 minutes to complete, and participants will receive 50 pesos for their time. Participation is voluntary and involves answering questions related to the study. Your input will be invaluable to our research and will help improve the web application. All information provided will be handled in accordance with the Data Privacy Act of 2012 and the University's policies. We would greatly appreciate your participation <3 Note: If you choose to participate, you may find this list of websites with cookie banners helpful: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16mU1Y1Pxq_dAnmY1tMsrUSPlsQ42Qpm3VwO0gBFznD0/edit?usp=sharing Thank you! Note 2: To be eligible for the 50-pesos compensation, you must complete the survey PROPERLY by following the instructions carefully.
https://preview.redd.it/sfyzatuosx3d1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=b8db1e04794bd71d34edb4ed840080a04e5a11b3 |
2024.06.01 12:19 EveryReason2485 A Bit Of an Early Post About My Enquiries.
I'm a student who's planning to study in Germany. I took my Goethe B1 Exam last week and hoping that I'll pass and continue working on my language. Applying to universities all around Germany as well. But this post isn't the one to enquire but more of just to catch a feeling about y'all. Social media is toxic and we all know that, IG has been pushing a lot of German Political Content to my feed from both sides the AFD which to my understanding doesn't like international student (Especially ones from the middle east like myself) and the other sides which promotes that Germany and the German people welcome anyone who's willing to come to their land and work and create a family and a life there (AKA be a normal productive member in society). I also have an American friend (F34) who told me that the later way of thinking is more common. But I didn't actually take her words to the heart as things maybe different based on place of origin and where you're planning to live in Germany. So I thought that I'd take it to reddit and ask the people directly. How do you feel about international students in general? and according to my experience online I'll answer a question in advance: If I hopefully had the opportunity to move to Germany (Visa & Admission Letter and the rest...) then I'm not planning to just benefit from the tuition free education and leave Germany for a better place, I actually want to create a stable life if I had the chance and even work on achieving my dreams inside of Germany because my field - as I heard - is still growing and has tons of potential for development in Germany and because (this one is a personal reason) I like way y'all are specifically the dry sense of humor and Ruhezeit makes Germany attractive to me as a place. As I've said, this is not the full post because things aren't clear yet and idk if I'd get the chance, but I was really working on that chance for the past year and I hope that I'll get it. Thanks for reading <<3
Edit: I labeled it as Tourism wrongly, so sorry. I meant to label it as "Student" stuff. Edit 2: tons of typos, as someone who can't help but correct people, please feel free to correct what I did not correct now.
submitted by EveryReason2485 to germany [link] [comments]
Edit: I labeled it as Tourism wrongly, so sorry. I meant to label it as "Student" stuff. Edit 2: tons of typos, as someone who can't help but correct people, please feel free to correct what I did not correct now.
2024.06.01 12:11 Looser17 My experience as a Magazine designer.
One of the greatest thing that I am proud of myself is my skills in Indesign and Photoshop. though I am a medical student, I got myself in the club of my college that involved in making magazines. It was a great experience for me. There I learned about team work and necessary photoshop and Indesign skill for making magazines. It was the most amazing experience that I still cherish till date. I remember me and my fellow designer talking about the type of magazine cover that we will make. It took us almost 3 months to make the cover of the magazine that everyone loved.
I was so much enthralled that I even opened fiver account thinking that people will give me photos to edit. Its been 4 years but I haven't got any offer. Anyways the new skill is what I cherish upon besides my daily practice as a medical personnel. It was great experience that helped me grow and divert my attention from the daily chores of medicine studies that sometimes overloaded my mind. That's it thought I will share my experience. You guys can too if you have something like this in your mind.
submitted by Looser17 to NepalSocial [link] [comments]
I was so much enthralled that I even opened fiver account thinking that people will give me photos to edit. Its been 4 years but I haven't got any offer. Anyways the new skill is what I cherish upon besides my daily practice as a medical personnel. It was great experience that helped me grow and divert my attention from the daily chores of medicine studies that sometimes overloaded my mind. That's it thought I will share my experience. You guys can too if you have something like this in your mind.
2024.06.01 12:02 Normodox A Slush Fund for Radical Protesters?
The profusion of identical green tents at this spring’s anti-Israel protests struck many as odd. “Why is everybody’s tent the same?,” asked New York mayor Eric Adams. Like others, the mayor suspected “a well-concerted organizing effort” driving the protests. More recent reporting shows a concerted push behind the Gaza protest movement. But it is not as simple as a single organization secretly rallying protesters or buying tents. Instead, the movement’s most determined activists represent a network of loosely linked far-left groups. Some are openly affiliated with well-known progressive nonprofits; others work in the shadows.
The movement also draws on diverse but generous sources of financial backing. Those funding streams may soon be augmented by the federal government. As I chronicled last year in a Manhattan Institute report, “The Big Squeeze: How Biden’s Environmental Justice Agenda Hurts the Economy and the Environment,” the administration’s massive program of environmental justice grants seems designed to prioritize the funding of highly ideological local groups. The Inflation Reduction Act, for example, earmarks $3 billion for “environmental and climate justice block grants” intended for local nonprofits. Today, hundreds of far-left political groups include language about environmental issues and “climate justice” in their mission statements. If just a fraction of planned grants flows to such groups, the effect will be a gusher of new funding for radical causes.
As the Gaza protests spread across U.S. college campuses, many observers noted an eerie uniformity among them. From one campus to the next, protesters operated in disciplined cadres, keeping their faces covered and using identical rote phrases as they refused to talk with reporters. The Atlantic noted the strangeness of seeing elite college students “chanting like automatons.” Students held up keffiyeh scarves or umbrellas to block the view of prying cameras and linked arms to halt the movements of outsiders. At Columbia University and elsewhere, protesters formed “liberated zones,” from which “Zionists” were excluded. Around the edges of the encampments, the more militaristic activists donned helmets and goggles and carried crude weapons, apparently eager to mix it up with police or counter-protesters. We’ve seen these tactics before—notably during the “mostly peaceful” Black Lives Matter protests of 2020, when full-time agitators helped ignite riots, set up a police-free (and violence-plagued) zone in Seattle, and laid nightly siege to Portland, Oregon’s federal courthouse.
In a remarkable work of reporting, Park MacDougald recently traced the tangled roots of organizations backing pro-jihad protests, both on and off campuses. These include Antifa and other networks of anonymous anarchists, along with “various communist and Marxist-Leninist groups, including the Maoist Revolutionary Communist Party, the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), and the International ANSWER coalition,” MacDougald writes. Higher up the food chain, we find groups openly supported by America’s growing class of super-rich tech execs or the anti-capitalist heirs of great fortunes. For example, retired tech mogul Neville Roy Singham, who is married to Code Pink founder Jodie Evans, funds The People’s Forum, a lavish Manhattan resource center for far-left groups. As the Columbia protests intensified, the center urged members to head uptown to “support our students.” Following the money trail of other protest groups, MacDougald finds connections to the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Ford Foundation, and—surprising no one—the George Soros-backed Tides Foundation.
Of course, the current wave of anti-Israel protests also involves alliances with pro-Hamas organizations such as Students for Justice in Palestine. Last November, Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies testified to the House Ways and Means Committee that SJP and similar groups have deep ties to global terrorist organizations, including Hamas.
For many keffiyeh-wearing protestors, however, a recently professed concern for Palestinians is just the latest in a long list of causes they believe justify taking over streets and college quads. In Unherd, Mary Harrington dubs this medley of political beliefs the “omnicause,” writing that “all contemporary radical causes seem somehow to have been absorbed into one.” Today’s leftist activists share an interlocking worldview that sees racism, income inequality, trans intolerance, climate change, alleged police violence, and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts all as products of capitalism and “colonialism.” Therefore, the stated rationale for any individual protest is a stand-in for the real battle: attacking Western society and its institutions.
In the U.S., this type of general-purpose uprising goes back at least to the riots at the 1999 meeting of the World Trade Organization in Seattle. In those protests, mainstream liberal factions—including labor unions and environmentalists—were joined by “black bloc” anarchists and other radicals eager to engage in “direct action” against police. That pattern—relatively moderate demonstrators providing a friendly envelope for hard-core disruptors—formed the template for many later protests: the Occupy Wall Street encampments in 2011, demonstrations following the police shooting of Michael Brown in 2014, 2016’s Standing Rock anti-pipeline movement, and of course, the calamitous summer of 2020.
These uprisings were not entirely spontaneous. In some cases, activists spend months planning mass actions—for example, against economic summits or political conventions—and can recruit street fighters from across the country. In others, an event, such as George Floyd’s death, sparks popular protests involving neophyte demonstrators. Those attract far-left activists, who swoop in to organize and expand the struggle, often tilting it toward more radical action.
That has certainly been the case at the college Gaza-paloozas. At Columbia, the New York Times spotted a woman old enough to be a student’s grandmother in the thick of the action as protesters barricaded that school’s Hamilton Hall. The woman was 63-year-old Lisa Fithian, a lifetime activist, who Portland’s alternative weekly Street Roots approvingly calls “a trainer of mass rebellion.” A counter-protester trying to block the pro-Hamas demonstrators told NBC News, “She was right in the middle of it, instructing them how to better set up the barriers.” Fithian told the Times she’d been invited to train students in protest safety and “general logistics.” She claims to have taken part in almost every major U.S. protest movement going back to the 1999 “Battle in Seattle.”
America’s radical network has plenty of Lisa Fithians, with the time and resources to travel the country educating newcomers about the “logistics” of disruptive protests. And these activists appear to have played key roles in the college occupations. The New York City Police Department says nearly half the demonstrators arrested on the Columbia and City University of New York (CUNY) campuses on April 30 were not affiliated with the schools. One hooded Hamilton Hall occupier—photographed scuffling with a Columbia custodian before getting arrested—turned out to be 40-year-old James Carlson, heir to a large advertising fortune. According to the New York Post, Carlson lives in a $2.3 million Park Slope townhouse and has a long rap sheet. For example, in 2005, he was arrested in San Francisco during the violent “West Coast Anti-Capitalist Mobilization and March Against the G8.” (Those charges were dropped.)
For a quarter-century now, Antifa and other anarchist networks have worked to refine tactics and share lessons following each major action. At Columbia, UCLA, and other schools, authorities found printouts of a “Do-It Yourself Occupation Guide” and similar documents. The young campus radicals are eager to learn from their more experienced elders. And, like the high-achieving students they are, they follow directions carefully. MacDougald asked Kyle Shideler, the director for homeland security and counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy, about the mystery of the identical tents. There was no need for a central group to distribute hundreds of tents, Shideler said. Instead, “the organizers told [students] to buy a tent, and sent around a Google Doc with a link to that specific tent on Amazon. So they all went out and bought the same tent.”
In other words, America’s radical class has gotten very skilled at recruiting and instructing new activists—even from among the ranks of elite college students with a good deal to lose. How much more could this movement accomplish with hundreds of millions in federal dollars flooding activist groups around the country?
From its first week in office, the Biden administration has trumpeted its goal to funnel more environmental spending toward “disadvantaged communities that have been historically marginalized,” partly by issuing grants to grassroots organizations. Previous environmental justice (EJ) grant programs were small in scope. But, with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in August 2022, a huge pool of grant money became available. EPA administrator Michael Regan told reporters, “We’re going from tens of thousands of dollars to developing and designing a program that will distribute billions.”
More than a year and a half later, it remains hard to nail down just where the Biden administration’s billions in EJ grants will wind up. Money is being distributed through a confusing variety of programs, and the process of identifying recipients is ongoing. To help outsource the job of sifting through proposals, the EPA last year designated 11 institutions as “Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Grantmakers.” These groups are empowered to make subgrants directly to community organizations, under streamlined EPA oversight. In all, the Biden administration has entrusted these outfits with distributing a staggering $600 million in funding. The money is expected to start flowing this summer.
The EPA’s grantmakers include a number of educational institutions and left-leaning nonprofits. For example, the EPA chose Fordham University as its lead grantmaker in the New York region. Fordham, in turn, lists as partners two nonprofits that oppose immigration enforcement. (One, the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice, states on its website: “NJAIJ believes in the human right to migrate, regardless of citizenship or political status.”) Neither group claims expertise in environmental issues. Given that the IRA’s eligibility requirements for EJ grants are extremely vague, however, perhaps that’s not a problem. Almost any activity that could help “spur economic opportunity for disadvantaged communities” (in the words of Biden’s EJ executive order) might qualify.
Perhaps the most prominent—and problematic—EPA grantmaker is the Berkeley, California-based Climate Justice Alliance. The CJA is a consortium of mostly far-left activist groups. It describes its mission as working for “regenerative economic solutions and ecological justice—under a framework that challenges capitalism and both white supremacy and hetero-patriarchy.” The group is a vigorous proponent of the omnicause, embracing almost every left-wing concern as a manifestation of climate change. For example, the CJA website proclaims: “The path to climate justice travels through a free Palestine.” MacDougald notes that the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance, one of CJA’s affiliated groups, “organized an illegal anti-Israel protest in the Capitol Rotunda in December at which more than 50 activists were arrested.”
The CJA website also includes a section dedicated to the cause known as Stop Cop City. It refers to an effort to halt the construction of an 85-acre police and firefighter training center outside Atlanta. Rag-tag activists from around the country have gathered around the facility since 2021. They have repeatedly battled with police—sometimes with fireworks and Molotov cocktails—and used bolt cutters to enter the site and torch construction equipment. (CJA’s Stop Cop City page features a cartoon illustration of three childlike activists; one brandishes bolt cutters.) The group also backs a legal defense fund for activists arrested in attacks on the training center or in other protests. For those looking for more inspiration, CJA links to an interview with former Black Panther and self-described revolutionary Angela Davis.
The Alliance is not an ideological outlier in Biden’s EJ coalition. On the contrary, when the White House assembled its White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council (WHEJAC), a panel of outside experts meant to provide “horizon-expanding EJ advice and recommendations,” it chose CJA co-chair Elizabeth Yeampierre to help lead the committee. Like other members of the panel, she sees environmental issues through an ideological, not a scientific, lens. “Climate change is the result of a legacy of extraction, of colonialism, of slavery,” Yeampierre told Yale Environment 360. As a group, radical EJ activists tend not to focus on pragmatic ways to reduce pollution and carbon emissions; for them, the real goal is overturning what they see as an exploitative economic and political system. Since these are the voices the White House chose to help shape its EJ policies, we can assume this worldview will dominate grantmaking decisions.
In February 2023, House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer, along with fellow committee member Pat Fallon, wrote to EPA administrator Regan asking for more information on the EPA’s grant programs. They noted that the EPA’s own studies of EJ grants issued in previous years showed sloppy supervision. According to an EPA report, an earlier version of the program funded projects that did “not logically lead to the desired environmental and/or public health [result].” Without better oversight and more clearly defined goals, the congressmen wrote, the EPA’s EJ grant machine risks becoming simply a “slush fund for far-left organizations.”
Since then, the administration has done little to reassure skeptics. To the contrary, the EPA has put at least one far-left organization—CJA—in charge of distributing $50 million in grant money. No doubt, many of the EPA grants will go to worthwhile projects. But money is fungible. A group that gets a large grant to, say, clean up dirty parks or teach children about recycling will also be able to hire more staff and divert more resources to political action.
With graduation behind them, most of the anti-Israel college protesters have stowed away their keffiyehs and moved on to summer vacations or internships. But the peripatetic activists who helped guide and intensify those uprisings are doubtless already planning their next actions. After all, two political conventions are looming. This fall, the college protests will likely flare up again, though by then perhaps focused on a different facet of the omnicause. And, with hundreds of millions in fresh funding flowing through the activist ecosystem, the groups that quietly nurture extremists—like those who firebombed “Cop City,” or who chant “Intifada Revolution!,” or who block bridges in the name of “climate”—will be more emboldened than ever.
A Slush Fund for Radical Protesters? City Journal (city-journal.org)
submitted by Normodox to BeneiYisraelNews [link] [comments]
The movement also draws on diverse but generous sources of financial backing. Those funding streams may soon be augmented by the federal government. As I chronicled last year in a Manhattan Institute report, “The Big Squeeze: How Biden’s Environmental Justice Agenda Hurts the Economy and the Environment,” the administration’s massive program of environmental justice grants seems designed to prioritize the funding of highly ideological local groups. The Inflation Reduction Act, for example, earmarks $3 billion for “environmental and climate justice block grants” intended for local nonprofits. Today, hundreds of far-left political groups include language about environmental issues and “climate justice” in their mission statements. If just a fraction of planned grants flows to such groups, the effect will be a gusher of new funding for radical causes.
As the Gaza protests spread across U.S. college campuses, many observers noted an eerie uniformity among them. From one campus to the next, protesters operated in disciplined cadres, keeping their faces covered and using identical rote phrases as they refused to talk with reporters. The Atlantic noted the strangeness of seeing elite college students “chanting like automatons.” Students held up keffiyeh scarves or umbrellas to block the view of prying cameras and linked arms to halt the movements of outsiders. At Columbia University and elsewhere, protesters formed “liberated zones,” from which “Zionists” were excluded. Around the edges of the encampments, the more militaristic activists donned helmets and goggles and carried crude weapons, apparently eager to mix it up with police or counter-protesters. We’ve seen these tactics before—notably during the “mostly peaceful” Black Lives Matter protests of 2020, when full-time agitators helped ignite riots, set up a police-free (and violence-plagued) zone in Seattle, and laid nightly siege to Portland, Oregon’s federal courthouse.
In a remarkable work of reporting, Park MacDougald recently traced the tangled roots of organizations backing pro-jihad protests, both on and off campuses. These include Antifa and other networks of anonymous anarchists, along with “various communist and Marxist-Leninist groups, including the Maoist Revolutionary Communist Party, the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), and the International ANSWER coalition,” MacDougald writes. Higher up the food chain, we find groups openly supported by America’s growing class of super-rich tech execs or the anti-capitalist heirs of great fortunes. For example, retired tech mogul Neville Roy Singham, who is married to Code Pink founder Jodie Evans, funds The People’s Forum, a lavish Manhattan resource center for far-left groups. As the Columbia protests intensified, the center urged members to head uptown to “support our students.” Following the money trail of other protest groups, MacDougald finds connections to the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Ford Foundation, and—surprising no one—the George Soros-backed Tides Foundation.
Of course, the current wave of anti-Israel protests also involves alliances with pro-Hamas organizations such as Students for Justice in Palestine. Last November, Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies testified to the House Ways and Means Committee that SJP and similar groups have deep ties to global terrorist organizations, including Hamas.
For many keffiyeh-wearing protestors, however, a recently professed concern for Palestinians is just the latest in a long list of causes they believe justify taking over streets and college quads. In Unherd, Mary Harrington dubs this medley of political beliefs the “omnicause,” writing that “all contemporary radical causes seem somehow to have been absorbed into one.” Today’s leftist activists share an interlocking worldview that sees racism, income inequality, trans intolerance, climate change, alleged police violence, and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts all as products of capitalism and “colonialism.” Therefore, the stated rationale for any individual protest is a stand-in for the real battle: attacking Western society and its institutions.
In the U.S., this type of general-purpose uprising goes back at least to the riots at the 1999 meeting of the World Trade Organization in Seattle. In those protests, mainstream liberal factions—including labor unions and environmentalists—were joined by “black bloc” anarchists and other radicals eager to engage in “direct action” against police. That pattern—relatively moderate demonstrators providing a friendly envelope for hard-core disruptors—formed the template for many later protests: the Occupy Wall Street encampments in 2011, demonstrations following the police shooting of Michael Brown in 2014, 2016’s Standing Rock anti-pipeline movement, and of course, the calamitous summer of 2020.
These uprisings were not entirely spontaneous. In some cases, activists spend months planning mass actions—for example, against economic summits or political conventions—and can recruit street fighters from across the country. In others, an event, such as George Floyd’s death, sparks popular protests involving neophyte demonstrators. Those attract far-left activists, who swoop in to organize and expand the struggle, often tilting it toward more radical action.
That has certainly been the case at the college Gaza-paloozas. At Columbia, the New York Times spotted a woman old enough to be a student’s grandmother in the thick of the action as protesters barricaded that school’s Hamilton Hall. The woman was 63-year-old Lisa Fithian, a lifetime activist, who Portland’s alternative weekly Street Roots approvingly calls “a trainer of mass rebellion.” A counter-protester trying to block the pro-Hamas demonstrators told NBC News, “She was right in the middle of it, instructing them how to better set up the barriers.” Fithian told the Times she’d been invited to train students in protest safety and “general logistics.” She claims to have taken part in almost every major U.S. protest movement going back to the 1999 “Battle in Seattle.”
America’s radical network has plenty of Lisa Fithians, with the time and resources to travel the country educating newcomers about the “logistics” of disruptive protests. And these activists appear to have played key roles in the college occupations. The New York City Police Department says nearly half the demonstrators arrested on the Columbia and City University of New York (CUNY) campuses on April 30 were not affiliated with the schools. One hooded Hamilton Hall occupier—photographed scuffling with a Columbia custodian before getting arrested—turned out to be 40-year-old James Carlson, heir to a large advertising fortune. According to the New York Post, Carlson lives in a $2.3 million Park Slope townhouse and has a long rap sheet. For example, in 2005, he was arrested in San Francisco during the violent “West Coast Anti-Capitalist Mobilization and March Against the G8.” (Those charges were dropped.)
For a quarter-century now, Antifa and other anarchist networks have worked to refine tactics and share lessons following each major action. At Columbia, UCLA, and other schools, authorities found printouts of a “Do-It Yourself Occupation Guide” and similar documents. The young campus radicals are eager to learn from their more experienced elders. And, like the high-achieving students they are, they follow directions carefully. MacDougald asked Kyle Shideler, the director for homeland security and counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy, about the mystery of the identical tents. There was no need for a central group to distribute hundreds of tents, Shideler said. Instead, “the organizers told [students] to buy a tent, and sent around a Google Doc with a link to that specific tent on Amazon. So they all went out and bought the same tent.”
In other words, America’s radical class has gotten very skilled at recruiting and instructing new activists—even from among the ranks of elite college students with a good deal to lose. How much more could this movement accomplish with hundreds of millions in federal dollars flooding activist groups around the country?
From its first week in office, the Biden administration has trumpeted its goal to funnel more environmental spending toward “disadvantaged communities that have been historically marginalized,” partly by issuing grants to grassroots organizations. Previous environmental justice (EJ) grant programs were small in scope. But, with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in August 2022, a huge pool of grant money became available. EPA administrator Michael Regan told reporters, “We’re going from tens of thousands of dollars to developing and designing a program that will distribute billions.”
More than a year and a half later, it remains hard to nail down just where the Biden administration’s billions in EJ grants will wind up. Money is being distributed through a confusing variety of programs, and the process of identifying recipients is ongoing. To help outsource the job of sifting through proposals, the EPA last year designated 11 institutions as “Environmental Justice Thriving Communities Grantmakers.” These groups are empowered to make subgrants directly to community organizations, under streamlined EPA oversight. In all, the Biden administration has entrusted these outfits with distributing a staggering $600 million in funding. The money is expected to start flowing this summer.
The EPA’s grantmakers include a number of educational institutions and left-leaning nonprofits. For example, the EPA chose Fordham University as its lead grantmaker in the New York region. Fordham, in turn, lists as partners two nonprofits that oppose immigration enforcement. (One, the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice, states on its website: “NJAIJ believes in the human right to migrate, regardless of citizenship or political status.”) Neither group claims expertise in environmental issues. Given that the IRA’s eligibility requirements for EJ grants are extremely vague, however, perhaps that’s not a problem. Almost any activity that could help “spur economic opportunity for disadvantaged communities” (in the words of Biden’s EJ executive order) might qualify.
Perhaps the most prominent—and problematic—EPA grantmaker is the Berkeley, California-based Climate Justice Alliance. The CJA is a consortium of mostly far-left activist groups. It describes its mission as working for “regenerative economic solutions and ecological justice—under a framework that challenges capitalism and both white supremacy and hetero-patriarchy.” The group is a vigorous proponent of the omnicause, embracing almost every left-wing concern as a manifestation of climate change. For example, the CJA website proclaims: “The path to climate justice travels through a free Palestine.” MacDougald notes that the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance, one of CJA’s affiliated groups, “organized an illegal anti-Israel protest in the Capitol Rotunda in December at which more than 50 activists were arrested.”
The CJA website also includes a section dedicated to the cause known as Stop Cop City. It refers to an effort to halt the construction of an 85-acre police and firefighter training center outside Atlanta. Rag-tag activists from around the country have gathered around the facility since 2021. They have repeatedly battled with police—sometimes with fireworks and Molotov cocktails—and used bolt cutters to enter the site and torch construction equipment. (CJA’s Stop Cop City page features a cartoon illustration of three childlike activists; one brandishes bolt cutters.) The group also backs a legal defense fund for activists arrested in attacks on the training center or in other protests. For those looking for more inspiration, CJA links to an interview with former Black Panther and self-described revolutionary Angela Davis.
The Alliance is not an ideological outlier in Biden’s EJ coalition. On the contrary, when the White House assembled its White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council (WHEJAC), a panel of outside experts meant to provide “horizon-expanding EJ advice and recommendations,” it chose CJA co-chair Elizabeth Yeampierre to help lead the committee. Like other members of the panel, she sees environmental issues through an ideological, not a scientific, lens. “Climate change is the result of a legacy of extraction, of colonialism, of slavery,” Yeampierre told Yale Environment 360. As a group, radical EJ activists tend not to focus on pragmatic ways to reduce pollution and carbon emissions; for them, the real goal is overturning what they see as an exploitative economic and political system. Since these are the voices the White House chose to help shape its EJ policies, we can assume this worldview will dominate grantmaking decisions.
In February 2023, House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer, along with fellow committee member Pat Fallon, wrote to EPA administrator Regan asking for more information on the EPA’s grant programs. They noted that the EPA’s own studies of EJ grants issued in previous years showed sloppy supervision. According to an EPA report, an earlier version of the program funded projects that did “not logically lead to the desired environmental and/or public health [result].” Without better oversight and more clearly defined goals, the congressmen wrote, the EPA’s EJ grant machine risks becoming simply a “slush fund for far-left organizations.”
Since then, the administration has done little to reassure skeptics. To the contrary, the EPA has put at least one far-left organization—CJA—in charge of distributing $50 million in grant money. No doubt, many of the EPA grants will go to worthwhile projects. But money is fungible. A group that gets a large grant to, say, clean up dirty parks or teach children about recycling will also be able to hire more staff and divert more resources to political action.
With graduation behind them, most of the anti-Israel college protesters have stowed away their keffiyehs and moved on to summer vacations or internships. But the peripatetic activists who helped guide and intensify those uprisings are doubtless already planning their next actions. After all, two political conventions are looming. This fall, the college protests will likely flare up again, though by then perhaps focused on a different facet of the omnicause. And, with hundreds of millions in fresh funding flowing through the activist ecosystem, the groups that quietly nurture extremists—like those who firebombed “Cop City,” or who chant “Intifada Revolution!,” or who block bridges in the name of “climate”—will be more emboldened than ever.
A Slush Fund for Radical Protesters? City Journal (city-journal.org)
2024.06.01 11:18 FineReality8540 Does anyone have the PDF version of the Oxford IB Biology Study Guide for the new syllabus?
Hello! How are you all? Does anyone have the PDF version of the IB Biology Study Guide from OXFORD? I tried to download it but every time I downloaded it, it said there was a problem. If you do, could you please DM me or put the link here? Thank you very much in advance.
submitted by FineReality8540 to IBO [link] [comments]
2024.06.01 11:05 itakeyou My experience with OneNote vs. GoodNotes
I should be studying but, hey, here I am. I've been a long-time GoodNotes user, but recently I tried out OneNote for about 2 weeks, and there were definitely things that I liked about it that I hope will get implemented into GoodNotes sooner or later.
1. Infinite Page
By this I don't mean the number of pages. My major requires a lot of mindmapping / flowcharting, and a infinite-sized page is just for that. Even the tabloid page in GoodNotes runs out sometimes, and would be nice if you could just expand the page as you use.
2. Syncing between devices
Yes, GoodNotes does sync between computer and tablet. But I am talking more about live syncing, like in Google Docs. It's good to see that changes are reflected on the devices almost immediately, so if I want to make a written note while typing, this comes in handy.
3. File Organisation
To be honest this is the biggest reason why I have decided to try OneNote in the first place. Although you can still organise notes in GoodNotes, the way OneNote allows you to organise the notes is just a lot obvious and hence faster to navigate through.
4. Typing & Editing
Although I usually don't type much when I make notes, along with the live syncing, I am starting to realise the convenience of being able to type some things down every now and then. The ability to insert shapes (i.e. arrows) and tables also came in quite handy.
5. Free
Most of the time OneNote comes free, and many schools/unis have student subscription available for Microsoft Office apps.
Now there are reasons I won't be switching fully to OneNote entirely anytime soon, mostly because of the writing experience. Frankly I don't think any note-taking software beats GoodNotes in that, and it's just way too smooth.
I hope someday these things will be reflected on GoodNotes as well.
submitted by itakeyou to GoodNotes [link] [comments]
1. Infinite Page
By this I don't mean the number of pages. My major requires a lot of mindmapping / flowcharting, and a infinite-sized page is just for that. Even the tabloid page in GoodNotes runs out sometimes, and would be nice if you could just expand the page as you use.
2. Syncing between devices
Yes, GoodNotes does sync between computer and tablet. But I am talking more about live syncing, like in Google Docs. It's good to see that changes are reflected on the devices almost immediately, so if I want to make a written note while typing, this comes in handy.
3. File Organisation
To be honest this is the biggest reason why I have decided to try OneNote in the first place. Although you can still organise notes in GoodNotes, the way OneNote allows you to organise the notes is just a lot obvious and hence faster to navigate through.
4. Typing & Editing
Although I usually don't type much when I make notes, along with the live syncing, I am starting to realise the convenience of being able to type some things down every now and then. The ability to insert shapes (i.e. arrows) and tables also came in quite handy.
5. Free
Most of the time OneNote comes free, and many schools/unis have student subscription available for Microsoft Office apps.
Now there are reasons I won't be switching fully to OneNote entirely anytime soon, mostly because of the writing experience. Frankly I don't think any note-taking software beats GoodNotes in that, and it's just way too smooth.
I hope someday these things will be reflected on GoodNotes as well.
2024.06.01 10:54 semibenzene Tecno Camon 30 5g or Pova 5 Pro 5g?
help me convince myself what I should buy. sounds crazy but this will be a life or death decision kasi kung ano man mabili ko, it will be stucked sa akin for 3-4 years. I need a camera phone that can handle taking a picture from the lens of a microscope (I'm a Biology student, documentation of every laboratory activities is vv important). plus documentation din whenever we're outside of the campus (academic purposes like for thesis, visiting protected forests, etc.)
I'm considering P5pro5g kasi it's cheaper sa C30 5g. I can buy accessories kasi may matitira pa sa budget for my new phone. and also, subok na rin kasi ng karamihan ang camera mg P5pro5g. AND WHEN I TELL U I FELL INLOVE SA CAM NG P5PRO5G, I MEANT IT. ang kaso, kumontrabida si C30 5g.
I'm considering C30 5g because of its promising camera—AS WELL AS ITS CHIPSET. and Tecno officially said na they will give Camon 30 series 3 years of software update & security patches. ang kaso kapag ito binili, sakto ang budget.
please please help me shed some light. I can't find any reviews about comparing these two monster phones so if you can give commentary about these two, drop it down na po agad huhu.
ps. please don't judge me. I know this will be my parent's money but half of price of the phone will be on me. I have scholarship and since I'm studying in a State Univ, I don't have to think about tf fees, etc. SO PLSPLS HELP 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
and medyo clumsy po ako pero tumagal naman Pova 2 saakin (2 years and counting) 😁😁😁
ADVANCE THANK U PO!! 🫶🏻
submitted by semibenzene to Tech_Philippines [link] [comments]
I'm considering P5pro5g kasi it's cheaper sa C30 5g. I can buy accessories kasi may matitira pa sa budget for my new phone. and also, subok na rin kasi ng karamihan ang camera mg P5pro5g. AND WHEN I TELL U I FELL INLOVE SA CAM NG P5PRO5G, I MEANT IT. ang kaso, kumontrabida si C30 5g.
I'm considering C30 5g because of its promising camera—AS WELL AS ITS CHIPSET. and Tecno officially said na they will give Camon 30 series 3 years of software update & security patches. ang kaso kapag ito binili, sakto ang budget.
please please help me shed some light. I can't find any reviews about comparing these two monster phones so if you can give commentary about these two, drop it down na po agad huhu.
ps. please don't judge me. I know this will be my parent's money but half of price of the phone will be on me. I have scholarship and since I'm studying in a State Univ, I don't have to think about tf fees, etc. SO PLSPLS HELP 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
and medyo clumsy po ako pero tumagal naman Pova 2 saakin (2 years and counting) 😁😁😁
ADVANCE THANK U PO!! 🫶🏻
2024.06.01 10:38 mbbsinvietnam List of Best Medical Colleges in the Philippines for Indian Students
 | Are you interested in pursuing an MBBS program in the Philippines? The Philippines is an excellent destination for both Indian and international students to study medicine. The country has gained popularity in recent years and has become the preferred choice for many students. submitted by mbbsinvietnam to u/mbbsinvietnam [link] [comments] Most Indian students studying in the Philippines are concentrated in these universities due to their practical and high-standard MBBS training. Let’s review a brief overview of these universities to help you make the best decision for your medical career. Here, we present the names of the top medical universities in the Philippines to elevate your career as a Doctor of Medicine. There are numerous options to study MBBS abroad, but the Philippines is a secure and excellent choice for Indian applicants. The NMC, WHO, and other medical organizations approve the medical universities in the Philippines. Students can apply to any medical college by qualifying for the NEET exam. Affordability: Compared to MBBS in India, the Philippines boasts significantly lower tuition fees. This makes it a financially viable option, especially for students seeking quality medical education at a reasonable cost. Eligibility Criteria: Admission requirements are generally simpler compared to Indian medical colleges. Universities typically consider factors like NEET (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test) scores, Class 12th marks (Physics, Chemistry, and Biology), and a qualifying entrance exam conducted by the university itself. MBBS Course Duration: The MBBS course in the Philippines is typically completed in five to five and a half years. This includes classroom learning, practical training in hospitals, and a mandatory internship. Top Medical Universities in the Philippines for Indian Students Top Medical Universities in the Philippines for Indian Students: Here's a list of some of the most prestigious medical colleges in the Philippines, recognized by the Medical Council of India (MCI) and well-suited for Indian students: · University of Perpetual Help Rizal (UPHR) Emilio Aguinaldo College (EAC) School of Medicine: This combined school offers a strong faculty and emphasizes clinical training. · UV Gull as College of Medicine: This institution focuses on a modern curriculum with research and technology integration. · Davao Medical School Foundation (DMSF): Located in a modern city, DMSF provides a student-centered environment with a focus on clinical practice. · Lyceum Northwestern University (LNU): LNU is known for being consistently ranked among the top medical schools in the Philippines. (Consider researching their ranking for specific details). · Southwestern University (SWU): SWU is another well-established medical school with a comprehensive MBBS program. · Our Lady of Fatima University College of Medicine (OLFU): OLFU offers a program specifically designed for international students, making the academic journey smoother. Additional Factors to Consider:
Choosing the right medical college involves careful research. Consider factors like:
For a smooth application process, it's recommended to contact the universities directly or seek guidance from authorized educational consultancies. These consultants can assist with document verification, application procedures, and visa applications. Conclusion: Studying MBBS in the Philippines presents a cost-effective and high-quality educational pathway for Indian students aiming for a medical career. With its affordability, eligibility criteria, and strong academic foundation, the Philippines are a destination worth exploring for aspiring doctors. Remember, thorough research and planning is crucial to ensure a successful medical education journey in the Philippines |
2024.06.01 10:25 ifadefense Best CDS Coaching in Chandigarh
IFA Defence Academy: The Best CDS Coaching in Chandigarh
When it comes to preparing for the (CDS) examination, choosing the right coaching institute can make all the difference. In Chandigarh, the IFA Defence Academy stands out as the premier destination for CDS aspirants. With a track record of success and a commitment to excellence, IFA Defence Academy has established itself as the best CDS coaching in Chandigarh.Why Choose IFA Defence Academy?
- Expert Faculty: At IFA Defence Academy, we pride ourselves on having a team of highly qualified and experienced instructors. Our faculty members are not only subject matter experts but also understand the intricacies of the CDS exam pattern and syllabus. They provide personalized attention to each student, ensuring that all doubts are clarified and concepts are thoroughly understood.
- Comprehensive Study Material: We provide our students with meticulously crafted study material that covers all aspects of the CDS exam. Our study guides, practice papers, and notes are updated regularly to reflect the latest exam trends and patterns. This ensures that our students are always ahead of the curve.
- Regular Mock Tests and Practice Sessions: Practice is key to excelling in the CDS exam. At IFA Defence Academy, we conduct regular mock tests and practice sessions that simulate the actual exam environment. This helps students manage their time effectively, develop a strategy, and build confidence. Detailed feedback and performance analysis are provided to help students identify and work on their weak areas.
- Focus on Physical Fitness and Personality Development: The CDS exam not only tests academic knowledge but also evaluates physical fitness and personality traits. We offer comprehensive training programs that include physical fitness routines, group discussions, and personal interview coaching. This holistic approach ensures that our students are well-prepared for all stages of the selection process.
- Motivational Environment: Preparing for the CDS exam can be challenging, and maintaining motivation is crucial. At IFA Defence Academy, we foster a supportive and encouraging environment. Regular motivational sessions by ex-defense personnel and successful alumni inspire students to stay focused and dedicated to their goals.