"So ... your job? Oh no, wait, let me guess: I guess I have a sixth sense for the trades. Sell \u200b\u200bcarpet ..? ".
"Almost, I am a sports journalist."
(Mighty Aphrodite, Woody Allen, 1995)
Monday, December 27, 2010
Is There A Pathophysiology For Myoma?
Crafts
"So ... your job? Oh no, wait, let me guess: I guess I have a sixth sense for the trades. Sell \u200b\u200bcarpet ..? ".
"Almost, I am a sports journalist."
(Mighty Aphrodite, Woody Allen, 1995)
"So ... your job? Oh no, wait, let me guess: I guess I have a sixth sense for the trades. Sell \u200b\u200bcarpet ..? ".
"Almost, I am a sports journalist."
(Mighty Aphrodite, Woody Allen, 1995)
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Can A Queen Size Bed Fit In A Uhaul Cargo Van
Four things
John 3, 1-21
There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of Giudei.Egli came to Jesus by night, and said, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, and no one can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. " Jesus replied: "Verily, verily I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he can not see the kingdom of God." Nicodemus said to him: "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?". Jesus replied: "Verily, verily I say unto thee, Except a man born of water and the Spirit, he can not enter the kingdom of Dio.Quel that is born of flesh is flesh and what is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be surprised when I say: You must be born again. The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the voice, but do not know where it comes from and where it goes So it is with everyone born of the Spirit ". Nicodemus replied," How can this happen?. "Jesus replied:" You are teacher of Israel and knowest not these things? Verily, verily I say unto thee, We speak that we know and testify what we have seen, but you do not accept our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and ye believe not, how will you believe if I tell you things the sky? No one has ascended into heaven except the Son of Man who descended from heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the Son of God, and this is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But who does the truth comes to light, it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God
Today we came to the place where we are reborn in spirit, because every time you need to remember where you came from not to miss again. In the choir of the friary of the Monte dei Cappuccini in Torino, we are reborn in the spirit during the catechesis of Brother Michael, and now we are in the wind, we hear it often on our skin, but certainly we do not know where it goes. Help us Lord to trust your Holy Spirit every day and help us remember that we are born again from above. Amen!
Saturday, December 18, 2010
What Stomach Virus Going Around
" The truth is bad: we have the art to not succumb to the truth "
(Friedrich Schlegel)
"If you do not tell you the truth, his nose grows like Pinocchio" is a warning that has plagued and continues to plague many children by forcing them to confess the source impressions of a finger in the glass with Nutella or bump on the front of the little brother still unable to speak and say, therefore, the truth of what happened. The luck of the novel by Collodi certainly depends on its literary qualities. However, it is undeniable that for most of his fame is also a particular debtor - the brilliant idea of \u200b\u200bthe nose that grows to report every lie of the puppet - that parents can use every time their children beautifully deny responsibility for most or marechella a less prominent. Relying on the uncertain relationship with the reality of small children get sincere thanks to the deterrent of an instrument so magically effective in showing off with undeniable clarity the difference between a lie and a truth. The fear of being nose grow out of childhood has influenced so many and it did cause even more damage than the fear of becoming a donkey if they were making bad grades or skipping school. How to explain, for example, psychoanalysts and developmental psychologists also attendibilissimo, it is the first childhood experiences that mark the fate of a human being. So the harm done to future adults of the nose that infallibly exposes the lies is not only to lead to the neglect of the pleasure principle in order to succumb to the dictates of an infallible authority to punish those who sgarra. The seriousness with which they and the peremptory demands the truth from children without in them the indelible mark of at least two convictions that inevitably cause large and small dramas in their lives as adults: the first is that truth is possible and the second that truth is important. In this way it is rooted in the belief that they say or find out the truth is always necessary, and that is also present when it is uncertain and questionable. From these certainties to feel the need to find any even when it is difficult to decipher or reconstruction, the distance is short. Moreover nothing is more easy to recognize a truth that it considers appropriate. There are also numerous those who under the threat of being seen as a liar unreliable are willing to confess a truth not even true. Who goes to a liar, indeed, very difficult to be recognized that for many other virtues it is better to be considered a villain rather than a sincere liar of dubious virtue.
The fear of punishment for every lie is so embarrassing when you come of age even if you know very well that the nose can not grow for no reason at all. It is probably for this reason that adults attach enormous value to sincerity, even with all their critical spirit and even if they no longer believe fables. Their children believe in magical nature of sanctions clearly continues to influence their lives as adults. This belief is manifested in their particular view of when confronted with serious matters, such as with interpersonal relationships, particularly those in love. Sincerity has such a high prestige in marital relationships that often gives preference to a candid and spontaneous partner beyond any rational assessment. So, for example, tend to prefer by far the one that claims to still think of saying things that you think facing a partner much more hesitant in expressing themselves. It is said that anyone who hesitates is contemplating a lie, as in generally suspected. His indecision, could, for example, be caused by its propensity to think twice before expressing their own truth. No coincidence that those who wish to put on the market for love affairs with a double listing often opts for a marketing strategy based on the formula: "sincere personality who always says what he thinks." Much rarer is to find who boasts of a nature rather reflective and think about things thoroughly before you speak or even who praised his willingness to change his idea of \u200b\u200btruth in the circumstances. To say very frankly and precipitation is what we think is believe, the best you can offer to its partners and all its stakeholders.
a markedly frank happy to demonstrate what is and think without subterfuge is certainly worthy of praise, and there are many circumstances in life where you can appreciate. This however should not overshadow the fact that there are at least as much honesty and immediacy that are truly impossible and it is completely unreal expectations that can be donated to the party so easily. This simple fact should be inferred as well as offering sincerity can be easy to show that there are no certainties, a ploy to hide their indecision, a form to show how you are. The idea of \u200b\u200btruthfulness crept in the knowledge of who was left impressed by parents who have used their doubts for educational Collodi's novel, assumes that there is the possibility to obtain answers to even simple and obvious questions of irreducible complexity. One such example is one of the questions posed by psychoanalysis, but that no analysis can complete my answer: "What are the real motivations that guide my thoughts and my actions?". Pretend to be able to respond with knowledge of the facts in this application means having to lie and, therefore, the only opportunity to be honest is to take note of how thoughts and opinions are determined by a desire not fully aware. mind, then, who guarantees the sincerity of the representation of a state of fact which can not be fully aware. The awareness of what can be precarious supply of sincerity put radically into question the idea of \u200b\u200btruth inculto many children of parents who claim children sincere. The relationship of humans with the false or true, indeed, a far more complex nature of what may occur in the detection of which finger was stuck in a glass of Nutella or which hand was armed the stone thrown at the front of his little brother still speechless.
Surrender to proclaim the truth of what one thinks one is and has been done, but not resolved in the hallway and in the triumph of anarchy of opinion, memory and representation. The fact that there are truths that are not fully accessible does not mean that we should not answer their thoughts and their actions. This, however, think first of all the sincerity in a direction that does not aim to reach a destination is inaccessible: that of a perfect type of what one says and what it is. The lawsuit finally becomes fully into account the facts thoughts and feeds the illusion that the only point of interest to guide the representation of both the character of truthfulness. This delusion prevents, for example, to realize all the many will be added to the desire to tell the truth and sometimes even replace it entirely. Not always, indeed probably ever, the means to communicate with words only get in the service of truth to proclaim purified from other intentions with the love of the truth have nothing to do. Whenever, for example, critical neighbor, you would do well to ask if you are guided by respect to unmask a defect, perhaps in order to improve it, or if it acts in the critical also a subtle desire to hurt him, or to establish a hierarchical relationship, or even simply to give vent to their discontent. What we often gives generously as frankly the service of others may well be simply an expression of bad character that does not tolerate the differences themselves, which wants to impose on others or download them on any tedium. Already acknowledge that it is not always a love of truth that makes judgments and offer reflections Express yourself, but often factors that even if we knew would be difficult admission, is a big step forward in recognizing the energy that is deceiving us .
is for this reason that hardly means doing a service to others when they say nasty things. Rightly, those who feel exposed to criticism in general does not perceive the benevolent will of those who take to heart the correction of errors of others to make them better. The reason for the supposed sincerity of a trial in many cases is not rewarded with gratitude in all probability depends on the fact that it is perceived for what it actually is: a cowardly way to attack the next. In fact, if there is not contaminated by pure thought interests more or less conscious, amnesia, manipulation, feelings or whatever, if any statement is to intent which often heterogeneous have nothing to do with the desire to speak truthfully, then do what you want to go through sincerity is nothing but a selection bias that simplifies a very complex reality. Then we might as well lie in a conscious way and admit, at least to themselves, that the unpleasant truth is nothing but a tool to manipulate others according to our wishes. If anyone really care about the sincerity can always express their will without transfiguring it prevaricating with the cloak of sincerity.
It has always been violent, but at least it is so true and correct because it also assumes responsibility for what you are doing.
People myths that they have not any intention to bully or hurt others can, in many cases, with the consciousness of the whole quiet, ignore the irresolvable problem of sincerity and to select those reviews and those opinions can be welcomed by stakeholders. A relaxed atmosphere with no grudges and will prevaricatorie fund is the condition most favorable for each correct in a sense desirable ideas and behaviors. Hardly aware of having to accept review in front of a truth revealed by hasty candor from others. More likely to do so, if you must, in complete independence, in a slow and progressive realization. The love of truth can then ask the patient waiting to occur when conditions ripen. The wait can be quite long and therefore necessarily be accompanied by several lies. The nature of truth not an opinion can not be considered a reason not to accept it and do not do it right. If you really want to consider the important truth, then what matters is to facilitate the conditions that may occur.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Toilet Paper Roll Test Big
There are mornings where I live not far from the grace of God, as this morning in which everything before I take the car and go to the Consolata Shrine to seek confessore.Questa morning I found one of most talented and inspired confessors of the sanctuary after hearing my confession, almost always equal to itself, he pointed to a road composed of four things:
- frequent confession
- daily personal prayer
- community prayer Wednesday
- constant vigilance against temptation
Now I'm back and I want to fix first in my heart these four things, and then to begin the drive here on my diary, and then I go to read the Word the day and prayer.
Matthew 21, 28-31
"What do you think? A man had two sons went to the first said, 'Son, go work today in my vineyard. And He replied: Yes, sir, but did not go. came to the second, and said the same. He said I will not, but then, sir, there andò.Chi of the two did the will of the father? "
I make my prayer suggested by Don Guido ...
Lord
I'm your son,
You also ask me every day
going to work in the vineyard.
ask me the effort of moving toward a more place, or simply to another
,
but to do it seriously, putting a part of me.
Help me make my real answer is already in the little things;
that are not only good dreams to those
that fill my soul and my mouth
that my fake "Yes"
become more and more of the "No"
become more and more of the "No"
to repent.
It is no coincidence that this word and this prayer to come to my own heart sorry and disappointed this morning, consoled and forgiven, filled with good intentions. It is no coincidence my run to the shrine on this day, but as said the priest, is an inspiration.
Thank you Lord Jesus!
Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Nadine Jansen Velba Milking
reborn from Immaculate Conception
Thank you Jesus for the gift of Mary! Thanks Mary for your love and your intercession. 
 |
| Tiepolo: Immaculate Conception (1767) |
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Colors Good On Brown Skin
Hope
I will not say the film, not the sharp eye on the vices of Italian atavistic.
The truth is that I was shocked by his suicide, as it struck me that of Lucentini.
I can not think of his words on hope. Words that acquire a new force after the suicide.
In particular, when he says that hope is a deception of the Church to placate the faithful comes to mind Bonhoeffer, his concept of Christianity adult ( etsi Deus non daretur ) from which it derives its interpretation of redemption, or of Christian hope. In the letter to Eberhard
Bedhge of June 27, 1944, Bonhoeffer wrote:
«[...] here [in the Old Testament] is a historical redemption , ie this side of the limit of death, while in all other cases, the myths have precise purpose of the redemption exceed the limit of death. Israel was redeemed from Egypt because they can live before God, on earth as God's people seek redemption myths of eternity ahistorically back to death.
[...] [...] it is said that Christianity was decisive in the fact that have been announced in the hope of resurrection, and therefore so was born a true religion of redemption. The center of gravity, then falls into that which is beyond of the limit of death. And here I see the error and danger. Redemption Redemption means then of worries, from the pains, fears and longings, from sin and death, in a better afterlife. But this would be the essential point of the ad content of Christ in the Gospels and in Paul? I deny it. Christian hope of resurrection is different from those mythological in that it refers to men their lives on earth in an entirely new and even stronger than in the Old Testament. The Christian always has one last escape from earthly tasks and difficulties in the eternal, as those who believe in the myths of redemption, but should enjoy to the full life on earth as Christ did ("My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ) and just making sure that the crucified and risen Christ is with him and he is crucified and risen Christ. The aldiquà should not be discontinued prematurely. In this, the New and Old Testament are in agreement. The myths stem from the experience of redemption of the human limitation. Christ, however, grabbed the man at the center of his life. "
There is no doubt that my lies, putting the words of Bonhoeffer to those Monicelli: Monicelli if I had known these words, If the Church had been able to explain so profound meaning of Christian hope, if he had the opportunity, which was an intellectual, meditation ... it would be killed anyway? 
I will not say the film, not the sharp eye on the vices of Italian atavistic.
The truth is that I was shocked by his suicide, as it struck me that of Lucentini.
I can not think of his words on hope. Words that acquire a new force after the suicide.
In particular, when he says that hope is a deception of the Church to placate the faithful comes to mind Bonhoeffer, his concept of Christianity adult ( etsi Deus non daretur ) from which it derives its interpretation of redemption, or of Christian hope. In the letter to Eberhard
Bedhge of June 27, 1944, Bonhoeffer wrote:
«[...] here [in the Old Testament] is a historical redemption , ie this side of the limit of death, while in all other cases, the myths have precise purpose of the redemption exceed the limit of death. Israel was redeemed from Egypt because they can live before God, on earth as God's people seek redemption myths of eternity ahistorically back to death.
[...] [...] it is said that Christianity was decisive in the fact that have been announced in the hope of resurrection, and therefore so was born a true religion of redemption. The center of gravity, then falls into that which is beyond of the limit of death. And here I see the error and danger. Redemption Redemption means then of worries, from the pains, fears and longings, from sin and death, in a better afterlife. But this would be the essential point of the ad content of Christ in the Gospels and in Paul? I deny it. Christian hope of resurrection is different from those mythological in that it refers to men their lives on earth in an entirely new and even stronger than in the Old Testament. The Christian always has one last escape from earthly tasks and difficulties in the eternal, as those who believe in the myths of redemption, but should enjoy to the full life on earth as Christ did ("My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ) and just making sure that the crucified and risen Christ is with him and he is crucified and risen Christ. The aldiquà should not be discontinued prematurely. In this, the New and Old Testament are in agreement. The myths stem from the experience of redemption of the human limitation. Christ, however, grabbed the man at the center of his life. "
There is no doubt that my lies, putting the words of Bonhoeffer to those Monicelli: Monicelli if I had known these words, If the Church had been able to explain so profound meaning of Christian hope, if he had the opportunity, which was an intellectual, meditation ... it would be killed anyway?
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Sample Of Community Service Hours
IN PRAISE OF THE LIE TO KNOW
is well known in what consists of a big step forward for humanity operated by the science of the modern age: the beliefs have replaced with knowledge. If you are still in the Middle Ages did not want or could distinguish between what you believe and what you knew, if was made, for example, a lot of confusion between the certainties of religion and the intellect, modernity has finally made a little 'order clearly distinguished from each other, placing them on different levels and judging each other as to be illusory and based in reality
The fathers of science like Galileo, Descartes, Locke, unlike the fathers of the church have taught us not longer sufficient simply to believe, but as something more appropriate: whether what is believed to be true. Beliefs based on illusions, prejudices and mistakes must be replaced with the knowledge provided by experience only what is experienced with their senses and checked with its intelligence can be considered true, then good and fruitful. Everything else takes us on a wrong path, so wrong and dangerous. The convictions that were not produced by research of their truth, leave a man staggering in the dark, deprives him of 'intellect and drag him into the hands of a will that does not know and therefore potentially oppressive and violent.
knowledge, to be true, therefore, needs to know to break free from what is not verifiable, established and experience in the real world. What we think we know without evidence is therefore not the fruit of knowledge, but the injury, not ability to judge but thoughtlessness.
Once science has developed tools to replace the illusion of beliefs with the certainty of knowledge, the real sin is to close its eyes to the light of true knowledge, to persevere in error. We all know what it is, at best, foolish and impossible the obscurantist view of reality to let a prisoner of his convictions was not verified. Where there is ignorance and prejudice has good game then the powers that be to impose himself as the only source of knowledge. Galileo's fight against the chief ecclesiastics who denied the truth of the universe to stay in the Copernican Ptolemaic vision, and above all to keep you faithful, is considered by many reasons, the fight against the oppression of power that does not want emancipation man. The simple experience of looking through the telescope would be open to the factual truth of the roundness of the earth by replacing the legends and myths of the Bible.
Modern science and technology tools to process in order to distinguish the true from the false certainty about the laws that have govern nature: no one can tell lies to its own use, the science makes all free to choose the truth and therefore all the same. Knowledge is no longer an instrument of power controlled by a few to maintain and consolidate their dominant position, but all men who can take possession. No one can claim the right to decide the rules of the universe because these are revealed by an instance that transcends the domain of human will: the incontrovertible truth of scientific research. The knowledge as to the power of reality, the discovery of its mechanisms, is in the hands of all those who want to access it, no more than a caste of the chosen few. Thus, only if you use wisely the reason, it is possible to progress not only of knowledge and technique but also of morality.
Critics, however, this overly optimistic view of modern science is not entrusted to those who remain on obscurantist positions. On the contrary, awareness of how a foundation has also illusory and contingent that it contradicts the claim of universality and incontrovertibly, not only is no stranger to scientific research, but that's what you get, or should obtain, from its practice. The science itself is developing tools that give certainty to reach absolute truths, universal and lasting only a scientist who wants to believe it. Precisely the Galilean telescope, along with intoxication of the discovery of the universe can be open to disillusioned knowledge of the limits of science and research. The look on the shape of the cosmos through the telescope reveals, for example, as a sensory experience is closely linked to insecurity and the mutability of the point of view: the big and the small, peripheral and central variables are not immutable, but depend on the perspective and tools available for viewing. Experience disclosed by a broader view of the universe thus provides just a truth contrary to the scientistic illusion: the certainty that it is vain to claim access to definitive knowledge, and complete, or even progressive improvement.
In fact very few human experiences such as the practice of scientific research have the opportunity to test the fragility, the transience and the partiality of all knowledge. The history of science is the history of theories that have emerged gradually more and more imaginative, truth that over time have turned into their opposites because they are produced by partial and limited knowledge. The difference between belief and knowledge, this is the truth that science gives us, is not hierarchical but time is the time, the changing conditions in which they are compared to determine the difference. Their short, is not a constant but changes over time is valid, valid closely linked to conditions in which it is found.
So we can say, paradoxically, it is the science which teaches us to enhance the knowledge basis while uncertain and a particular belief, which leads us to accept it even as a possibility inalienable Search accommodate the know with its limits and its blurring means so much to rely on it, how to recognize bias and the provisional. The word of Popper in his famous discussion Poverty of Historicism is illuminating in this regard: "If we were to rely on the impartiality of scientists, science, even natural science, would be utterly impossible." Science can not but be a human product, therefore subject to human prerogatives, like everything else. If this is so, and could not be otherwise, the only science is possible that the results prove inadequate over time, be revised, even unnecessary and harmful. Every human activity that is intended to ideality think of a context beyond time and space, indifferent to the particular needs and quotas, can only produce disasters.
It must also not overlook the fact that no scientist can be considered free from human weakness. Among these is the tendency to deceive others is not surely the least frequent. Thus, in addition to err in good faith, scientists can easily sacrifice the dominant ideologies and self-interest of the rigorous methods developed by themselves. Not can then be foreign to scientific knowledge, but rather should be an integral part, the criticism of those who directs attention to the manipulative will of his fellow men, although men of science. It is therefore legitimate scientifically suspect that the long process of research knowledge has as much land as illusory and deceptive than the research itself has rejected and continues to reject. The fact that his theories considered heretical in certain conditions and time have proven to be true then, that is relevant and useful to mankind, witnesses and court time as only the true and false. But also - and this is something at least as important - such as denying any legitimacy to beliefs, or not yet verified, is an attitude that would preclude development and progress: we could become close to the truth, we remain slaves to a temporal imaginary, , a path that would have allowed the developments in other directions. Scientific knowledge, by erecting barricades against what he considers unfounded beliefs, cultivating the illusion that his is the only path possible and that there is no alternative. Yet in this case is the same research based on scientific thinking to open up the possibility of imagining various routes and to consider the road taken only as one of those conceivable. If, for example, Euclid the sum of the angles of a triangle is 180 degrees and parallel lines never intersect, the very mathematical, more than two thousand years later, conceived the idea that there are other ways to define a space and represent his figures. And even after nearly half a century, a physicist, Albert Einstein, discovered an alternative to the Euclidean model that can be profitably applied to the investigation of the reality of our cosmos.
The real scientific question is thus not being able to distinguish what one knows what one believes, but to emancipate themselves from mental models fossilized so stable that it became futile to resist changing things over time. Rigor to the laws and procedures which they so determine, is most often an irrational approximation in view of the special conditions under which they must be applied, a lack of interest in accommodating the size of the belief that gradually slips to know that the foundations, an underestimation of the psychological weakness of those who, from being intimidated and loss, clinging to certainties misleading.
Willingness to enhance their knowledge in the state of belief also allows players to continually question their own certainties agreed to recognize erroneous. Awareness knowledge of how each covers, more or less hidden, more or less present, even a belief, makes available to accept the limits of the human faculties of discernment. At the same time we do not cling to your certainties for the sole purpose of giving strength to your position but you put it, as it were "experimentally" in the game. In this sense, enhance the prerogatives of a science that agrees to be fully human. In a gesture of humble and strong-willed believe there is much awareness of human limitations, the viability of what they want to grasp the stimulus to overcome them. At the unveiling of the implausibility of a theory or current affairs, in the consciousness of duty fleeting knowledge and belief in certainties, it reveals the peculiarity of man and his condition: the need to continually recreate the tools to become oriented in time and space they inhabit. 
"A new scientific truth does not triumph because its opponents are convinced and see the light, but because eventually die, and a new generation in which new concepts are family! "Max Planck," Wissenschaftliche Selbstbiographie ", Leipzig 1948.
is well known in what consists of a big step forward for humanity operated by the science of the modern age: the beliefs have replaced with knowledge. If you are still in the Middle Ages did not want or could distinguish between what you believe and what you knew, if was made, for example, a lot of confusion between the certainties of religion and the intellect, modernity has finally made a little 'order clearly distinguished from each other, placing them on different levels and judging each other as to be illusory and based in reality
The fathers of science like Galileo, Descartes, Locke, unlike the fathers of the church have taught us not longer sufficient simply to believe, but as something more appropriate: whether what is believed to be true. Beliefs based on illusions, prejudices and mistakes must be replaced with the knowledge provided by experience only what is experienced with their senses and checked with its intelligence can be considered true, then good and fruitful. Everything else takes us on a wrong path, so wrong and dangerous. The convictions that were not produced by research of their truth, leave a man staggering in the dark, deprives him of 'intellect and drag him into the hands of a will that does not know and therefore potentially oppressive and violent.
knowledge, to be true, therefore, needs to know to break free from what is not verifiable, established and experience in the real world. What we think we know without evidence is therefore not the fruit of knowledge, but the injury, not ability to judge but thoughtlessness.
Once science has developed tools to replace the illusion of beliefs with the certainty of knowledge, the real sin is to close its eyes to the light of true knowledge, to persevere in error. We all know what it is, at best, foolish and impossible the obscurantist view of reality to let a prisoner of his convictions was not verified. Where there is ignorance and prejudice has good game then the powers that be to impose himself as the only source of knowledge. Galileo's fight against the chief ecclesiastics who denied the truth of the universe to stay in the Copernican Ptolemaic vision, and above all to keep you faithful, is considered by many reasons, the fight against the oppression of power that does not want emancipation man. The simple experience of looking through the telescope would be open to the factual truth of the roundness of the earth by replacing the legends and myths of the Bible.
Modern science and technology tools to process in order to distinguish the true from the false certainty about the laws that have govern nature: no one can tell lies to its own use, the science makes all free to choose the truth and therefore all the same. Knowledge is no longer an instrument of power controlled by a few to maintain and consolidate their dominant position, but all men who can take possession. No one can claim the right to decide the rules of the universe because these are revealed by an instance that transcends the domain of human will: the incontrovertible truth of scientific research. The knowledge as to the power of reality, the discovery of its mechanisms, is in the hands of all those who want to access it, no more than a caste of the chosen few. Thus, only if you use wisely the reason, it is possible to progress not only of knowledge and technique but also of morality.
Critics, however, this overly optimistic view of modern science is not entrusted to those who remain on obscurantist positions. On the contrary, awareness of how a foundation has also illusory and contingent that it contradicts the claim of universality and incontrovertibly, not only is no stranger to scientific research, but that's what you get, or should obtain, from its practice. The science itself is developing tools that give certainty to reach absolute truths, universal and lasting only a scientist who wants to believe it. Precisely the Galilean telescope, along with intoxication of the discovery of the universe can be open to disillusioned knowledge of the limits of science and research. The look on the shape of the cosmos through the telescope reveals, for example, as a sensory experience is closely linked to insecurity and the mutability of the point of view: the big and the small, peripheral and central variables are not immutable, but depend on the perspective and tools available for viewing. Experience disclosed by a broader view of the universe thus provides just a truth contrary to the scientistic illusion: the certainty that it is vain to claim access to definitive knowledge, and complete, or even progressive improvement.
In fact very few human experiences such as the practice of scientific research have the opportunity to test the fragility, the transience and the partiality of all knowledge. The history of science is the history of theories that have emerged gradually more and more imaginative, truth that over time have turned into their opposites because they are produced by partial and limited knowledge. The difference between belief and knowledge, this is the truth that science gives us, is not hierarchical but time is the time, the changing conditions in which they are compared to determine the difference. Their short, is not a constant but changes over time is valid, valid closely linked to conditions in which it is found.
So we can say, paradoxically, it is the science which teaches us to enhance the knowledge basis while uncertain and a particular belief, which leads us to accept it even as a possibility inalienable Search accommodate the know with its limits and its blurring means so much to rely on it, how to recognize bias and the provisional. The word of Popper in his famous discussion Poverty of Historicism is illuminating in this regard: "If we were to rely on the impartiality of scientists, science, even natural science, would be utterly impossible." Science can not but be a human product, therefore subject to human prerogatives, like everything else. If this is so, and could not be otherwise, the only science is possible that the results prove inadequate over time, be revised, even unnecessary and harmful. Every human activity that is intended to ideality think of a context beyond time and space, indifferent to the particular needs and quotas, can only produce disasters.
It must also not overlook the fact that no scientist can be considered free from human weakness. Among these is the tendency to deceive others is not surely the least frequent. Thus, in addition to err in good faith, scientists can easily sacrifice the dominant ideologies and self-interest of the rigorous methods developed by themselves. Not can then be foreign to scientific knowledge, but rather should be an integral part, the criticism of those who directs attention to the manipulative will of his fellow men, although men of science. It is therefore legitimate scientifically suspect that the long process of research knowledge has as much land as illusory and deceptive than the research itself has rejected and continues to reject. The fact that his theories considered heretical in certain conditions and time have proven to be true then, that is relevant and useful to mankind, witnesses and court time as only the true and false. But also - and this is something at least as important - such as denying any legitimacy to beliefs, or not yet verified, is an attitude that would preclude development and progress: we could become close to the truth, we remain slaves to a temporal imaginary, , a path that would have allowed the developments in other directions. Scientific knowledge, by erecting barricades against what he considers unfounded beliefs, cultivating the illusion that his is the only path possible and that there is no alternative. Yet in this case is the same research based on scientific thinking to open up the possibility of imagining various routes and to consider the road taken only as one of those conceivable. If, for example, Euclid the sum of the angles of a triangle is 180 degrees and parallel lines never intersect, the very mathematical, more than two thousand years later, conceived the idea that there are other ways to define a space and represent his figures. And even after nearly half a century, a physicist, Albert Einstein, discovered an alternative to the Euclidean model that can be profitably applied to the investigation of the reality of our cosmos.
The real scientific question is thus not being able to distinguish what one knows what one believes, but to emancipate themselves from mental models fossilized so stable that it became futile to resist changing things over time. Rigor to the laws and procedures which they so determine, is most often an irrational approximation in view of the special conditions under which they must be applied, a lack of interest in accommodating the size of the belief that gradually slips to know that the foundations, an underestimation of the psychological weakness of those who, from being intimidated and loss, clinging to certainties misleading.
Willingness to enhance their knowledge in the state of belief also allows players to continually question their own certainties agreed to recognize erroneous. Awareness knowledge of how each covers, more or less hidden, more or less present, even a belief, makes available to accept the limits of the human faculties of discernment. At the same time we do not cling to your certainties for the sole purpose of giving strength to your position but you put it, as it were "experimentally" in the game. In this sense, enhance the prerogatives of a science that agrees to be fully human. In a gesture of humble and strong-willed believe there is much awareness of human limitations, the viability of what they want to grasp the stimulus to overcome them. At the unveiling of the implausibility of a theory or current affairs, in the consciousness of duty fleeting knowledge and belief in certainties, it reveals the peculiarity of man and his condition: the need to continually recreate the tools to become oriented in time and space they inhabit.
The Biggest Size Of Patron Bottle
racing calendar month of December
Sunday, December 5
1st RACING LODI - Lodi (LO )
courses: 8 km-13-21 - Departure at 08:00 - Oratorio S. Bernardo, V.le Piacenza 65
GP Oratorio S. Bernardo - V.le Piacenza 65-26900 Lodi (LO)
Information: Luca Sesini Phone: 0371.30386
Wednesday, December 8
20 ^ IMMACULATE WALK - Cremona (CR)
Tours: km.6-11 -21 - Departure at 08:00 and 09:00
DLF Cremona - Via Perugia, 70 - 26100 Cremona (CR)
Information: Bruno Ghisleri Phone: 0372.560104/392.7168762
Sunday, December 12
6th IBC ANTURNE GATULI A '- Gattolini Bagnolo Crema (CR)
Routes: km .7-11-18 - Departure at 08:00 to 08:30
Bagnolese GP - Via Lodi, 9-26010 Bagnolo Crema (CR)
Information: Carlo Gandelli Phone: 0373.648702/340.0535674 
Sunday, December 5
1st RACING LODI - Lodi (LO )
courses: 8 km-13-21 - Departure at 08:00 - Oratorio S. Bernardo, V.le Piacenza 65
GP Oratorio S. Bernardo - V.le Piacenza 65-26900 Lodi (LO)
Information: Luca Sesini Phone: 0371.30386
Wednesday, December 8
20 ^ IMMACULATE WALK - Cremona (CR)
Tours: km.6-11 -21 - Departure at 08:00 and 09:00
DLF Cremona - Via Perugia, 70 - 26100 Cremona (CR)
Information: Bruno Ghisleri Phone: 0372.560104/392.7168762
Sunday, December 12
6th IBC ANTURNE GATULI A '- Gattolini Bagnolo Crema (CR)
Routes: km .7-11-18 - Departure at 08:00 to 08:30
Bagnolese GP - Via Lodi, 9-26010 Bagnolo Crema (CR)
Information: Carlo Gandelli Phone: 0373.648702/340.0535674
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Cubefield School Unblocked
Youth
So while walking along the road, his stolid brooding led him to the youth, the glorious youth that rose exultant and invincible, supple muscles with silk and leather, with heart and lungs never tired nor agitated. Youth who mocks the limit, and stress.
Yes, Youth was the Nemesis. It destroys old without realizing that in doing so destroys itself. Widens your arteries and grinding his knuckles. Only to be destroyed, in turn, by Youth.
Why Youth is forever young. It 's just the Age Ageing.
Jack London, "a steak", 1909 
So while walking along the road, his stolid brooding led him to the youth, the glorious youth that rose exultant and invincible, supple muscles with silk and leather, with heart and lungs never tired nor agitated. Youth who mocks the limit, and stress.
Yes, Youth was the Nemesis. It destroys old without realizing that in doing so destroys itself. Widens your arteries and grinding his knuckles. Only to be destroyed, in turn, by Youth.
Why Youth is forever young. It 's just the Age Ageing.
Jack London, "a steak", 1909
Glory Holes In Athens,ga
Alberto Sordi, a comparison, was an amateur
The call comes during the summer. In the deserted town, a man works. D 
a portion of the wire Minister Bondi, on the other Nicola Borrelli, Director General of the Ministry of Culture, cinema section. "Doctor, red alert. An emergency terrifying. There is a very dear friend to the Bulgarian Prime Minister and the Prime Minister, a good girl, her name is Michelle Bonev . He says he wants to go to the Venice Film Festival and which do not participate enough. Our Prime Minister Berlusconi has promised that it will win and who will be a wonderful evening, full of light and color. An evening of freedom. She, with time, and he's convinced there's no way to change her mind. " Borrelli, a former deputy Blandini precipitate the lead in the most difficult period in the recent history of Italian culture, stutter something. "Minister, we feel, I do not know if it will be possible." On the first request is followed by others, however, more and more insistent and a story that seems invented by Age and Scarpelli becomes a piece of Italian reality. They spend weeks and "red alert" change of location.
a portion of the wire Minister Bondi, on the other Nicola Borrelli, Director General of the Ministry of Culture, cinema section. "Doctor, red alert. An emergency terrifying. There is a very dear friend to the Bulgarian Prime Minister and the Prime Minister, a good girl, her name is Michelle Bonev . He says he wants to go to the Venice Film Festival and which do not participate enough. Our Prime Minister Berlusconi has promised that it will win and who will be a wonderful evening, full of light and color. An evening of freedom. She, with time, and he's convinced there's no way to change her mind. " Borrelli, a former deputy Blandini precipitate the lead in the most difficult period in the recent history of Italian culture, stutter something. "Minister, we feel, I do not know if it will be possible." On the first request is followed by others, however, more and more insistent and a story that seems invented by Age and Scarpelli becomes a piece of Italian reality. They spend weeks and "red alert" change of location. Venice, the festival, the celebration. Promises must be kept. The staging is by Oscar. A fake plate with the logo of the European community and that of the ministry (that well-informed recount ordered in haste in a Roman workshop in the days before the start of the ministerial delegation), a prize invented from nothing, a gag institutionalized has the Lido as a stage and a series of figures more or less aware. Ministers, MEPs, assorted claque. In the realm of Sandro Bondi, who despite having promised "exclusive interest of the Republic ", has created an independent, is the norm.
In Venice, the gay group has passed away. Michelle Bonev (born Dragomir
to ) has won the Golden Lion but had the impression (at the end what matters), to do so. The organization is evil. Taking advantage of the event "Action for Women" , cockade true for short films with high-level jury (among others Tornatore, Francesca Comencini, Roberta Torre) and the confusion issue, the plan Bonev snaps in the late afternoon. A secluded location, the Sala Pasinetti , and that's come out the offending plate, the film produced by Bonev "Goodbye Mama" , and co-produced by Rai Cinema under the auspices the Ministry of Culture. History of marginalization full of buxom women in export which is transformed into work "from the social value." The epigraph, a solemn, to give a semblance of credibility: "Special Prize of the Biennale awarded at the 60th anniversary of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Minister for Arts and Culture ".
They could also give the other because it is undeniable, she is extremely active. The first stirrings of awareness in Sanremo , when the poor Baudo the flank as a columnist in Dopofestival 2003 edition. Pippo angry, but it bends to the wishes of Agostino Sacca, sponsors Erinyes bewitched by the charm of a brunette girl six feet tall, a physicist from the 50 plus. The climb knows no barriers. A fictional Barbarossa of the Northern League with the singer, Renzo Martinelli ( The girl hands dirty ) Mondadori published a book and a review (extorted) to Giampiero Mughini that Panorama Carlo Rossella of a rod 'ironic slating and found himself in a page one piece that compared the girl to Marguerite Yourcenar. Years later, the memory is still alive: "I found a paper published extensively amended in the sense ruffianoide against Bonev.
In Venice, besides the Bulgarian Minister of Culture, to celebrate a Dragomira (Michelle), half the Italian government. Giancarlo Galan, joyful, "Prime Minister Berlusconi has asked me to personally bring his warmest greetings and I do it willingly with all the affection I am capable of," Mara Carfagna : "I am proud to honor a girl so brave "and upset Marco Muller and Paolo Baratta, the president and director of the Biennale, hastily called in from the rooms of the Ministry of Bondi to the desire to find appropriate stage of the premier and terrified by the presence of the press. Unique absent, in fact, journalists. With the ghost of the unfortunate Henry Magrelli (Television Movie) given for this, mistaken for a whirlwind of aural Mereghetti with Corriere della Sera and vainly awaited Dragomira Bonev between a bow and one that kept saying, 'Where' is famous Magrelli de courier de Milan?, President promised me there, so I want to hug him. " In the dining room, a public fake dismay, the same as certain TV programs in the afternoon, enlivened by Deborah Bergamini (counsel for the real prize "Action for woman"), in spite of that day in Venice with a plethora of MEPs diligently sitting in the audience. At the end of the evening, complimentary phone call to B. new and amazing future scenarios to draw together. A close
worthy imitation Fellini, a letter from the EU, also fictitious, offered to Dragomira-Michelle, lilac dress, shock collar, pearl necklace, cultured from mystical ecstasy and ready to add his testimony to the black book Communism: "I arrived in Italy in 1990 with only a couple of yellow shoes and $ 20 in his pocket. I owe a lot to Italy: the Bulgaria gave me life but Italy freedom. " From parts of Arcore, sincerely, confirm.
Done From The Daily of November 23, 2010
In Venice, the gay group has passed away. Michelle Bonev (born Dragomir
to ) has won the Golden Lion but had the impression (at the end what matters), to do so. The organization is evil. Taking advantage of the event "Action for Women" , cockade true for short films with high-level jury (among others Tornatore, Francesca Comencini, Roberta Torre) and the confusion issue, the plan Bonev snaps in the late afternoon. A secluded location, the Sala Pasinetti , and that's come out the offending plate, the film produced by Bonev "Goodbye Mama" , and co-produced by Rai Cinema under the auspices the Ministry of Culture. History of marginalization full of buxom women in export which is transformed into work "from the social value." The epigraph, a solemn, to give a semblance of credibility: "Special Prize of the Biennale awarded at the 60th anniversary of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Minister for Arts and Culture ". They could also give the other because it is undeniable, she is extremely active. The first stirrings of awareness in Sanremo , when the poor Baudo the flank as a columnist in Dopofestival 2003 edition. Pippo angry, but it bends to the wishes of Agostino Sacca, sponsors Erinyes bewitched by the charm of a brunette girl six feet tall, a physicist from the 50 plus. The climb knows no barriers. A fictional Barbarossa of the Northern League with the singer, Renzo Martinelli ( The girl hands dirty ) Mondadori published a book and a review (extorted) to Giampiero Mughini that Panorama Carlo Rossella of a rod 'ironic slating and found himself in a page one piece that compared the girl to Marguerite Yourcenar. Years later, the memory is still alive: "I found a paper published extensively amended in the sense ruffianoide against Bonev.
In Venice, besides the Bulgarian Minister of Culture, to celebrate a Dragomira (Michelle), half the Italian government. Giancarlo Galan, joyful, "Prime Minister Berlusconi has asked me to personally bring his warmest greetings and I do it willingly with all the affection I am capable of," Mara Carfagna : "I am proud to honor a girl so brave "and upset Marco Muller and Paolo Baratta, the president and director of the Biennale, hastily called in from the rooms of the Ministry of Bondi to the desire to find appropriate stage of the premier and terrified by the presence of the press. Unique absent, in fact, journalists. With the ghost of the unfortunate Henry Magrelli (Television Movie) given for this, mistaken for a whirlwind of aural Mereghetti with Corriere della Sera and vainly awaited Dragomira Bonev between a bow and one that kept saying, 'Where' is famous Magrelli de courier de Milan?, President promised me there, so I want to hug him. " In the dining room, a public fake dismay, the same as certain TV programs in the afternoon, enlivened by Deborah Bergamini (counsel for the real prize "Action for woman"), in spite of that day in Venice with a plethora of MEPs diligently sitting in the audience. At the end of the evening, complimentary phone call to B. new and amazing future scenarios to draw together. A close
worthy imitation Fellini, a letter from the EU, also fictitious, offered to Dragomira-Michelle, lilac dress, shock collar, pearl necklace, cultured from mystical ecstasy and ready to add his testimony to the black book Communism: "I arrived in Italy in 1990 with only a couple of yellow shoes and $ 20 in his pocket. I owe a lot to Italy: the Bulgaria gave me life but Italy freedom. " From parts of Arcore, sincerely, confirm.
Done From The Daily of November 23, 2010
Sunday, November 21, 2010
B Online Banking Sign
I wonder why ... A quiet life
... Italian newspapers put on the front page Carfagna, I 
ntre were lodged the grounds of appeal on sentence Dell'Utri that explains in detail how the senator has had contact with members of the first caliber mafia ( including Riina) , and how these relationships have also benefited from Mr Berlusconi.
Go well as the presumption of innocence until res judicata, but here we call. When there is only the Supreme Court, which judges on the form is not on the merits.
really do not understand. In any other country I believe that such a thing would have taken title to 12 columns in all the papers. We, however, we are not informed properly. The news was given but in the second or third floor, accompanied by the release of the offender, of course, says that this is a fairy tale, however, confirming that the mob boss, serial killer, Mangano was a hero.
Why do we kidding? Maybe because we are lazy and ask, in today, it requires commitment. I started reading the reasons for the sentence. It is a huge effort because it is over 600 pages, and I have more to do. But I do it because I think it is a civic duty. So
public link where you can download these reasons:
http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2010/11/19/dellutri-sentenza-dappello-ecco-le-motivazioni/77807/
PS the other front page news in newspapers today is dedicated to ' "opening
to" the Pope condoms. There is a single case in which a condom is acceptable, according to the Pontiff, "such as when [...] a prostitute using a condom, and this may be the first step toward a moralization, a primary responsibility to develop a new awareness of the fact that not everything is allowed and that you can not do everything what you want '.
Given that Ratzinger spent the first words of wisdom on the trivialization of sexuality, which I think all agree, raise your hand if faced with this opening is not induced to become a fat laugh ...
ntre were lodged the grounds of appeal on sentence Dell'Utri that explains in detail how the senator has had contact with members of the first caliber mafia ( including Riina) , and how these relationships have also benefited from Mr Berlusconi. Go well as the presumption of innocence until res judicata, but here we call. When there is only the Supreme Court, which judges on the form is not on the merits.
really do not understand. In any other country I believe that such a thing would have taken title to 12 columns in all the papers. We, however, we are not informed properly. The news was given but in the second or third floor, accompanied by the release of the offender, of course, says that this is a fairy tale, however, confirming that the mob boss, serial killer, Mangano was a hero.
Why do we kidding? Maybe because we are lazy and ask, in today, it requires commitment. I started reading the reasons for the sentence. It is a huge effort because it is over 600 pages, and I have more to do. But I do it because I think it is a civic duty. So
public link where you can download these reasons:
http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2010/11/19/dellutri-sentenza-dappello-ecco-le-motivazioni/77807/
PS the other front page news in newspapers today is dedicated to ' "opening
to" the Pope condoms. There is a single case in which a condom is acceptable, according to the Pontiff, "such as when [...] a prostitute using a condom, and this may be the first step toward a moralization, a primary responsibility to develop a new awareness of the fact that not everything is allowed and that you can not do everything what you want '. Given that Ratzinger spent the first words of wisdom on the trivialization of sexuality, which I think all agree, raise your hand if faced with this opening is not induced to become a fat laugh ...
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Sami Temimi, Québec
BELIEVE IN PRAISE OF EGO Rewarding
If there are certain ways to be appreciated by relatives and friends is a sure way to be hated and perhaps hate: the show on every occasion that an egoist recognizes only itself and its own interest. Selfish a nature it can be recognized early because usually there is an evident since early childhood. Just begins to walk one of the first targets of a child is selfish bin of ice cream in the freezer, or alternatively the second season, the door of the chocolates in the window in the living room. Its sole purpose is to accappararsi beautiful which pleases in spite of previous fair division among brothers. Is that child does not divide the tip of her aunt even though it was peremptorily requested to do so. And that is what requires the whole family channel cartoons, soap operas during the Mother's or Father's Day game. His first experience of social relations expressed already then, in their small, knowing that it will also lead to great in the jungle of the free market: None of his friends will take him from the missing figure, although it has double or triple, if not with the counterparts in quantity and quality of figures is absolutely unfair. And even when you leave work, so to speak merchant to devote himself to disregard the game, he is recognized at once: in a practice match football in the yard is what everyone wants to kick the penalties and punishments, one that never goes out and the ball does not go to to the goalkeeper when it is his turn.
Despite the efforts of parents, teachers and other educators to inculcate occasional that being selfish is wrong, even malicious, selfish brat continues to make its own interests in defiance of all teaching, regardless of any negative impact on relations with others. Nothing has the power to dissuade him from pursuing his selfish ends. The exhortation of the mother, or someone on her, thinking to others - perhaps with the lure of the reason the other there is always needed - is received with the greatest indifference. And sometimes the idea of \u200b\u200bsending in the parish is likely to have not anything good: not even terrible punishment from God - so far away and so divorced from its immediate interests - can convince him to surrender to what he believes is his personal benefit. There is no religious argument, nor those utilitarian in various ways that reward altruism, able to convince both better to think of others instead of himself. Would the fertile imagination of the child refuses to be intimidated by the future punishment of eternal fire, it is certain that the contempt and hatred of fellow land and educators are very poor deterrent against his natural instinct to overwhelm.
There are many reasons that make it almost impossible for his redemption. Even painful experiences that would suggest that it is more convenient, even for his personal purposes, to obtain the cooperation and goodwill of others, led him to persist in his attitude often masochistic to want to reward any price, often with heavy losses, its interest staff. The selfishness that has a perfect size does not let anyone blow from scratch in real life. As the missionaries devoted to selfishness altruism also pursue their goals profoundly indifferent to their advantage. The reasons for this persistence to their ideal of self-interest does not only depend on their nature. Culture also provides you with one of his decisive contribution. The strength of the recalcitrant child who lashes out against the teachings of parents, teachers and religious is, for example, fueled in large part also by the modern culture that is expressed, for example, in the organization of economic relations based on purely selfish. Who would not give to do to excel, to win the competition, it is an incompetent who does not deserve the success. And it is considered a parasite that can live only through goods and services produced by the most selfish, ie by the stronger and bolder. Any dishonesty, the instinct for domination at any price that spurs them to do and always have more than others, is for them a little insignificant spot redeemed by great service to the welfare of everyone, including the poor and weak altruists. The latter, clinging to the aid of the welfare state or a state employment or at least working for them - leaving their lives in the hands of the strong and dishonest for a good purpose - would be a symptom of a deep decline of the human family and degeneration of humanity who can not think of itself. And if the members of the aristocracy, active and aggressive, while pursuing his own interest, which would also be parasites, they are forced to sacrifice not only lives but also the environment in which they themselves live, is a special for them small. Focused on their task ideal to aim for the good of the individual self-interest do not care that every effort will be resolved in cutting the branch on which it sustains life itself.
The deleterious action of the selfish obviously does not escape those who are not selfish, those who from childhood have been limited to only eat the candy they are entitled and to respect the duty to defend the port in the practice match in the yard. The awareness of being in the right leads them to consider their way to be virtuous and to denounce the selfishness of others as an evil to be fought. Mindful of their chocolates and unjustly taken away long afternoons between two poles still without power run towards the ball, believe that the wrongs suffered by them are the work of human evil. In short, the fate of humanity would continue their personal fate of victims of the selfish right from early childhood. Is how I take you for a universal question of their personal and relational experiences disappointing, because of their altruism, are considering a general solution to saving all: the propensity to evil, selfishness must be suppressed by an authority which imposes a duty solidarity and mutual respect. Otherwise, they threaten, the world will always be unfair and unfortunate.
The award of justice and happiness is achieved then, according to them, refusing to do what you want, abandoning their own wishes and trust in the will and sense of justice of a higher moral authority, political or religious it is. The commandment to which they entrust their ransom of virtuous victims of the wickedness of others is one that requires everyone to submit to a much more important instance of self-interest. Given that research spontaneous, immediate and free to see them happiness always unsuccessful, opting to destroy in whole spontaneity, immediacy and freedom.
does not therefore seem misleading to think that the altruistic confused, not so different from the selfish, personal interest and inclination with an interest and a general tendency. They also rewarding part of himself, gratified by the generosity of the party. Without admitting it, and perhaps even without realizing it, reward what they are or believe to be, as indeed are also selfish. Both live in a partial and simplified size of their identity: some know nothing of the pleasure of trust their instincts, to the spontaneity and freedom to be who they are, others know nothing of the pleasure and gratitude to obtain benevolence others. So limited a vision of itself and its radical renunciation of a possible form of pleasure, can not produce relational imbalances. No coincidence that the selfish, once you got the goods they seek in the long run come to desire so strongly the affection and approval from others starts buying and pretending not to realize how they are obtained. If not the night would not be populated by wealthy selfish turn into hours of the night in very generous benefactors in exchange for some attention. And if the excessive selfishness has produced equally immoderate wealth grows equally the need for consent of applause and praise, not only have to take the field in politics, buying journalists and opinion makers, so there is always someone who, well paid, offer what no selfishness. You can not say that the altruists are not themselves at risk of falling into relationships just as ambiguous and paradoxical. Their belief of being able to be happy just doing good for others leads them to seek at every opportunity those who need them. I have found more and more opportunity to indulge their pleasure. If we are not aware of the need of the needy as much as those of them, then you are definitely at risk to engage even those who accept their help with discomfort.
A chance to restore balance in relations which are based on unequal relationships between who gets and who gives is to accept the idea of \u200b\u200bhow every human action is driven by what is called selfishness with contempt. But it is rewarding when it's not a selfish thought so unilterale and opens the possibilities to get pleasure from interpersonal relationships, where, ultimately, will not crush or making other enemies or need. "So it's a selfishness that is not inconsistent with altruism, ie what is erroneously thought to be its opposite. Not only can you love others or just themselves. In " love your neighbor as yourself " as the Bible reminds us, the love one has for oneself is inevitably linked to what you give to others. This awareness, capacity for example in the banality of love affairs, to understand how the desire to make happy the other arises from the consciousness and experience than it is gratifying to be the architects of the happiness of others. What then is called selfishness, more than a defect or a defect, is a form of stupidity: it focuses only on a part of himself with the false certainty as to the goal of running their own welfare. We wear blinders to run faster towards the goal and while we become insensitive to all removes stains caused in the race. In this sense we can speak of selfishness as a failure of conscience and knowledge, an error produced by a myopia unable to see that the ego is a fiction: what we call ego is only a part of us, something that is constantly changing, with more faces, and more likely to be manifest. 
Selfishness does not sin as much action as misunderstanding
(Hugo von Hofmannsthal)
(Hugo von Hofmannsthal)
If there are certain ways to be appreciated by relatives and friends is a sure way to be hated and perhaps hate: the show on every occasion that an egoist recognizes only itself and its own interest. Selfish a nature it can be recognized early because usually there is an evident since early childhood. Just begins to walk one of the first targets of a child is selfish bin of ice cream in the freezer, or alternatively the second season, the door of the chocolates in the window in the living room. Its sole purpose is to accappararsi beautiful which pleases in spite of previous fair division among brothers. Is that child does not divide the tip of her aunt even though it was peremptorily requested to do so. And that is what requires the whole family channel cartoons, soap operas during the Mother's or Father's Day game. His first experience of social relations expressed already then, in their small, knowing that it will also lead to great in the jungle of the free market: None of his friends will take him from the missing figure, although it has double or triple, if not with the counterparts in quantity and quality of figures is absolutely unfair. And even when you leave work, so to speak merchant to devote himself to disregard the game, he is recognized at once: in a practice match football in the yard is what everyone wants to kick the penalties and punishments, one that never goes out and the ball does not go to to the goalkeeper when it is his turn.
Despite the efforts of parents, teachers and other educators to inculcate occasional that being selfish is wrong, even malicious, selfish brat continues to make its own interests in defiance of all teaching, regardless of any negative impact on relations with others. Nothing has the power to dissuade him from pursuing his selfish ends. The exhortation of the mother, or someone on her, thinking to others - perhaps with the lure of the reason the other there is always needed - is received with the greatest indifference. And sometimes the idea of \u200b\u200bsending in the parish is likely to have not anything good: not even terrible punishment from God - so far away and so divorced from its immediate interests - can convince him to surrender to what he believes is his personal benefit. There is no religious argument, nor those utilitarian in various ways that reward altruism, able to convince both better to think of others instead of himself. Would the fertile imagination of the child refuses to be intimidated by the future punishment of eternal fire, it is certain that the contempt and hatred of fellow land and educators are very poor deterrent against his natural instinct to overwhelm.
There are many reasons that make it almost impossible for his redemption. Even painful experiences that would suggest that it is more convenient, even for his personal purposes, to obtain the cooperation and goodwill of others, led him to persist in his attitude often masochistic to want to reward any price, often with heavy losses, its interest staff. The selfishness that has a perfect size does not let anyone blow from scratch in real life. As the missionaries devoted to selfishness altruism also pursue their goals profoundly indifferent to their advantage. The reasons for this persistence to their ideal of self-interest does not only depend on their nature. Culture also provides you with one of his decisive contribution. The strength of the recalcitrant child who lashes out against the teachings of parents, teachers and religious is, for example, fueled in large part also by the modern culture that is expressed, for example, in the organization of economic relations based on purely selfish. Who would not give to do to excel, to win the competition, it is an incompetent who does not deserve the success. And it is considered a parasite that can live only through goods and services produced by the most selfish, ie by the stronger and bolder. Any dishonesty, the instinct for domination at any price that spurs them to do and always have more than others, is for them a little insignificant spot redeemed by great service to the welfare of everyone, including the poor and weak altruists. The latter, clinging to the aid of the welfare state or a state employment or at least working for them - leaving their lives in the hands of the strong and dishonest for a good purpose - would be a symptom of a deep decline of the human family and degeneration of humanity who can not think of itself. And if the members of the aristocracy, active and aggressive, while pursuing his own interest, which would also be parasites, they are forced to sacrifice not only lives but also the environment in which they themselves live, is a special for them small. Focused on their task ideal to aim for the good of the individual self-interest do not care that every effort will be resolved in cutting the branch on which it sustains life itself.
The deleterious action of the selfish obviously does not escape those who are not selfish, those who from childhood have been limited to only eat the candy they are entitled and to respect the duty to defend the port in the practice match in the yard. The awareness of being in the right leads them to consider their way to be virtuous and to denounce the selfishness of others as an evil to be fought. Mindful of their chocolates and unjustly taken away long afternoons between two poles still without power run towards the ball, believe that the wrongs suffered by them are the work of human evil. In short, the fate of humanity would continue their personal fate of victims of the selfish right from early childhood. Is how I take you for a universal question of their personal and relational experiences disappointing, because of their altruism, are considering a general solution to saving all: the propensity to evil, selfishness must be suppressed by an authority which imposes a duty solidarity and mutual respect. Otherwise, they threaten, the world will always be unfair and unfortunate.
The award of justice and happiness is achieved then, according to them, refusing to do what you want, abandoning their own wishes and trust in the will and sense of justice of a higher moral authority, political or religious it is. The commandment to which they entrust their ransom of virtuous victims of the wickedness of others is one that requires everyone to submit to a much more important instance of self-interest. Given that research spontaneous, immediate and free to see them happiness always unsuccessful, opting to destroy in whole spontaneity, immediacy and freedom.
does not therefore seem misleading to think that the altruistic confused, not so different from the selfish, personal interest and inclination with an interest and a general tendency. They also rewarding part of himself, gratified by the generosity of the party. Without admitting it, and perhaps even without realizing it, reward what they are or believe to be, as indeed are also selfish. Both live in a partial and simplified size of their identity: some know nothing of the pleasure of trust their instincts, to the spontaneity and freedom to be who they are, others know nothing of the pleasure and gratitude to obtain benevolence others. So limited a vision of itself and its radical renunciation of a possible form of pleasure, can not produce relational imbalances. No coincidence that the selfish, once you got the goods they seek in the long run come to desire so strongly the affection and approval from others starts buying and pretending not to realize how they are obtained. If not the night would not be populated by wealthy selfish turn into hours of the night in very generous benefactors in exchange for some attention. And if the excessive selfishness has produced equally immoderate wealth grows equally the need for consent of applause and praise, not only have to take the field in politics, buying journalists and opinion makers, so there is always someone who, well paid, offer what no selfishness. You can not say that the altruists are not themselves at risk of falling into relationships just as ambiguous and paradoxical. Their belief of being able to be happy just doing good for others leads them to seek at every opportunity those who need them. I have found more and more opportunity to indulge their pleasure. If we are not aware of the need of the needy as much as those of them, then you are definitely at risk to engage even those who accept their help with discomfort.
A chance to restore balance in relations which are based on unequal relationships between who gets and who gives is to accept the idea of \u200b\u200bhow every human action is driven by what is called selfishness with contempt. But it is rewarding when it's not a selfish thought so unilterale and opens the possibilities to get pleasure from interpersonal relationships, where, ultimately, will not crush or making other enemies or need. "So it's a selfishness that is not inconsistent with altruism, ie what is erroneously thought to be its opposite. Not only can you love others or just themselves. In " love your neighbor as yourself " as the Bible reminds us, the love one has for oneself is inevitably linked to what you give to others. This awareness, capacity for example in the banality of love affairs, to understand how the desire to make happy the other arises from the consciousness and experience than it is gratifying to be the architects of the happiness of others. What then is called selfishness, more than a defect or a defect, is a form of stupidity: it focuses only on a part of himself with the false certainty as to the goal of running their own welfare. We wear blinders to run faster towards the goal and while we become insensitive to all removes stains caused in the race. In this sense we can speak of selfishness as a failure of conscience and knowledge, an error produced by a myopia unable to see that the ego is a fiction: what we call ego is only a part of us, something that is constantly changing, with more faces, and more likely to be manifest.
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Famous Person At Showers
Not what you all want: a quiet life? Aside Vasco Rossi, of course. A wife, a son, a job that feel fulfilled. The estimate of people, you know, who knows who you are. Rosario Russo is no exception. In order to find peace, left the Casertano and emigrated to Germany. He opened a hotel and restaurant, where the people making them welcome into her family intimacy, made of a German wife, efficient and comprehensive, a son, a child who speaks Italian, but German's hair (blond) to a friend "from below", with which he can be himself.
The quiet life, Rosario, has found in a remote village in Germany, near a forest where he goes to hunt wild boar. Yes, the wild boar. Rosario to enter the forest because it is that's where the animal lives. The wild boar is, you can not expect to come out from its natural habitat and get yourself in that world, middle-class that is close to the forest. Moreover, if, ironically, it did, that the savage world. So, Rosario enters the dark forest with a rifle. You see, the boar, quiet, rooting. Rosario takes aim, shoots him. Then, the door out of the forest, in the kitchen of his restaurant. Finally, he serves at the table with a side dish of crabs. Flat strange, it's true, but it also means welcome customers 
go and meet their tastes, therefore, a good restaurant as Rosario is not ashamed to cook less pizza and more wild boar with crabs. Why are German ones: they eat everything. And you drink it all.
After the successful debut of the comedy Lessons chocolate, Claudio Cupellini signing his second directorial sce 
gliendo a black history. Like a black tunnel with no exit, as a dead infamous Gomorrah, like the forest in Germany. As the life of a man who chooses to kill another. The life of a mafioso, a racketeer. The issue, already touched upon in Lessons chocolate, is that of redemption. Possible or impossible? According to the protagonist, impossible. His most important stop in the topical scene of the film, when he turns to a priest in a comatose state, sounds like a condemnation, without appeal: "God does not care about helping people." He says that he regretted the things done in the past, Rosario. Maybe he sincerely believes. But it is not. His death hoax, staged to avoid a wasted life up to that point in the underworld, he soon reveals an expedient Pirandello. How Mattia Pascal, Rosario Russo has also deceived her not to come to terms with the past. But those accounts, with past that, you have to do it. The redemption passes for 
strait and forced accountability: in front of themselves, others, God where are you? Where is your brother? Invoke the forgiveness of God, who is Truth and Life, by lying about their identity and having given the death easier for a cable enters the eye of a needle.
Here, then, that life "suicide" is back, and in the most compelling: the father's love for his son. Not Mathias, the son of "German" father's restaurant, but Diego, the son of his father Neapolitan Camorra. Discarded, Rosario had violated a taboo first: the sacredness of love, drawing on a lifetime, he had violated a second: the sanctity of death. Just as Pascal Pirandello's the lesson of Debenedetti.
Toni Servillo interpreting Rosario Russo, skillfully made, in flesh and blood, this character never epifanizzato sentenced to pursue peace in the impossibility of personal relationships. The tragedy is that they can not love anymore, not even a wife, not even a child. Even changing his wife, son or changing. His quiet life is his hell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)