Epiphone Quick Connector

Charles - creationists


If today we have a Feb. 12 Darwin Day! Festive mood in the morning. With a daughter who is scrumptious, "suffered from" the state feverishness, we ate Christmas breakfast (soy hot steam from razowcem and - optionally - mustard), we raised a toast at breakfast, a tea drink it cold, I'm red wine with a fairly low-end (to symbolize the commitment to the theory of the origin of wines higher from lower species.) Instead of a cake - dark chocolate. Dark chocolate, as we know her supporters (including słodyczożernym vegans), there is a total so bitter that it seemed like the first tasting in the life of the ankle. And this, of course, also has symbolic meaning.

Yes, reader, since this morning we celebrate the most underrated family feast of the Year. I drag the family celebration Selo on the blog. And here I would like to wish all readers and not readers, supporters and opponents of evolution, wish a nice day, Darwin Day. For the latter sub-group in the previous sentence Homo sapiens I also have occasional prezencik: a few witty fakcików anything myself, removed from the biography of Charles Darwin, after which - as celebrystycznie - grabbed from the shelf (Charles Darwin, Selected Works, Volume VIII, Warsaw, 1960 .) Fakciki can be used - after undergoing a treatment ideological and acrobatic manner - as a building block for the arguments for abolishing the theory outlined in "The Origin of Species." I do not know if you can, but who is not trying to not give advice. In any event voila, here are weak points in the lives of the Greatest Stories of Great destructor!

first (...) I have to admit - of necessity be granted Darwin - that as a small boy I was very tempted to compose a variety of imaginary history, and it's always for the cause of sensation. (p. 4) Ha! What more could you want! After all, this is basically the same what to say: "I admit that with pleasure łgam throughout his life and nothing came up, does not hold together a factual!" Darwin is no longer, and squeals, just finish off the smooth movement of the shoe (unless, given the enormity of oddarwinowskiej baseness and infamy, we recognize the need to complete its penance, set in the form of a slow and prolonged agony.) But if there każden psycho teacher knows that the shell of his youth and so forth. "For the cause of sensation," she wove a small Karolek kociopoły parents! Old Charlie has "imaginary stories" bulwersował naive and good-natured the world only "to evoke sensations! Egocentric and skandalista, zakompleksiony fantasist and reprobate. What more do you need to understand the character of this darkly humorous pseudo-scientific theory?

second father once told me, to my deep humiliation, "you just do not care about outside shooting, dogs and rat catching, and the shame you bring your whole family." (p. 7) Shame! Shame! Shame! You do not need Freud, Lacan, Žižek than to heap up to look into the foundation works of Darwin's psychopathology. Does his penchant for inventing idiotyzmów (whose compensation function is as bright as the highest dead-nettle) not directly related to the sense of humiliation from the father? Maybe not, but it can and even, yes, we test this hypothesis by using an interdisciplinary instrumentation that is supplied with each workshop postmodern critical-case-history.

third Fantasist? Of course. Fabricator? Indeed. Neurotic? Not otherwise. For the libertine and profligate!

Although my stay in Cambridge was (...) brighter side, this time for me was unfortunately wasted, and worse than wasted. My passion for shooting and hunting, and when that ran out of time - a passion for horse riding, pushed me in a group of athletes, which was a lot of exciting and limited youth. Often evening we ate dinner together sometimes (...); drank too much, podśpiewywaliśmy cheerfully, we played cards. I know I should be ashamed of that spent days and evenings, but since some of my friends were very nice and the mood was often very nice, I remember those times with great pleasure. (P. 27)

That's right: he knows that he should be ashamed of, but not be ashamed, but on the contrary! And ribald rascal, without a doubt. I note two details. Detail 1: Darwin - fantasist and neurotic - he falls in a group of athletes. " Like anything, yet. Does not if - the time fascination with physical fitness, the model uniquely jumping monkey - Charles takes up residence in my head this insidious and deceptive virus, which years later transform into "The Descent of Man"? Detail 2: Darwin and his dodgy company used to eat dinner in the evening. Can anything good come from similar abnegatów?
Oh, if only at the time of study, instead of compromising the patrimony, the young Darwin focused on the science fair and conscientious, can play a dangerous child zaniechałby matches, introducing chaos in the eternal order? And so we are stewing and klops, and someone has to eat that monkey!

4th Top ... oops, pardon me ... Of course the worst was yet to come! Here are unabashedly admits to Darwin: the time I occupied the student demoralization boys choir to sing in my room . Sang? I wonder what Darwinu singing "boys", as already in the next sentence reads Autobiography: am so utterly tone-deaf that I can not know the dissonance nor properly and something to hum to the rhythm, is a mystery to me how the music could make me so much pleasure . (P. 28) The secret is to it!? Shameless bugger! Entertains the helpless reader suggestions and weaving fantasies! Wood ear takes in-house boys from the choir. " Why, I ask? Why? Poor boys, Poor Dad, what in his own breast uhodował this monstrosity, the poor world, what a monstrosity wife - with bezeceństwami by her sinful fantasies created - even today has to cope!

5th In the next paragraph, we read about the Darwinian venom poisoning beetle, which he held - with the lack of free hands, pozajmowanych enslaved another hapless creatures - in the mouth; then shot out a very sharp liquid that such a hell to me in language that I had to spit it out . (P. 28) First: anyone who loses the normal time for the bush to collect beetles and other abominations? What can provide this kind of perversion? Secondly, "hot liquid", which in the language of Charles hell - is not that the same solution, which poisons people's minds Darwinian phlegm? Infection continues and moves through the generations. Fear, fear and trembling.

6th Fantastic Darwin's theory comes from uncommon hatred its author to God. Proof of it is found also in the Autobiography. This is Darwin, not Dawkins, first hit the base of the Kingdom of God on Earth, demanding the diabolical fiddling heads of innocent children. It is written: Let the children come to me . If only Darwin Dawkins can become incarnate in the way of separating the innocent from the innocent!

Nor can we overlook the possibility of continued faith in God implanted in the minds of children, which has such a strong and probably inherited effect on their brains not yet fully developed, that just as hard for them to reject belief in God as monkey it is difficult to get rid of the instinctive fear and hatred of the serpent. (P. 47)

Istnie devilish cunning! Devilish cleverness! God - Child / Monkey - Snake, no word here is random, each has a deeply spiritual, metaphorical sense. Oh no, Darwin is not a common dummy! His job is to astutely Knut and - in view of the unleavened intellectual mediocrity of his salary - not on the same dates. Fantasist, rake, a liar, bugger, rat catcher, the follower type of monkey - zaprzedaniec devils, no doubt! What a naive count Stanhope, who is he supposed to ask Darwin Why do not you leave the geological and zoological hocków-blocks and will not return the pan to the occult? (p. 58) It is precisely through this "hocki blocks" the bandit, Darwin, all were turned toward the occult, grim and evil! The devil in the skin did not speak English in all his life, the word of truth, nor even a syllable of the word such could be skumpletować! And how many rams polazło behind the black sheep of a sordid, who is counting?

7th makes me difficult to clear and strict expressing the . (P. 74) lie! It's not difficult! This method of cunning rat, snake, monkey! It means to overturn turning everything possible to overturn turn! And if not, then the worse for Darwin. I mean, it is not clear and precise, how then do we know what happened to him rozchodziło with all this, Lord have mercy, natural selection?

8th Old Darwin complains regrettable loss of the higher aesthetic feelings . (P. 75) I do not have time to explain how it can be to the whole "work" This fantasy, neurotic and szatanisty. And what is such a thing at all attested. Please yourself extra money this quote appropriate ears.

end gifts, I hope that something useful from the list above to spread the godly work. For the rest I'm sorry. Good luck!

The Life Expectany Of The Chicken Pox Virus

agonism, you idiot!


not known until the end, which led the leftist Paktofonika (especially the guys are totally indyferentni politically, which I checked with my own ears in Kalisz meeting with the characters and the author of the book), but the next (chronologically earlier) "Guide to Political Criticism," by Chantal Mouffe Fri "The political" in the translation Joanna Erbel leads quite clear ideas, transmits a clear message, though, and his left-wing is in some parts of the text is not quite obvious. But from the beginning.

Mouffe is one of the expressions of apology leftist political conflict, which - in the minds of its adherents - has the power of reanimation of democracy, wypłukiwanej effectively by dominant today (also in Poland in the implementation of the OP) model of doing politics. It is characterized by blurring of ideological differences - a classic blurring the division between left and right - and the establishment in that place of power technokratyczno-governance expert. Politics always has its "biased" dimension - people will not be interested in politics, if there is no choice between parties offering a real alternative. This is what is missing in contemporary praise for the democratic "impartiality". (p. 44)

symptom (and perhaps also the condition of possibility) and utechnokratycznienia odideologicznienia power is the precipitating element fundującego emotionality of her discourse. Meanwhile well-functioning democracy requires a clash of legitimate, democratic political positions. This is what has to rely confrontation between the left and right. It should be a source of collective forms of identification are able to mobilize political passions. (p. 45) There is no democracy without conflict, and the latter without the involvement of emotions for intersubjective exchange of ideas fundujących social attitudes. And that's why we Serenity prevailing "politics of love" is an effective tool of cynical disposition gained power, but at the same time, in a broader context, destabilizing the democratic project, fundujący power. Why destabilizes? Because blurring ideological differences in the entities internalized it (authority) as. A blurring of these differences is taking politics out of emotion. And choosing it from the emotional - takes its social attractiveness. And receiving the appeal - limited, rather than expanding, the strength of the mandate to exercise power on behalf of the sovereign.

As between the parties there is no fundamental difference, will try to sell their products invented by marketing and advertising agencies. The result will be the growing disenchantment with politics and the dramatic fall in participation in elections. How long will it be before people completely lose faith in the democratic process? (P. 79)

disturbed and disturbing the prospect of Mouffe calls the conflict, polarized positions, the return of ideology and the appeal of technology from the office of the First Practice wielding Designer.

idea of \u200b\u200bhow this conflict effectively yet safely return to the bosom of the policy is a key theme of the orange book. Safely - ie without getting naked violence (for which insisted strongly inspiring Mouffe and its Polish publisher of Carl Schmitt).
This idea is relatively simple and clear (thanks to the orange book is the booklet is rather bulky tomiszczem):

If we accept the irreducible stability of the antagonistic dimension of the conflict on the one hand, with the possibility of "tame" on the other hand, we must introduce tzreci type of relationship, which I propose to call "agonism". While antagonism is a type of relationship we / they, characterized in that the sides are enemies who do not share their points of reference, agonism is a relationship we / they, in turn, part of which, being aware of the impossibility of the existence of a rational solution to the conflict that divides them, they also legitimacy of their opponents. They're for themselves "enemies" and not enemies. This also means that despite the conflict parties perceive themselves as belonging to the same political association, as sharing the same symbolic universe. (P. 35)

Antagonistic distinguish us / them creates enemies (and hostility), agniczne distinguish us / them and creates enemies. The opponent is someone who is impossible to agree on the ideas for the design of a common world (because the ideological differences that we are different, they have no rational basis, involving emotions reinforce an irrational policy of the leg), but who can (and therefore need to) get along as to the conditions in which leads to dispute about the shape of the world. And if you can get along with him, it means that it recognizes its subjectivity. Recognition of the distinction as the enemy opponent and the opponent (I have a feeling that Mouffe, Schmitt was inspiring about a completely different idea, but let this one). Do you have something important to say in this matter? can say that democracy is the task of transforming the antagonistic relationship agoniczne. (p. 36)

Mouffe then deals with academics who are not aware of the democratic core antagonistic regulation order, or seeing them in working towards its destruction, thus unwittingly working for the destruction of democracy itself. It gets mostly Giddensowi a "third way" and Beck as "subpolitykę, the Hardt / Negriemu for" Empire "and the multitude .

goes even further with morality as a tool of politics. Specifically: to replace the ideology of the registry records of morality in the practice of political debate. This, according to Mouffe, along with strategies to blur the ideological differences and replacing them with expert discourse, the most serious threat to democracy. What is it? In short, it's about all measure of "men of honor" and "little people", "civilization of life" and "axis of evil", a stigmatizing moral opponents (and signed by their political projects), significantly contributing to push them beyond the pale of public discourse.

When politics is played in the register of morality, antagonism can not take the form agonicznej. Just as the opponents are not defined on the basis of political, but moral, can not be seen as "enemies", but only as "enemies." "Bad" they are not suitable for agonicznej debate and must be exterminated. (P. 92)

Such recognition in Poland is quite recent date, has taken place during the so-called glory. Fourth Republic, and his voice came from the various perspectives of interpretation, which rub up nicely today, breaking the ideological hegemony of neo-liberal economic and cultural superstructure.

last part of the text relates to translate the ideas of Mouffe agonism in global politics. The author recognizes postpolityczny cosmopolitan nature of the perspective and subjected her to criticism:

Implementation of cosmopolitan right, no matter in what form it occurs, will end up applying to the whole world one, the liberal-democratic model. In essence, this means subjecting more people under the control of the West, supporting the statement that this model is best suited for the implementation of human rights and universal values. (...) And this will be the emergence of strong resistance and dangerous antagonisms. (P. 121)

Not much is known from reading, from the author's knowledge about the cosmopolitan city of determinism, a view in one direction in the shackles of "one, the liberal-democratic model." Nor do we know too much, what's wrong with the universality of the processes of emancipation, aimed to "the implementation of human rights and universal values." Apparently, in the words of Mouffe once again give voice to some form of ethnocentrism and cultural diversity, favoring the happy due to us (still only) regionally basic rights. Maybe my questions are not covered in the views of Mouffe, this is your problem that can not be regarded as unfounded by the reading of "politics," too many easily expressed opinions critical of the courts and the universalist cosmopolitanism strategy, too superficial treatment by the author lansowanego alternative model. (...) It is essential dispense with the illusion of a united world and work toward the establishment of a multipolar world order . (P. 134). But exactly what is going on? Does the "illusion of a united world" includes, according to Mouffe, globally universal education, the emancipation of those different types of chauvinism? Secularism is part of the illusion? And animal rights? Do you enjoy can (if ever be fought), only the European cows and pigs? Is a "multipolar world order" is the idea of \u200b\u200b"respect for cultural differences," even if certain aspects of those cultures - in the name of universal values - In any respect does not deserve? This is a paragraph "imaginary God" , who fits me like nothing else here:

constantly encounter (...) [with] a tendency to a fascination with the difference of ethnic beliefs and customs, and this includes the justification committed crimes on their behalf . The attitude of many otherwise enlightened liberals and good happens at that point truly schizophrenic. On one hand, we can not accept the suffering and violence, on the other, postmodern and relativistic beliefs dictate respect for other cultures no less than his own. Treatment kliteroktomii is, there is no doubt horribly painful and makes a woman ceases to feel sexual pleasure (in fact mainly in the matter). I think with half of the enlightened, decent people with liberal views would prohibit these practices. The second half however, with "respect" for other cultures believe that we should not interfere, when "they" want to mutilate "their" girls. But the problem is that we forget that these "their" girls are actually "own" the girls, whose own desires, we should not ignore. (Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, Switch. Szwajcer PJ, ed. CiS, Warsaw 2007, p. 439)

That is, it is! Mouffe does not buy the reason for the defense of liberal democracy, human rights, universal values \u200b\u200bthat stand out, spokesmen for the transmission of hen, in the wide world. The point is that it is not because liberal democracy or human rights are cool, because they are ours, but because they constitute a set of tools in the heap to rectify the theoretical foundations of social life for the various abominations of this world, the type of physical violence, discrimination, chauvinism, rape , poverty, slavery. Every vote would undermine the meaningfulness of globalization and universalization of Western liberal ideological gains, even the most subtle (and Mouffe voice and it is unlikely such, it is difficult for subtlety when its concept is as the proverbial łebkach), pregnancy toward a relativistic idea of \u200b\u200brównofajność all, without exception, the concept of social life. I do not know whether it is specifically leftist. If so, I have at this point, the lack of an obvious left-wing.

Big Fish Games Hacken

bottleneck "Extended phenotype"


you can not read any of my other books, but this read is essential - an injunction refers to reading "extended phenotype" by Richard Dawkins on the back cover said a few words before the volume. A jam that you do not have a finite dawkinsiarz me was to read the oxen pull. And the fact that the whole thing is addressed primarily to Dawkins colleagues, not only did not discourage me, but even further mobilized by heating unhealthy ambition. Well, I say what? I'm not that kind of stretch of the expected utility of cognitive lekturki? If not me, then who?
Well, I gave up and let the reading hopeless. Thanks be to God Urojonemu, not a happy coincidence that he came up with "extended phenotype" as Dawkins's first book, which I have read! Nothing in the world I would not tell you at that time that "The Selfish Gene" or "unweaving rainbow" is interesting stuff! Give you peace of mind, as I umęczył I was at Oxford biologist, in his (by no means popular) scientific incarnation. Too much of the volume of text discussing with like-minded specami świergotka the Y chromosomes of meadow and other abominations, discussing with them on that level of expertise rozkminy that the ability of reading comprehension man not of this sect, though he tried to focus on power and must run to ruin, sooner or later. In my case, unfortunately, usually it was before.

toil for wages reading stubborn as a mule reader, which reads constantly, though long ago does not understand anything the last few chapters of the book brings, finally, as a cognitive benefit. It was there that Dawkins serves as "a layman Friendly " his theory of the extended phenotype of the title. In short, this goes Dawkinsu is that the phenotypic consequences of genotypic interactions back / can extend far beyond the borders of individual body, who is a "cover" (or, as the poetic industral-recognized author, machine replicators propagation), this particular genotype. In other words, the gene not only may "squeeze" eye color, coat color or other phenotypic characteristics of their own body, can also determine the behavior of certain of the body, resulting in the reorganization of the living environment (a good example of the beaver and its dam), and even affect the characteristics of effective tudziez phenotypic behavior of other organisms. Examples of such extension of the battlefield to a higher value Replication gives Dawkins a few, and każden more interesting than others. That, say, flukes, parasitic on the cochlea and forcing replication for their own interest (contrary to the interests of the cochlea counterpart) increasing the thickness of snail shells. Or scuds infected larvae kolcogłowa that behave not as implied by the interest of the vector, but on the contrary, that is contrary to their interests to the interests of the parasite. Or male mice (or maybe a rat? "I do not remember, sorry) that through appropriate pheromone act on the pregnant females in a way that make them a miscarriage. Or, finally, the influenza virus, which - quite possibly - forcing me to sneeze with your own promotion. Well, a lot of this is to trace, and the conclusion of the whole thing might look like this:

genes affect the proteins, which in turn affect the X, which affects the Y, which affects the Z, which ... affects us an interesting phenotypic cehcę. But in traditional genetics of X, Y and Z must be closed within the body of the individual. Rozszezrona genetics recognizes the arbitrariness of this decision and follows the X, Y, Z, and when their effects go from one body to another. (P. 292) Dawkins

news so bad mish-mash, a total mix of compounds the sum of the existing relationship between genotype and the amount of phenotypic effects in the form of bodies and behaviors of all kinds of living organisms. According to traditional genetics of this association is much simpler and limited to the entailment relationship between genotype and phenotype X X Dawkins sees the arbitrariness here, and, above it, constructs a very complex network of relationships between genes and bodies / behaviors. I think - he writes - that almost every feature bears the traces of a compromise phenotype interaction between internal and external replicators . (P. 310)

(...) defending the doctrine of the extended phenotype of the replicator, I was trying to undermine confidence in the reader to the view which views the body as a unit of relating the benefits of the adaptations . (P. 311) And in another mania: I have a feeling that the very concept of the extended phenotype was possible to articulate only through the rejection of this perspective, which is an organism / individual is the primary beneficiary of natural selection. How here and there, you know, old-fashioned view fights Dawkins the evolutionary importance of individual prymarne even more fiercely than the Lord God. In any case, my personal confidence in the evolutionary "osobnikowizmu" effectively have been challenged when taking a "selfish gene", and "extended phenotype" gained the impression of distant consequences genocentrycznego coup on the basis of evolutionary biology. And that is why reading this book is, after all, however, was a good gadget. Although the version of the popular science really could be close to one fifth of total volume.