text:
Thursday, June 23, 2011
My Next Run
40 comments:
- Rob Timko said...
Give everyone a run for there money Geoff!
-Rob & Laurie from Jersey-now-in-Boulder ;) - June 23, 2011 at 2:08 PM
- Charlie said...
All the best for a great run Geoff. I just re-read your report from last year and it does provide some great insights into how to race a 100 miler even with all the highs and lows that ou have to deal with.
Will be watching online all day. - June 23, 2011 at 2:13 PM
- paulhiggins said...
Good luck Geoff. Pity Gary and Tony injured this year. Reckon it's between you, Clark, Bragg and Journet. Enjoy.
- June 23, 2011 at 2:23 PM
- Obstreperous Dogey said...
Are you still doing UTMB this year as well? If so, good luck (and for this!)
- June 23, 2011 at 2:28 PM
Good luck!
- June 23, 2011 at 3:45 PM
- Ian Scott said...
Good luck Geoff. I hope you come out on top again this year!
- June 23, 2011 at 3:53 PM
- Brian said...
Good Luck, and have a blast!
- June 23, 2011 at 4:41 PM
Good luck Geoff, it's going to be a corker of a race up front, like you say one of the most competitive for years.
- June 23, 2011 at 5:32 PM
- Rob Timko said...
Brendan, Heck, I figured here in Boulder, people would be gathering and imbibing as they would the super bowl!
- June 23, 2011 at 6:29 PM
Good luck! I'll be spectating online with many others!
- June 23, 2011 at 7:21 PM
- fabrice said...
Go get you buckle, you will do great!!! You manage your races better than anyone. It will be so cool to see you at the Mt Blanc!!
- June 23, 2011 at 7:43 PM
- mindful mule said...
Go Geoff! Also, welcome back to Cali…
- June 23, 2011 at 8:13 PM
- Todd said...
Good luck Geoff! I've been a long time follower of your blog. Can't wait to follow along on Saturday! Rip it up!!!
- June 23, 2011 at 8:27 PM
- mtnrunner2 said...
Geoff, good luck on your run, I'll be following from afar (thank goodness for Twitter).
Beware, I hear Kilian is bringing a water bottle this year ;) - June 23, 2011 at 9:08 PM
- Alaska Classic said...
Best of luck, Geoff! Stay healthy, be happy, run fast!
- June 23, 2011 at 9:50 PM
- Alex Gillespie said...
Goodluck Geoff. I think kilian will be a lot better this year and you will have to go maybe under 15 hours based on last years course (can't compare it to this years) which I am sure you can do. Us arm chair fans are sooooooooo excited!
- June 23, 2011 at 11:06 PM
- Michelle said...
good luck Geoff. We'll all be following online and cheering you on from home. Love you!!!!!!
Michelle, Phil, Sarah, Haley, et al - June 24, 2011 at 2:25 AM
- momroes said...
Good luck Geoff but remember your health is much more important than any race so read your body and listen to what it is saying. We will be watching from Cleveland, NY (your hometown) and I am sure a lot of others will be watching from all areas of the world. You are such an inspiration to so many people. We love you very much and are so proud of you.
- June 24, 2011 at 2:56 AM
Have a fabulous race, Geoff - I am one of the many people your mom tells you that you are an inspiration to. I hope one day I'll be lining up alongside you at WS. The story of your victory last year is a true indication of the overwhelming power of the human spirit.
- June 24, 2011 at 4:02 AM
- johnmichael said...
Best of luck out there on Saturday! I'l only be 'watching' online, but I am pumped!
- June 24, 2011 at 4:44 AM
- John said...
Good luck Geoff. Looks like it'll be an exciting race. Like others I'll be be glued to the web searching for updates all day Saturday.
- June 24, 2011 at 7:08 AM
- Fames Jahl said...
you truly understand the journey vs. The destination philosophy! Good travels...
- June 24, 2011 at 9:47 AM
- The Sean said...
Just run as you do. If you have a your day then nothing else matters. Success is your choice.
- June 24, 2011 at 10:17 AM
- eric said...
here's hoping conditions don't play too much of a factor and that your race plan plays out smoothly.
most importantly, hope you enjoy yourself!!
looking forward to reading your race report. will be following online tomorrow!! - June 24, 2011 at 12:02 PM
- Aaron Pederson said...
Good luck man!
- June 24, 2011 at 7:01 PM
- Cloud said...
It's easy to see what happened and why it happened yesterday. You lost your edge. The same guy who last year was going on and on about how we need more races that put the super elites together over the last few months has become a guy talking about how Western States was no big deal and just your next run. Well such a mentality isn't going to get you across the finish line first...or across the finish line at all. News flash: western States isn't "your next run"- it's the biggest fucking 100-miler in the world. Kilian had the eye of the tiger as did Nick and Jez and you didn't have the eye of the tiger. You were intimindated by Kilian and never challenged him. So may this be a learning experience for you--you lost your first 100. And you lost it cause you lost your edge.
- June 26, 2011 at 11:44 AM
- Cloud said...
And you also lost it cause you raced too much going into western. The guys out there who raced too much, you and Mackey mainly, came up short. Clark raced too much and might have won had he not done so many goddamned races this year. When the fuck are people gonna get it? Unless you're 22 like Kilian, chill the fuck out with over-racing.
- June 26, 2011 at 11:46 AM
- Michelle said...
you are such an ass hole. - June 26, 2011 at 11:46 AM
- Ian Scott said...
Hey cloud, how'd you do at Western States yesterday?
- June 26, 2011 at 12:56 PM
- Kris said...
I was cheering for Roes or Mackey. It sucks that an American didn't win.
- June 26, 2011 at 1:32 PM
- Kris said...
In all honesty, WS 100 is the biggest ultra trail in the world. UTMB or Commarades are the next biggest things. Who cares who really won. It's a sporting event and ultimately athletes are there to entertain us. They aren't warriors, they aren't fighting for our freedoms or democracy. Athletes are there for there own good. I just hope next year an American brings our cougar back the USA! :)
- June 26, 2011 at 1:36 PM
- Charlie said...
Thank goodness for Mike Wolfe or it would have been an international top 4.
Cloud you may want to wait for Geoff's story before putting the boot in. He may have taken a fall for all you know, wrestled a bear, gotten bitten by a snake, had a tree fall on him. What ever the reason I'm sure he had a very good reason for DNF'ing. - June 26, 2011 at 2:38 PM
- momroes said...
I am so glad that Cloud knows everything. He wasn't even there and has no idea why Geoff DNF and why Geoff was at the finish line cheering on the other top runners that did finish. That really shows the friendships that these top runners all have for each other and how much they respect each other. Anyone of them can win a race on any given day - they are all top notch athletes and should be treated as such, but some people (Cloud especially) have no idea how much they want to see each other do good.
So, to all the top finishers, I say Congratulations and to all the runners in the race I say nice job and you should all be very proud of yourselves and what you accomplished yesterday. - June 26, 2011 at 3:25 PM
- fabrice said...
WS 100: 425 runners 25 countries/ course record 15hours UTMB:2300 runners 60 countries/ course record 21 hours..... Biggest ultra ???Hum Hey cloud sure you anyone can have a bad day. And Goeff will get his rematch in 8 week Chamonix.
- June 26, 2011 at 4:15 PM
- Art said...
You mom is 100% class -- I see where you got your gift.
Art - June 26, 2011 at 6:50 PM
- Alaska Classic said...
I'm sorry, but I simply do not understand why anyone would badmouth a person who is humble, nice, caring, loves running, loves being in the mountains, and loves to cheer on and help others with their running. What is this guy's problem? (I'm assuming this is a guy - excuse me if I am wrong.) Geoff - we are proud of you and how you handle yourself no matter what the trail throws in your way. Even on a "bad" day, you are way fast. But you know all that, so hope this troll, who feels obligated to criticize that which he does not understand, doesn't cause you so much as to blink.
- June 26, 2011 at 6:54 PM
- Ryne Melcher said...
When most would of been sulking and feeling sorry about dropping Geoff was at the finish to give Kilian a high five and some kind words. He was also there 2 hours ish later to join teammate Ellie Greenwood running through the streets of Auburn happy as anything for her.
Geoff's resume speaks for itself and one bad race happens to everyone, heck most have many many bad races. But true to what makes ultra running great Geoff exhibits the camaraderie and respect most of have for anyone who toes the line, be it aiming for 15 hours or 30 hours.
If you don't want to learn a lesson from Geoff about running Cloud that's cool. It would be nice if you could learn a lesson from him about class and respect.
Happy trails!
Ryne - June 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM
Amen, Ryne!!! This whole thing has a subtly amusing Charlie Sheen quality to it...
Really though, Cloud, would you have spewed this garbage to Geoff's face on the track at Auburn? Somehow, I doubt it as you use an anonymous handle on the internet. Perhaps you should spend a little more time on the trails yourself instead of worrying about what Geoff is/isn't doing? If you think you know the game so well, why not use it to further your own running career? Who knows, maybe you'll come to understand and share the love Geoff has for this sport and the people who do it!
All Day!
~Ken - June 28, 2011 at 6:27 PM
- Many Miles Until Sleep said...
Personally I think "Cloud" made some fine points, he may or may not be right on all points but his thoughts are legit. Over racing is an issue for some, funny they cannot see it. WS is HUGE and the field stacked so putting the same mental energy into it as you would a Fat Ass 50K will not bring home the Cougar, more likely a DNF. Thanks Cloud for posting something a little more than a pat on the back.
Geoff good luck the rest of the season we all hope for a top notch performance at UTMB. - July 2, 2011 at 10:28 AM
- Michelle said...
to Many Miles:
Perhaps it's not so much the points Cloud tries to make as the crass way he/she says it that makes him/her an asshole. Guess I should have clarified........ :P - July 6, 2011 at 7:12 AM


text:
If you could dream up the perfect bouquet, this would be it! Artfully designed with mini purple calla lilies, lavender roses and freesia, this petite bouquet is perfect for the mother of the bride or groom, a special guest or as a toss away for the reception. Petite bouquet of mini calla lilies, roses, freesia, seeded eucalyptus and variegated pittosporum All of our wedding flowers are hand-designed and arranged at a local florist to ensure they arrive looking their best on the big day Our florists select the freshest flowers available so floral colors and varieties may vary Orders must be placed two weeks in advance to allow for processingMeasures Approximately: 7"H x 7"L
Order by 1:00 PM PST for same day pickup or delivery!
* Fee charged in addition to the Standard Delivery Fee
Enter full name. We'll ask for delivery information at checkout.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Can beliefs be inconsistent?
One of the responses to the callers caught my attention. Matt and Don, beginning at around 42:30 in the audio, were speaking to Gregory in Eugene, Oregon. Gregory first wanted to propose his own uninteresting (IMHO) redefinition of God. Then, later, he claimed that he "considered himself just as much an atheist as I do a theist."
Matt asserted that this was ridiculous -- which it is. To be a theist means that you believe in a god, while to be an atheist means that you do not believe in a god. Obviously these positions are mutually contradictory, and so it makes no sense to hold both of them.
But then Matt went one step further, claiming that Eugene could not hold both of these positions simultaneously, effectively accusing him of either lying or being deluded about his own beliefs. It is this point that I wish to respond to, because -- as an enthusiast of formal logic -- I think one can't make such a blanket statement about other people's beliefs.
Of course, it's perfectly reasonable to assert that people should not hold contradictory beliefs, and to point it out vigorously when they try to slip that sort of thing past. However, it does not follow that one cannot hold contradictory beliefs, and in fact, I think that they do all the time.
Seen in abstract terms, you could say that a person's state of mind is a set of propositions that they assert to be true. "The sky is blue" and "the sky is not green" are two such propositions; "There is a God" is another. Not all propositions need to be definite; they could be probabilistic, as in "There is probably no God" or "There may be intelligent life elsewhere in the universe."
Now, given a particular proposition P, P can be either true or not true; and according to propositional logic it must be one or the other but not both. However, just because a proposition is false in reality does not mean that it is not a part of someone's belief system. Indeed, we know that some people have false beliefs -- just consider that many people are theists and many others are atheists. Either there is a God or there isn't, and therefore one of these groups clearly holds a false proposition to be true, and most likely a host of related propositions as well.
Still, believing a false proposition P does not make your belief system inconsistent; you can easily believe something that is false but does not contradict any other proposition in your universe of beliefs. However, my point is that there is no reason in principle why somebody cannot comfortably believe the assertion P1: "X is true" and P2: "X is false", at the same time.
As a computer geek, I happen to believe (though not entirely backed by affirmative evidence) that the human mind can be represented as a formal system, not entirely unlike a computer could behave in principle if it was outfitted with the right software. I am a believer in the possibility of artificial intelligence, though I definitely do not believe it has been achieved yet, and it may not be achieved within my lifetime, or even the entire span of the human race.
There is a famous theorem formulated by Austrian mathematician Kurt Gödel, which states that all formal systems are either incomplete or inconsistent. In other words, either there is some proposition P for which the system holds P to be both true and not true (inconsistent); or else there is some proposition P which really is true, but the system cannot prove it (incomplete, as P is true but missing).
Some opponents of AI see this as a fundamental limitation of computers, a proof that humans are somehow better than computers because they have intuition which is capable of somehow "jumping outside the system" and directly perceiving truths that cannot be proven formally. I see that as a fallacy. Sure, humans are capable of making logical leaps of intuition, but that doesn't mean the leaps lead exclusively to true beliefs. We know for a fact that brains are often misled into believing things which are not true, and may even be contradictory, which we sometimes call "hypocrisy."
Imagine a person who is completely insane, in the sense that he believes everything that is false and nothing that is true. Such a person must necessarily be inconsistent as well. Why? Well, consider the following untrue statements. P1: 2+2=3. P2: 2+2=5. These statements are contradictory -- they cannot both be true at once. Yet the insane person must believe both, because they are both false.
But you don't have to go so far as complete insanity in order to hold contradictory beliefs. In fact, I would speculate that everyone in the world probably has some beliefs that contradict one another. I do. Matt does. I'm not saying that this is desirable, or that you can't minimize the number of contradictions you believe, but the mind is full of shortcuts and logical leaps and rules of thumb that let us analyze reality without becoming immediately paralyzed by an in-depth comparison of new information against every other single proposition you already believe.
In fact, I once read a beautiful proof by logician Raymond Smullyan that every person must necessarily be either inconsistent or conceited. It goes like this:
The human brain is finite, therefore there are only finitely many propositions which you believe. Let us label these propositions p1, p2, ..., pn, where n is the number of propositions you believe. So you believe each of the propositions p1, p2, ..., pn. Yet, unless you are conceited, you know that you sometimes make mistakes, hence not everything you believe is true. Therefore, if you are not conceited, you know that at least one of the propositions, p1, p2, ..., pn is false. Yet you believe each of the propositions p1, p2, ..., pn. So you believe at least one of these statements to be both true and false; hence you must be inconsistent.
Believing a contradiction does not make you crazy or a liar. Continuing to believe both "there is a god" and "there is no god," even after the contradiction is explicitly pointed out to you, might make you a bit thick. But there's no impossibility there. We know thick people exist, and most of us encounter them on a daily basis.
37 comments:
That is a beautiful little proof, I might just have to borrow it!
On the topic of holding contrary believes. Could it be that we add limits to our beliefs? One could think of it as a way to keeping the contrary beliefs apart, thereby maintaining a 'sort of' consistent world view. One could picture it in this way:
X is true in a given interval [X1,X2] and X is not true in a given interval [X3,X4]
While the two statements might be mutually contradictory (They don't actually 'have' to be contradictory, but let's say so for the sake of the argument) to, they will never come in conflicts, unless the intervals are changed so that they overlap.
As for the caller being thick? He didn't sound thick really, he just sounded as if he didn't want to label himself, or provoke any party. But that tactic tends not to work very well on Matt ;)The statement might make more sense if you look at the semantic containers being used, the terms, imo aren't very precise.
Saying one is a theist, especially when trying to redefine god, can mean deist or syncretist, or what I would call a small t theist.
So stating you are as much an atheist as a theist can make sense if you allow that the person speaking does not believe in a monotheistic-type god but does believe in some type of god that is ill-defined or yet to be defined.
Sure there is an element of ignorance here, after all, theist means something specific. However, I think a lot of the confusion lay with the christian apologists who have, in an attempt to appear rational, erased the edges of the capital G god and replaced them with abstract logical principles no one actually believes, but can defend in a syllogism.
And you are correct in saying people can believe in contradictory things, you provided a good proof, and I think Godel alludes to this as well.Moreover, there's a related issue: Belief in a contradiction from a purely matter of formal logic implies that every statement is both true and false.
Quick sketch: We agree that "P or Q" and "not P" allows us to conclude "Q". Also we agree that "P" allows us to conclude "P or Q" for any Q.
Ok, so now assume P and assume not P. Let Q be any fixed statement. Then by the second of these two rules we have "P or Q" and then by the first rule we conclude "Q". So having any contradiction in first order logic leads to everything being true and false.
Here's the key though: Humans don't use formal logic in their reasoning. At least, we don't naturally. If someone has a contradiction in their belief they don't throw their hands up in decide that the moon must be made out of green cheese. Instead, you generally try to find the error in your reasoning. If you can't, you eventually shrug your shoulders and move on.i felt a little bad for the caller because i could understand his position having been there myself.
i think, given time, he will recognize the absolute proposition matt was talking about, but until i started listening to podcasts like AE and NP, i didn't really have anyone to discuss this stuff with, so i was in the more abstract camp that the caller was coming from. that is, it seemed reasonable to say "i don't necessarily believe in a god, but i also don't discount the possibility, therefor i don't not believe in a god."
i understand the error in that statement pertaining to the logical question of atheist vs theist, but many people are used to thinking more abstractly and emotionally overreact to being forced into committing to one side or the other because they put some much weight onto it. as if to say because you don't currently believe in something, you are immediately closing yourself off to changing your mind.
for me to understand, it was the detail that "i don't believe P is true" doesn't mean "P cannot be true." it just means "i haven't got sufficient reason to believe P is true."Bertrand Russell famously stated in a lecture that if you accept a false proposition then you can derive any proposition. He was challenged: "2+2=5. Prove that you are the pope." He allegedly came up with this proof on the spot:
1. 2+2=5.
2. Simplifying, 4=5.
3. Reducing both sides by 3: 1=2.
4. The pope and I are two.
5. But 2=1, therefore the pope and I are one.
6. I am the pope.
7. QED.Gregory was becoming a bit annoying when Matt finally jumped on his illogic. I got the idea that Gregory was new to some of the ideas he was trying to understand and was having trouble expressing himself. He may have been trying to express the idea that he is an atheist when thinking about the religious idea of god but might be a theist when it comes to some redefined version he just came up with.
Most of us have not taken the time to put our ideas under the scrutiny of formal logic. We can than seem dense when we make our first attempts to sort out ideas that were just packed away. When one does this in front of people who deal with these ideas all the time it is hard for them to continue to have patience, particularly when one does not seem to be listening.
I personally decided that the supernatural had no place in my worldview a long time ago. God, ghosts and the tooth fairy have long ago been relegated to my mental outbox - no further processing required. Certainly we have many ideas both true and false that have been likewise filed away. Many are likely to be contradictory but if they are not brought out to consider at the same time we don't notice this.
Logic is nice for sorting out our thoughts, but it does not dictate reality. If we were to try to logically defend one of the ideas that we have not thought about for some time, it would be fairly easy for someone like Ray Comfort to put us in a logical bind with his clickomatic "are you a good person". Winning the argument logically does not create god or any other reality. For that you also need evidence.I'm not really convinced that the proof is actually equivalent to the theist/atheist situation. I think the proof works well to demonstrate that we can believe both some number of propositions, and the proposition that one of them is probably or even certainly false. Specifically, that you can simultaneously believe a proposition that negates one unspecified proposition of all the other propositions you believe.
That's not the situation with the claim to believe simultaneously that 'there is a god' and 'there is no god'. These are directly contradictory propositions and you can't believe both at once.
The equivalent in the world of your proof is actually that you believe propositions p1...pn, and also that "p1 is false". I think this is clearly impossible. Either you believe that p1 is true, or you believe that it is false, not both. In the proof, you don't know which proposition you believe is false, only that you believe one of them will turn out to be false. In the theist/atheist example, you know exactly which proposition your negating belief negates.
As such, we can only really assume that the guy was making a statement in the heat of the moment as a sort of rhetorical move, or honestly doesn't know what the terms mean.
Correct me if I'm wrong on this, but I don't really think the proof works, at least logically.The "proof" was mostly a demonstration of what should be the trivially obvious fact that people can and do hold mutually contradictory beliefs. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
If you agree, can you tell me how you justify this?
"The equivalent in the world of your proof is actually that you believe propositions p1...pn, and also that "p1 is false". I think this is clearly impossible."
Why do you think it is impossible? Do you seriously think that nobody you know is inconsistent in their beliefs? What specific mechanism is in the brain that would prevent this, in your opinion?I personally think Matt is right on this issue. While people hold contradictory beliefs all the time, they don't look at a dog and believe it to be both a dog and not a dog at the same time. Two abstract ideas can but up against each other in ways that cause contradictions in our beliefs, but two directly contradictory straight-forward propositions can't both be believed at once. The fact is that if someone says they are both an atheist and a theist they are not using those words right.
ReplyDeleteSomeone can actually accept two contradictory positions, but I'm convinced that this can only occur when they are unaware of the contradiction. The dilemma must be obfuscated in some way (including insanity).
To flatly claim that you are both X and notX - as this caller did - is most likely resolved by:
1. The caller is lying to us and/or themselves.
2. The caller is crazy.
To acknowledge the contradiction and still assert the claim is absurd. How many times have we pointed this out when someone says "I neither believe nor disbelieve..." BZZZT! Wrong. Once you've said "I neither believe" you have affirmed your disbelief.
It is, though, possible to CLAIM to be a theist and not a theist - as this caller did.
I remain convinced that this caller is not simultaneously a theist and not a theist...despite his claims.i think the point i and some others on here were trying to make is that the limitation to "lying" or "crazy" is oversimplified. it assumes the person fully understands the proposition, which i don't think the caller did.
i certainly don't defend that one can truly be both theist and atheist at the same time in term of logical absolutes, but i think the subject is sufficiently heavy in baggage and intricacies to lead someone to a third position along the lines of "confused."
once i am confident someone really understands th question, i am comfortable with labeling them as either a lier or crazy, but until then, i was willing to cut the person some slack.
all that said, i was glad when the call ended because i don't think his forward progress was at an end.Someone can actually accept two contradictory positions, but I'm convinced that this can only occur when they are unaware of the contradiction. The dilemma must be obfuscated in some way (including insanity).
I think our callers disprove that assertion every week. Consider this hypothetical dialogue:
Caller: "I believe that every word of the Bible is true, and a perfect moral guide."
Host: "What about the part where God orders them to slaughter everyone except the virgins?"
Caller: "The Bible does not say that."
Host: "[Chapter and verse]"
Caller: "...I'll have to get back to you on that."
Very, very rarely this kind of dialogue can lead to a conversion. But that's an unusual case, so I'll assume the caller doesn't change his mind.
At this point the caller simultaneously holds these propositions in his head:
1. Everything the Bible says is moral.
2. Genocide is immoral.
3. The Bible is endorsing genocide.
Probably in short order, he will somehow manage to crowd one of those propositions out. Perhaps they are just not bright enough to process the implications of the contradiction. But I think there are definitely periods of time when someone holds beliefs in his head that are in obvious contradiction to one another, and they are neither insane nor lying.
Unless, of course, you believe that everyone is entirely rational.I'm with Matt on this one. Of course we accept the premise that people hold contradictory beliefs, but not about the exact same thing.
For example, you believe that the boiling point of water is 200 degrees. You believe that a kettle heats to 100 degrees. You believe that you can boil water in a kettle.
The person is not associating the beliefs.
It's different to say you believe that the boiling point of water is both 100 degrees AND 200 degrees.
The first has to do with logical deduction, the second has to do with your actual belief on a single topic.I think if we add a third option to 'crazy' and 'lying', we're probably all saying the same thing: Ignorant. Especially when talking about something like the term 'atheist', which people use in many different ways (including, "I'm an atheist with respect to Thor, but not FSM"). I can see how someone could say they're both at the same time by not understanding the terms, or even by failing to communicate their position clearly. That said, my gut feeling when listening to the podcast was that the caller wasn't being honest (even with himself).
ReplyDeleteIt's really hard to add to much to what Matt and Pippen say, I think they nail it.
My two cents:
I feel it depends on definitions and how specific you are defining what you are having the belief about.
For example, the following "seemingly" contradictory statements could be true:
"David hates all ethnic groups other than his own"
"David loves all ethnic groups other than his own"
The problem is the definitions of "love and hate" and the context based on the statements. David could love the way that they look different than him, but hate the way they all talk differently.
I think someone looking at the above could say, "yeah, i see how the two statements can be conflicting and true at the same time".
But, then you take these two statements:
"David ALWAYS gets violently ill whenever he sees a white albino male human with green eyes, wearing red pants, red shoes, and a red shirt. No other feature matters for this to happen."
and then,
"David NEVER gets violently ill whenever he sees a white albino male human with green eyes, wearing red pants, red shoes, and a red shirt. No other feature matters for this to happen."
Those are definitely contradicting statements, and no honest, rational person could say that someone could believe that both could be true.
Another example could be:
David says, "I'm an atheist"
David says, "I'm a theist"
Expounding on that you could call him out...but then he could say something like, "well, I'm a theist in regards to Thor, but an atheist in regards to Yahweh."
On this:
Caller: "I believe that every word of the Bible is true, and a perfect moral guide."
Host: "What about the part where God orders them to slaughter everyone except the virgins?"
Caller: "The Bible does not say that."
Host: "[Chapter and verse]"
Caller: "...I'll have to get back to you on that."
Russell, I believe you're comparing apples to oranges here.
It's not like the guy says:
Caller: "I believe that every word of the Bible is true, and a perfect moral guide."
AND THEN in the next breath says:
Caller: "I also do NOT believe that every word of the Bible is true, and a perfect moral guide."
I truly believe that as Matt says, if the statements are precisely and clearly defined, two clearly contradictory statements can not be believed at the same time.
Now, I will give you - as you wrote your title, "Can beliefs be inconsistent", that is true, up to the point where the beliefs and statements are SPECIFICALLY defined, but at the point they can not.
"Can specific beliefs be inconsistent"? I'd have to say no unless you're mentally ill, insane/whatever.
But, maybe that's the point you're trying to make :)People seem to zero in on the "liar or insain" options, but I'd say there are at least two other options.
The caller might use other definitions of the words atheist and theist. The caller might even be unaware of the proper definitions of the words and as such confused.
The 2nd option I don't think apply in this case, but is worth noting. What do we call a person who has never thought about the god issue? That person wouldn't have taken a stance on the issue, and as such neither affirmed nor rejected the idea of a god or gods. I would consider that person neither an atheist or a theist.
So to sum up, he could have been a lying, insane, confused or unaware. Or possibly Russel is right, and we can hold mutually excluding ideas in our minds without a mental meltdown While I don't claim this to be the case, my thought process centered around an assessment of a perfectly 50% chance that a claim is true. Under this situation, one cannot use evidence to claim that something is true or false, and it seems reasonable to assume that it could be either. You must accept that it is true just as much as you reject it if you are perfectly logical.
Now, for theistic claims, I don't think anyone has put forth one that is remotely close to 50%, and I don't think the caller was struggling with a "it's just as likely" thought. In the end I think I agree with Matt's choice of words on the show, and with his follow up here in the comments, I have to agree even further.@ Dines
A person who has never thought about the god issue and holds no explicit position on it is an atheist by definition. Just because the type of people you usually call atheists are people like us who talk about this stuff all the time, doesn't mean you ignore the definition of the word. The people on here are all, for the most part, going to be activist atheists but anyone who doesn't hold a positive position of belief in a god is an atheist whether they think about the issue or not. This has been addressed many times on both of the ACA's shows as well as many other places.I agree with Kazim on this issue - it is definitely conceivable that one might hold two contradictory propositions simultaneously.
And yet... I agree with Matt - it is impossible to believe X is true and believe X is not true simultaneously.
Wait... does that mean that I believe two contradictory propositions?!"At this point the caller simultaneously holds these propositions in his head:
1. Everything the Bible says is moral.
2. Genocide is immoral.
3. The Bible is endorsing genocide.
Not true. In your example, the caller has just had a dilemma clearly exposed to them and has said they'd get back to you - because they're trying to reconcile it.
This is where rationalization and compartmentalization serve to obfuscate the dilemma.
In fact, your particular example tends to result in apologists rationalizations like "God knew which ones could be saved". Why? Because they recognize the conflict and need to resolve it.
If anything, your example supports what I've said. I don't believe you could find a (sane and honest) believer who openly states that they believe slavery is both moral and immoral...they'll claim it used to be moral, or any number of other twists that disguise the contradiction.I think you are treating this as a qualitative difference when it fact it is a quantitative one. The key is in your final phrasing, which is poorly defined: "or any number of other twists that disguise the contradiction."
I think every person in this thread has agreed with me that anybody can hold contradictory positions in their mind, as long as the nature of the contradiction is sufficiently obfuscated that they don't see the problem.
Well, how much obfuscation is required? Obviously it varies from person to person. Logic puzzles that present a dozen or so propositions like "Bob is a painter," "The painter has a daughter," "The architect is single" etc, can easily slip a contradiction in that is hard to detect unless you put in a whole lot of work. Therefore, I can read a dozen statements that wind up being obscurely but provably contradictory, and believe them all without causing any mental anguish at all. Probably if the same contradiction was reduced to three or four statements, I would notice it and complain.
But then again, I'm trained in that sort of thing through programming and gaming. A person who is not used to that sort of thinking might easily miss a contradiction in three or four statements, or even less if he's dumb, unobservant, or just plain apathetic.
What I'm saying is that there is no clear amount of obscurity that is "the right amount" to allow people to believe a contradiction, just as there is no definition of the creationist weasel word "kind." And I'd say the specific level of tolerance a given person has for contradictions is less important than the universal fact that everyone can believe a contradiction no matter how smart. After that, we're just arguing over a matter of how low this threshold has to be before you are allowed to apply the (also poorly defined) "insane" label.Um, is it just me or is there a tiny bit of an "apples and oranges" thing going on here?. Mr. Dillahunty seems to be using "contradiction" to mean something like "no sane or honest person can believe god is perfectly moral AND god is NOT perfectly moral at the same time." Mr. Glasser(Kazim) on the other hand appears to mean something like "it's possible to believe a contradiction like: god is perfectly moral AND the Bible is inerrant."
The latter sounds like a believer holding two contradicting beliefs but rationalising the contradiction(if the Bible is inerrant, how can you say the thing god did are moral?) by making excuses and ad hoc explanations, which is possible and in fact, happens all the time. The former sounds more like someone stating that A = A and A = -A at the same time, which is impossible('cause things are what they are; they're not what they're not; and it's not neither or both).
I dunno... just throwing stuff out there. Don't pay too much attention to me. :PI don't think it's an apples and oranges thing. When I say "contradiction" I mean it in the literal, conventional sense of the word. As I say before, I feel like we can agree that people can and do believe contradictory information. I think the only difference being expressed here is in terms of how starkly drawn the contradiction has to be before a non-crazy person will sit up and say "Hey, wait a minute..."
Unfortunately, this will have to be my last contribution to this discussion for the week, as I'm headed home, after which I'll be catching a flight in the morning and I have no laptop to bring with me. (Yet. In point of fact I just ordered one and it should be available shortly after I return. I'm quite excited about it.)
Bye!it does not follow that one cannot hold contradictory beliefs, and in fact, I think that they do all the time.
This seems (to me) to be an issue of semantics. The objection to contradictory beliefs is not that one can't have them. It's that in doing so, the person doesn't understand the nature of his/her belief.
It's similar to what you said later in your post. But I will side with those who claim that the person can't actually believe what he/she is claiming.
Personally, I moved away from religion once I found out that many believers uphold contradictory ideas. Few are honest enough to admit that they don't care about the contradictions, and even fewer understand the implications of what they claim.I think you guys have really misrepresented Gregory's position, and/or, perhaps it's better put that you're interpretation of him was rather unforgiving, and I would suggest, incorrect….. Gregg's position is that he is both a Theist and an Atheist, at the same time.
From his opening remarks it seems quite evident that what Greg rejects in God (that makes him call himself an atheist) is God in the sense of a Platonic conception (Realism or Materialism is you will. i.e. he rejects the same God you do). The notion that Greg accepts is a Pragmatic conception, perhaps God as metaphor (that requires significant unpacking of course – think, Nietzsche's notion of truth as a mobile army of metaphors).
You guys on the show seem to have definite Materialist/Realist leanings (and you're skilled in that rhetoric) so of course you're going to do a good job pulling Greg into your world, forcing him to argue from the foundations of your assumptions. I'd be willing to bet Greg would feel quite comfortable in the hands of say, a William James or Richard Rorty.
Anyway, bottom line is I think Greg was being quite honest, but could simply not articulate himself properly and find his way out of Platonist assumptions. In this way, I don't think he was being in the least bit inconsistent, merely inarticulate.I also have to agree that it is only possible to have contradictory beliefs when the person is unaware of the contradiction.
The way I see it is that any time two beliefs can be expressed as the same proposition P1 being both true and false then there is no room to hide the contradiction.
For example:
P1 "Thor exists". I claim that it's impossible to believe that this statement is both true and false.
However if we look at two other statements:
P1 "Thor exists" P2 and "No gods exist". Now it's possible to believe that both P1 is true and P2 is true because since we are talking about two diffrent statements, it's possible that the contradiction between the two statements is not clearly seen. (For example if one doesn't know that Thor is a god).Ingemar,
Your example simply won't do – you are essentially mistaking the finger for the moon.
If your fictitious person thinks Thor exists, but doesn't think Gods exist, and by your admission doesn't think Thor is a God, then he hasn't contradicted himself. You interpreting him the way you are (as being wrong about Thor) drains your case that you are interpreting him correctly. For all you know Thor is his neighbor, of some new video game, etc. etc. The bottom line is (and you've demonstrated it) the person doesn't think Thor is a God, and as such there is no contradiction.Andrew Louis:
My example with Thor is exactly the same thing as Russels example with someone believing that the bible is moral but thinking that genocide is immoral. The person saying that the bible is moral simply doesn't know or understand what the bible says about genocide.
The point is that any contradiction that someone believes can only be pointed out by someone else who identifies the beliefs as a contradiction. I claim that noone believes two contradicting things if they know that it's contradicting.Kazim:
Great, thought-provoking post!
I just got one question - aren't you mixing properties of formal systems and human belief systems too readily?
Inconsistent formal systems contain paradoxes - like the famous 'This statement is false'. You can say that in the formal system of aristotelean logic the statement can be both proved true and false at the same time. But can a human mind grasp that concept of both true and not-true? Or is it rather the case that the human mind merely cannot decide whether the statement is true or not?
In my case, no matter what I do, I cannot wrap my mind around such paradoxes and honestly believe they are true and false at the same time. And I suspect no human mind can do that.
In a similar fashion if you look at Escher's Convex and Concave - you know that the objects in the pictures can be interpreted in two different ways and you can make your mind see them convex or you can make your mind see them concave, but you cannot make your mind see both at the same time.Stenlis,
Inconsistent formal systems contain paradoxes - like the famous 'This statement is false'. You can say that in the formal system of aristotelean logic the statement can be both proved true and false at the same time.
Actually, it's the opposite. A paradoxical statement like the one above is considered by logicians to be neither true nor false.
But can a human mind grasp that concept of both true and not-true? Or is it rather the case that the human mind merely cannot decide whether the statement is true or not?
I think you are mixing up the default position, which is simply complete apathy with regard to the truth or falsehood of a given statement. It takes work to ferret out a contradiction in your beliefs. Many people, on encountering the claim "This statement is false," might just say "Whatever" and not think through the implications. That's the sort of person that I think can easily accept contradictory claims without a problem.
Many who have contributed to this thread would probably say that this doesn't count, because those people haven't really grasped the contradiction and so do not really "believe" it. But I think that's the point -- it's a common occurrence to accept contradictory claims precisely because it's uncommon to think hard about the logic involved. The only way to weed out contradictions is to really work hard at the logical process that isolates the contradiction, or else make the contradiction so simple and obvious that it takes no work. But I hardly think this means that one person can't accept a contradiction which is readily apparent to another person. It happens all the time.Kazim:
OK, the liar paradox was perhaps not the best example, but *inconsistency* of formal systems in general means that there is a statement P such that both P and 'not P' are provable by the axioms of the system. Perhaps the Berry paradox is a better example of something that is both true and not true at the same time.
In any case, I see what you are saying with the misunderstanding of logic that people profess.
PLEASE NOTE: The Atheist Experience has moved to a new location, and this blog is now closed to comments. To participate in future discussions, please visit http://www.freethoughtblogs.com/axp.
This blog encourages believers who disagree with us to comment. However, anonymous comments are disallowed to weed out cowardly flamers who hide behind anonymity. Commenters will only be banned when they've demonstrated they're nothing more than trolls whose behavior is intentionally offensive to the blog's readership.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.


text:
Beautiful Multicolor Floral Porcelain Ball Table Lamp Finial
Beautiful Multicolor Floral Porcelain Ball Table Lamp Finial
Regular price
Regular price
Sale price
Unit price
About Us
We are Asian Style Furnishing and we are here to help you add beautiful Asian colors and history to your home. We speciallize in porcelain items as well as creating fantastic lighting with our pieces. Always feel free to ask us if your favorite figurine, vase , or box can be made into a lamp as we love when our customers are able to experience their accent pieces with lighting. We carry products made from the early 1900s to modern times and all of our items are for decorative use only! We have been in business for over 30 years and I am the second generation to be in this business. I am excited to bring my energy and family experience to those in need of some Eastern influences in their home.
Please note :
As most of our porcelain pieces are hand made and hand painted they may be slightly different from the photo in both shape and the way it is even colored! We do our best to find the one that is most common but sometimes they will be slightly different.
Beautiful Multicolor Floral Porcelain Ball Table Lamp Finial
Country of Origin: China
Age: 2010
Dimensions (in inches): Height:2.5"
(Note porcelain pieces will vary in size from one another)
Sales Tax:
Please note all orders from California will also incur 7.75% sales tax
to beautify our state :). (At least I hope they do)
Shipping Policy:
We always do our best to ship items within 24 hours and usually we can
do it even faster. We ship items with our discretion on which shipper
we use as these items are big and it helps save cost on shipping for
both you and us! We know we do charge quite a bit for shipping but we
do our best to price our items as fairly as we can so that we can have
a fair balance for you.
Return Policy:
Uh oh something went wrong with the item? No worries if you just dont
like it you can return it up to 14 days after you receive the item.
However, due to high shipping cost yoou will be responsible for both
shipping. However if the item breaks or is not as described we
will of course refund you the shipping as it was a mistake on our end.
We are always here to help you so feel free to contact us for more information.
Cant find what your looking for? We may still have what you're looking
for so send us a message or a photo and we will do our best.
For custom lamp orders please feel free to send us a message.


text:
New to us? Talk to an Agent 954-374-5100
Visit our neighborhood office
8928 Taft Street
Pembroke Pines, FL 33024
Service Requests 888-254-5014
You have coverage for your home and your car. You've chosen higher limits of liability to make sure you're protected. An Umbrella policy can provide an even greater level of protection by filling the gaps left by your other policies. Featuring higher limits and broader coverage that includes protection for claims or lawsuits that could threaten your lifestyle, Umbrella can be an important safety blanket.
Liabilities beyond normal coverage
Coverage anywhere in the world
Attorney fees and defense costs
The amount of coverage you'll want depends on your unique circumstances. We'll take the time to learn about you, and then find the policy that fits your needs. Give us a call to get started.
Safe driving record
Good credit
There are many different types of discounts available. To get started with a free quote, give us a call or leave us your contact information and we'll get in touch with you right away.
Reach out and we'll get back to you with a custom policy that fits your unique situation.


text:
Unfortunately, your access has now expired. But there's good news—by subscribing today, you will receive 22 issues of Booklist magazine, 4 issues of Book Links, and single-login access to Booklist Online and over 200,000 reviews.
Your access to Booklist Online has expired. If you still subscribe to the print magazine, please proceed to your profile page and check your subscriber number against a current magazine mailing label. (If your print subscription has lapsed, you will need to renew.)
Free Trial, activate profile, or subscribe
June 2024
Find more Stonewall Book Awards
The Stonewall Book Awards are sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered Round Table (GLBTRT). For more information, visit the Stonewall Book Awards Home Page.
The Master. By Colm Toibin. Scribner, hardcover, $25 (0743250400).
Evolution's Rainbow: Diversity, Gender, and Sexuality in Nature and in People. By Joan Roughgarden. University of California, $18.95 (0520260120).


text: petals-191859_1920 Share Tweet Email About the Author Beth's love of the written word has been evident her entire life. She has been an avid reader ever since she got her hands on a Sellersville Elementary School library card. Although she occasionally still enjoys a gripping novel, most of her current reading is focused on expanding her understanding of God and growing in Him. She is also deeply passionate about the Word and is diligent to hide it in her heart. Her journey into writing began much later in life. Beth's first book Joy All Around Us, which she wrote with her husband Gary and their daughter Tara, was published in 2016. One of Beth's passions is telling stories that engage readers and listeners while offering them wisdom and biblically-based solutions for navigating the twists and turns of life. She plans to continue pursuing both writing and speaking and focusing on helping those around her realize their God-given potential and dreams. Bio & Posts Click here to cancel reply. Name Email Address Website Δ Donate View Now Products from Beth Suess Sale! Sale! Joy All Around Us $15.99 $12.99 Add to cart Sale! Sale! Joy All Around Us $20.99 $15.99 Add to cart Unisex Catch the Wind T-Shirt $20.00 Select options You may also like: The Children of God Sermon: Humility and Honor Taking the Reins: How to Avoid Being Led On in Relationships


text:
Three American citizens were killed Thursday at a Christian organization's hospital in Kabul, Afghanistan, when an Afghan security guard opened fire. Another American citizen was reportedly wounded.
One of those killed was an experienced pediatrician from Chicago who had been working at the hospital for seven years, according to media reports. The other two killed were a father and son whose names and ages had not yet been released.
Government spokesman Sediq Sediqqi says the gunman was shot and wounded and is now under arrest, NPR's Sean Carberry reports from Kabul. His gunshot wound may have been self-inflicted.
As Sean tells our Newscast Desk:
"Attacks on foreigners have been on the rise this year. Last month, the Taliban attacked the guesthouse of an American aid organization — it turned out the intended target had been a neighboring Christian guesthouse. Earlier this month, an Afghan police commander opened fire on two Associated Press journalists, killing one and seriously wounding the other."
The Washington Post writes that:
"Over the past three months, as Afghanistan is in the midst of electing a new president, 20 foreigners have been killed in separate attacks targeting civilians. The attacks have occurred at a popular restaurant, an upscale hotel and other venues where foreigners congregate.
"The Taliban has taken credit for much of the violence, including one March 20 assault on the Serena Hotel in Kabul, which killed nine people, including two Canadians.
"The violence is accelerating the pace at which foreigners are fleeing Kabul, which until recently has provided relative security for aid workers, journalists and civilian contractors.
"With Thursday's shooting, the dangers facing foreigners is heightened by what appears to be growing incidents of random attacks by Afghan security officials."
The site of Thursday's attack was a hospital run by Cure International, which is based in Lemoyne, Pa. One goal of Cure's hospital in Kabul is to transform the lives "of children with disabilities and their families in Afghanistan through medical and spiritual healing."
The Associated Press is referring to those who were killed as "three doctors." Sean reports that according to the Afghan ministry of health the three Americans were a child specialist who has been working in the hospital for seven years and "his two guests," who were a father and son and may also have been medical workers. Sean also reports that the ministry says a woman, an American citizen, was wounded.
The U.S. embassy in Kabul says in a statement that "with great sadness we confirm that three Americans were killed in the attack on CURE Hospital."
Update at 12:15 p.m. ET. Chicago Health Center IDs One Victim:
"A Chicago-area doctor was among those killed Thursday in an attack at a charity-based children's hospital in Kabul, Afghanistan," NBC Chicago and other news outlets are reporting. He's identified as Dr. Jerry Umanos, who before going to Afghanistan was a pediatrician at Lawndale Christian Health Center. "We have lost a dear friend," LCHC's Chief Ministry Officer James Brooks told NBC Chicago. CNN says Umanos "had worked at the hospital in Kabul for seven years, longer than anyone else."
CBS Local in Chicago is reporting that "Umanos was shot when he went to the gate to receive his American friends. Those two, who Afghan officials said were father and son, were also killed when the guard opened fire."
Update at 7:35 a.m. ET. More On The Attack And The Hospital.
In his latest report for our Newscast Desk, Sean says:
-- The three "American medical workers" who were killed were arriving to work when the shooting began.
-- The wounded American was reportedly a nurse
-- Mohammed Zahir, a nearby vendor, says he heard three separate bursts of gunfire.
-- Soraya Dalil, the minister of Public Health, says Cure is one of the best hospitals in the city and provides advanced treatment to Afghans.
Copyright 2021 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.


text:
Cook Top Repair 92678 Authorized Service
Cook Top Repair Service 92678 Expert services all types of electric Cook Top repair, gas Cook Top repair, glass Cook Top repair, induction Cook Top repair. If your Cook Top is having problems like the Cook Top will not heat or if you need a Cook Top replacement. Cook Top Repair Service will put you right back where you need to be. ceramic cooktop burner repair, gold cooktop repair, electric cooktop repair, ceramic cooktop repair. Expert Appliance Repair 92678 will have your Cook Top repaired or serviced in no time. We will have your Cook Top up in running in no time flat.
Cook Top Repair
If in need of a same-day stovetop repair service, call Expert Appliance Repair 92678 at (949) 428-1950. We are available each and every hour of the day to repair all brands of stovetops.
Here at Expert Appliance Repair Orange County, we have highly competent repair specialists who have been professionally trained to successfully repair all types and makes of stovetops.
Expert Appliance Repair Orange County provides its customers with the best repairment service at the lowest costs:
- We do not charge if we are able to help repair your machine over the phone
- We do not charge anything extra for holidays, weekends, or nighttime appointments
- We provide repair estimates that are reasonably controlled by our guaranteed Low Price Protection Policy
With every service call, Expert Appliance Repair Orange County provides information regarding the best and safest ways to extend the life of your stovetop. However, stovetop repairs could potentially be dangerous if not performed by a trained repairment technician. Therefore, we do not recommend performing repairs yourself, unless you have acquired the necessary knowledge, experience, and tools required to repair the stovetop. We have technicians who specialize in stovetop repair and can execute the job safely and successfully.
If your stovetop is not performing well, this could be due to a number of reasons, such as coils that fail to heat, damaged coils, loose coils, or heat adjustment failure. Expert Appliance Repair Orange County can help you identify the current problem affecting your stovetop's performance and estimate how much it would cost to either repair or replace it. Once you have found out the estimated costs, we can help you to decide whether repairing or replacing the stovetop would be a better choice.
If you have a malfunctioning stovetop and are looking for the best repairment service with the lowest costs, call Expert Appliance Repair Orange County!


text:
Happy Monday! Hope you all enjoyed you Mother's Day. Mine was AH-mazing. I love my little ones.
After finally getting around to putting away Easter decorations away, I am really looking all the patriotic holidays coming up. Memorial Day is a huge celebration in our town- a parade, fireworks and lots of fun pool parties thanks to the amazing southern California weather. I am just so thankful to live in this incredible country.
So, I just had to pull out my fun party popcorn recipe and whip up something for these events coming up. Patriotic Popcorn is just the thing- colorful, yummy and easy to make. This is a simple variation on Bunny Bait and Leprechaun Lunch and uses the same directions found here except I added red nonpariels, star confetti and red m&m's.
I will happily send the tags for free if you


text:
Davy Jones, who thrilled many a young girl's heart back in the '60s as a member of the Monkees, has died.
TMZ broke the news. It reports being told by the medical examiner's office in Martin County, Fla., of the 66-year-old singer's death. The English-born Jones apparently lived in that part of Florida.
And NPR has now received a statement from a spokesman for the singer, relaying "the very sad news that Davy Jones of the Monkees died this morning in Indiantown, Fla., of a heart attack." We've also confirmed the news with the local medical examiner's office.
Now might be a good time for everyone to hum a little Daydream Believer.
Our friends over at The Record will have more.
The other three Monkees — Micky Dolenz, Mike Nesmith and Peter Tork — are still with us.
Copyright 2016 NPR. To see more, visit http://www.npr.org/.


text:
Accurately identifying the source and cause of memory access errors can be frustrating and time-consuming. CUDA-MEMCHECK detects these errors in your GPU code and allows you to locate them quickly. CUDA-MEMCHECK also reports runtime execution errors, identifying situations that could otherwise result in an "unspecified launch failure" error when your application is running.
Running CUDA-MEMCHECK on your application is easy; simply pass your application's name as a parameter to CUDA-MEMCHECK on the command line. CUDA-MEMCHECK can also be enabled within CUDA-GDB while debugging your CUDA applications.
Key Features
(click images to expand) |
The latest version of CUDA-MEMCHECK with support for CUDA C and CUDA C++ applications is available with the CUDA Toolkit and is supported on all platforms supported by the CUDA Toolkit.
Developers should be sure to check out NVIDIA Nsight for integrated debugging and profiling. Nsight Eclipse Edition for Linux and MAC support, and Nsight Visual Studio Edition for Windows.
Questions on CUDA Tools?
If you encounter difficulty with any of the CUDA Tools or have more questions please contact the NVIDIA tools team at firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Project Members
- Andrej Malchukov
- Bernard Comrie
- Martin Haspelmath
- Birgit Jänen
Ditransitive constructions in the world's languages
In this project, we studied the grammatical properties of ditransitive constructions (i.e. constructions with an agent, a recipient, and a theme argument) in a broadly comparative perspective. We compiled a database with relevant information on about 200 languages, and we planned to publish this database as well as a monograph that presents the results of our inquiries.
The project addressed cross-linguistic variation in ditransitive constructions, i.e. constructions with an agent, theme (T) and recipient (R) arguments. These typically include canonical ditransitives verbs (such as 'give', 'sell', or 'show'), but may also extend to other verb classes in individual languages. The research topics included the basic properties of ditransitive constructions in terms of their coding (through flagging/case or indexing/agreement), as well as syntactic and lexical properties. As is well-known, languages differ in ditransitive 'alignment', that is which of the object arguments – T or R - is coded like monotransitive patient (P) (see the schematic representation of the indirective (T=P), neutral (T=P=R) and secundative (P=R) alignments, and the corresponding examples from German, English and Eskimo, respectively). Apart from providing a comprehensive overview of basic alignment patterns of ditransitive constructions in individual languages, the project addressed morpho-syntactic properties of the object arguments, using a number of syntactic diagnostics (e.g., passivization), to detect alignment in the syntactic domain. Further morphological issues included peculiarities of derived ditransitive constructions (applicatives, causatives), as compared to basic ditransitives, as well as less studied phenomena such as suppletion in the paradigm of ditransitive verbs. Finally, the extensions of ditransitive constructions across different verb classes were studied, which was of particular interest given that languages range from those having an open class of ditransitives to those having a closed class. The data were collected from the secondary sources as well as through elicitation on the basis of a questionnaire. The results of the analysis were summarized in a monograph as well as in the form of a database which will eventually be published on-line.
This project is a member of the DFG-funded Forschergruppe "Grammatik und Verarbeitung verbaler Argumente".
Comrie, Bernard. 2003. Recipient person suppletion in the verb "give". In: Wise, Mary Ruth and Headland, Thomas N. and Brend, Ruth M. (eds.) Language and Life: Essays in Memory of Kenneth L. Pike. Dallas: SIL International and the University of Texas at Arlington, 265-281
Haspelmath, Martin. 2007. "Ditransitive alignment splits and inverse alignment". Functions of Language 14.1:79-102.
Malchukov, Andrej. 2007. "Animacy and asymmetries in differential case marking." Forthcoming in Lingua (special issue on Animacy edited by M. Lamers and P. de Swart).


text:
Former President George H.W. Bush Shaved Head for Child With Cancer
Regardless of your politics, you have to admit this is a class move by former President George H.W. Bush.
When President Bush found out that Patrick, the two-year-old son of one of his Secret Service guards, had leukemia, he decided to show his support by shaving his head. Other members of his Secret Service have also shaved their heads. In addition, the Bush family has also made a donation to Patrick's treatment.
President Bush and his wife Barbara lost their second child, Robin, to leukemia sixty years ago, so Patrick's illness obviously struck a chord. Since Robin's death, the Bush family has worked to raise money for leukemia and cancer research. Today, an adolescent and child clinic at a cancer center in Houston, Texas, is named after Robin.


text:
North Korea responded to new U.N. sanctions aimed at starving its nuclear program by vowing to cut a Cold War-style hotline and scrap a nonaggression pact with the South.
State-run media said North Korea "abrogates all agreements on nonaggression reached between the North and the South ... and also notifies the South side that it will immediately cut off the North-South hotline."
Pyongyang's statement appears to refer to the bilateral pact signed in 1991 that endorses the peaceful settlement of disputes and the prevention of accidental military clashes. However, earlier this week the North also reiterated threats to walk away from the 1953 armistice that technically ended the Korean War.
Also this week, Pyongyang threatened to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the U.S. and its allies.
(As Reuters notes, while the threat of a strike against the U.S. is "a hollow one," South Korea and Japan are in easy range of the North's short- and medium-range missiles.)
The stepped up rhetoric from Pyongyang is the latest in a week of bellicose posturing in the lead-up to the United Nations Security Council's unanimous approval on Thursday of sanctions to tighten trade and financial restrictions on the North in an effort to force it to halt its nuclear weapons program.
Even so, as The Associated Press points out, sanctions have done little to deter Pyongyang thus far:
"Since 2006, North Korea has launched long-range rockets, tested a variety of missiles and conducted three underground nuclear explosions, the most recent on Feb. 12. Through it all, Pyongyang was undeterred by a raft of sanctions — both multilateral penalties from the United Nations and national sanctions from Washington, Tokyo and others — meant to punish the government and sidetrack its nuclear ambitions."
The war of words is testing South Korea's new president, Park Geun-hye, who campaigned on a promise to remain vigilant while keeping the door open for the possibility of ending the long conflict on the peninsula.
Speaking at a graduation ceremony for South Korean military cadets on Friday, Park promised to "deal strongly with North Korea's provocations."
The early days of Park's administration could prove dangerous, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
A CSIS analysis suggests a causal link between a change in South Korean leadership and "a military provocation of some form within weeks."
Copyright 2020 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.


text:
We offer a Free quote and UK design service, get in touch today.
High traffic areas on car parks look to have automatic barriers in Foindle IV27 4 to help when controlling traffic management. It is also used as a security method to make sure cars pay their tariffs for parking before leaving the facility.
An automatic barrier is great to create private areas for office blocks to prevent unwanted people entering your land. The beauty of automatic barriers is that they do not need to be manned and can be operated out of hours meaning they are perfect for a range of applications.
The main reason that people choose to have these systems installed for car parks and not a full gate, is because people can still walk around them but cars and vehicles cannot get past without the barrier being lifted.
Lifting the barrier is controlled automatically, so there should be no manual work involved for theses to work correctly and efficiently.
Automatic barriers are the security systems that allow vehicles to enter a facility or private property. They involve a large pole that is lifted up and down when a code is entered or a card is swiped.
As professionals we supply and install these barriers in Foindle IV27 4 and can provide you with the highest standards possible.
Talk to one of our experts today if you're interested in what we have to offer and would like to receive more information.
For more details on electric security barriers that we can install, we suggest that you fill out the application form on our website and a member of our team will contact you as soon as they can to discuss it further with you. Our application process is simple, so why not do it today!
If you're on the internet and you have searched electronic barrier gates near me, wanting to find a company who can install this at your facility, they you have come to the right place. Installing access control barriers is a service which our local company specialises in and our experts have a large amount of experience in this service.
There are many gate companies in surrounding areas, who claim to be the best electric barrier installers but we recommend that you do the necessary background research before you choose a company to install a gate at your organisation.
If they are not an appropriate company, they could install the automatic barriers incorrectly and this could be dangerous and cause many hazards and implications. When these are installed, it is important that they meet the necessary health and safety standards to avoid any issues happening.
Installing automatic barriers could be carried out by our professionals who have years of experience. To put these systems in place we follow these simple steps:
As professionals we are able to provide you with high quality results that are long lasting. These barriers work in all weathers and are very reliable. Let us know if you want to learn more regarding what we can do for you.
There is a variety of design and specification options to choose from, it depends on a range of factors, such as the type of parking-barriers system you would like, the budget which is available and what the barrier is required to do. As well as this service, installing road blockers http://www.automated-access.co.uk/blockers/highland/foindle/ as another automatic access control is something we can do.
Access control barriers in Foindle IV27 4 could be installed by our professional electric barrier installers for a variety of reasons and for many facilities. The most common facility which we install these systems at is a car park.
Some schools https://www.automated-access.co.uk/school-gates/highland/foindle/ may also have barriers installed in order to prevent intruders coming in.
The reason for this is that management controls can be included on the barrier, such inserting money or paying in advance as the car-park machine and then inserting a token which will lift the barrier. Car-park barriers are great because you do not need to hire an individual to manage the boom gate, as they are installed to work on their own.
If you would like to know more about the closest car park barriers which we can install or how a boom gate could help your facility when controlling traffic, speak to our professionals by filling out the form on the site.
There are a number of benefits that come from installing an automatic control system in Foindle. The benefits include:
Having an automatic access installed in your facility can be the best way to keep your surrounding areas safe. Let us know if you'd like to find out more information and speak to our professionals by filling out the enquiry form provided.
Car park barriers are an effective way to manage the cars coming in and out of a facility. The system will be fitted with a sensor included, this is to make sure the automatic barrier will not shut whilst a vehicle is driving through it.
However, it means that it will shut soon after to avoid the next vehicle getting out if they have not done the correct procedure, for example, paid the tariff. Occasionally, you do get cars who tag along with the vehicle in front to avoid paying the fee, this is where cameras can be useful as they can clock the registration and you can follow up the issue if it is needed.
Please fill in your details into the enquiry form on our website if you require more information about automatic barriers in Foindle IV27 4 and the range of other automated access services http://www.automated-access.co.uk/highland/foindle/ we could provide. When this information is received, our experts will review it and get back to you with an appropriate response which you are looking for.


text:
Sony Xperia E3 D2203 Charging Solution Jumper Problem Ways Charging Not Supported
Charging problem in Sony Xperia E3 D2203 can be due to charging pin broken damage and due to water damages.in case of charging problem mobile can not save power in battery and may it shows fake charging in it.in fake charging condition you can only see charging singe in mobile but it will not save any electricity power in it.
[caption id="attachment_20127" align="alignnone" width="856"] Sony Xperia E3 D2203 Charging Solution Jumper Problem Ways[/caption]
to sole charging problem Sony Xperia E3 D2203 Charging Solution Jumper Problem Ways Charging Not Supported
after disassembly of mobile phone you have to do a few steps as shown in above diagram.check charging jack and its points do they hae good value if yes then change charger and check it and if charging points at mother board do not show accourate value with meter then you have to check all parts and tracks that are given in diagram of Sony Xperia E3 D2203.
look at mother board vary carefully if there is any rust or carbon and water damage or may any component is damage.if any track is missing apply jumpers as given and if any part is damage or broken then replace it with new one.
For more information and new tips and tricks about this problem solution keep visiting this page we will update it if there will be new updates.some related post are also given below you can read more about mobile phone.
Please note that although every diagram & solution posted on our website has been tested by one or more members of our team before posting,so we will not be responsible for any loss or damage, including personal injury.Use this repair solutions at your own risk.
Sony Xperia E3 D2203,Charging,Solution,Jumper,Problem,Ways
Sony Xperia E3 D2203 Charging Solution Jumper Problem Ways No Charging Not Supported
Sony Xperia E3 D2203,Charging,Charging Problem,Charging Solution,Charging Jumpers,Charging Ways
Sign up here with your email
Disclaimer.We are not affiliate with cell phone companies like Nokia,Samsung,Sony Ericsson,Lg,Motorolo and some other etc Manufacturers / Vendors .All trademarks are the property of the respective trademark owners.we just provide diagrams for study and repairing purpose.these images are uploaded by website visitors.so we will not be responsible for any loss or damage, including personal injury.for more detail read Terms and Conditions and Privacy and Policies at bottom.


text: Civil law, as opposed to criminal law, is the branch of law dealing with disputes between individuals and/or organizations, in which compensation may be awarded to the victim. For instance, if a car crash victim claims damages against the driver for loss or injury sustained in an accident, this will be a civil law case. Civil law courts provide a forum for deciding disputes involving torts (such as accidents, negligence, and libel), contract disputes, the probate of wills, trusts, property disputes, administrative law, commercial law, and any other private matters that involve private parties or organizations including government departments. The objectives of civil law are different from other types of law. In civil law there is the attempt to right a wrong, honor an agreement, or settle a dispute. If there is a victim, they get compensation, and the person who is the cause of the wrong pays, this being a civilized form of, or legal alternative to, revenge.


text:
Is My Son's Voice Changing Too Soon?
My son is 10 and I think his voice is already starting to change. I'm worried — and he's self-conscious — because none of the other boys his age are experiencing this. Is he hitting puberty too soon?
– Jillian
When boys and girls begin puberty, the larynx (voice box) grows larger and thicker. It happens in both boys and girls, but the change is more evident in boys. Girls' voices only deepen by a couple of tones and the change is barely noticeable. Boys' voices, however, start to get significantly deeper.
When a boy reaches puberty, the production of testosterone increases (just as estrogen production increases in girls). Testosterone, which is produced in the testicles and then travels through the blood throughout the body, causes the cartilage of his larynx to grow. Along with the larynx, the vocal cords grow significantly longer and become thicker. In addition, the facial bones begin to grow. Cavities in the sinuses, the nose, and the back of the throat grow bigger, creating more space in the face and giving the voice more room to resonate.
Each child develops at a different pace, so a boy's voice might change anywhere between ages 11 and 14½, usually just after the major growth spurt. Some boys' voices change gradually, whereas others' change quickly.
If your son is concerned, stressed, or embarrassed about the sound of his voice, let him know that it's only temporary and that everyone goes through it to some extent. After a few months, he'll likely have the resonant, deep, and full voice of an adult!
Note: All information is for educational purposes only. For specific medical advice, diagnoses, and treatment, consult your doctor.
© 1995-2024 KidsHealth ® All rights reserved. Images provided by iStock, Getty Images, Corbis, Veer, Science Photo Library, Science Source Images, Shutterstock, and Clipart.com


text:
Now streaming on:
"Lore" gets right down to business. We're in Germany at the end of World War II, watching a large, once-prosperous family pack hurriedly to avoid the onslaught of Allied forces. A Swastika emblem on a discarded piece of clothing tells us we're dealing not with mere German citizens but Nazis. No wonder the mother looks petrified as she torches documents and the father flees at the first opportunity.
Other than the rather slovenly father, this is one gorgeous family. The mother might as well be Marlene Dietrich in her prime. The eldest daughter looks like a Leni Riefenstahl Aryan goddess. Her four younger siblings have been spared none of the stunner genes. That these Hitler Youth are easy to watch on a superficial level seems part of director Cate Shortland's strategy: We are about to see these beauties trudge through every muddy, thorny stretch of the Black Forest, into the kind of indignities and horrors their parents' political party inflicted upon the Jews. We know where this is going pretty early on, but that doesn't prevent "Lore" from being riveting stuff, start to finish.
The focus shifts from the mother, doomed to face Allied justice for her and her husband's apparent connection to a concentration camp, to Lore (Saskia Rosendahl), the daughter whose coming of age happens alongside her awakening to the truth: Hitler, her Santa Claus, her Jesus, presided over genocide.
Shortland is a sensualist, using constantly shifting handheld cameras shooting tight and close to make each step of Lore's education a palpable event. When she leads her siblings through the forest on a quest to grandmother's house, it ain't fairytale stuff. We see poorly shod feet set down in mud puddles, skin scratched and bruised by jutting branches, the air crowded with insects, smoke, mist, rain. Shortland seems determined to represent every kind of sensation and yearning in image and sound.
Which is why it doesn't raise eyebrows much when this film starts to become as obsessed with Lore's sexual awakening as it does her political one. Shortland's way into a scene is holistic: Lore's physical and emotional response to events merit equal scrutiny; each draws current from the other. When the kids meet up with Thomas (Kai Malina), an apparent concentration camp escapee who also happens to be a volatile and daring young man, his courage attracts her; his possibly being a "dirty Jew" repulses her. He circles the family discreetly but relentlessly, following them through the countryside like both a predator and a protector. But whenever they're in trouble, he steps in and takes charge. There are moments where we're unsure if Lore and Thomas will tear each other's clothes off or eyes out or both.
There's a style of filmmaking widely known as "Shaky-Cam" which increasingly threatens to cause an audience revolt as the new century rolls on. Shaky-Cam movies deploy handheld cameras to record the events of a screen story in pseudo-documentary style. When done sloppily and incoherently (usually in action films) it earns scholar Matthias Stork's designation, "Chaos Cinema. When done with inspiration and control, you get the realist classics of the Dardenne brothers and Ken Loach, the earthy lyricism of new classics like "Beasts of the Southern Wild" (2012) and the Andrea Arnold "Wuthering Heights" (2012).
"Lore" belongs in the inspiration-and-control camp. It makes dizzying flourishes out of moments that would pass as filler in other films. A sublime shot of Lore's younger sister skipping rope on a dirt floor sings of their rapidly vanishing youth with such slow-motion grace it aches. (It also evokes Riefenstahl's "Olympia.")
Very little of this style-to-burn would mean much without actors to give it a pulse. All of the children are living fully in their moments of terror, disillusion and heartbreak. It's slightly disturbing to see such young kids, down to the swaddled infant, put through such an ordeal, but the payoff justifies the torture.
Here's the payoff (no, not a plot spoiler): The protagonists are stand-ins for us. Wherever "Lore" is apt to screen, most audience members are likely to be citizens of the 27 NATO countries that signed onto America's War on Terror. How many of these folks are as loyal and unquestioning of the war's aims and practices as Lore is of her Fuhrer early on? How many Americans among them believe in extrajudicial killing of fellow citizens "suspected" of ties to terrorism -- and in assassination-by-robot-plane of individuals thought to be linked to Al Qaeda? How many Westerners subscribe to the "better there than here" philosophy that has kept thousands of foreign civilian deaths out of our sight? (An international treasure, thenausea.com, was censored off the web a few years ago, due to its raw images and videos of war atrocities that shame governments on every continent.)
I'm referring to a specific contemporary situation, but "Lore" offers up its lessons for all time. Citizens everywhere are often lost in the fog of their nation's propaganda, until reality comes crashing in. Lore's mental breakdown begins at an exhibit of fresh holocaust photos. The Americans taunt her and her neighbors with stark black & white images of concentration camp bodies piled high. Denial and acceptance push her to the verge of suicide. This can't be real. I don't live in a country that could do this to innocent people.
108 minutes
Ursina Lardi as Mutti
Saskia Rosendahl as Lore
Andre Frid as Gunther
Nele Trebs as Liesel
Kai Malina as Thomas


text:
If you have a concrete countertop in your kitchen or bathroom you need to take care of it to make sure you don't ruin the surface. Concrete countertops are still pretty new, so there isn't a lot of information out there on how to keep them clean and well taken care of. Here are a few suggestions to keep your countertops looking great and staying durable.
The most important part of your concrete countertop is that it is sealed extremely well from the beginning. This well prevent unwanted leaks onto the actual countertop and provides a barrier between whatever you spill and the countertop itself. If your concrete countertop is sealed it should be as easy to clean as any other countertop surface. Overall the basic rule is to use a PH neutral cleaner and avoid scrubbing pads or extremely strong cleaners that can eat away at the sealer. Here are a few more ideas on how to clean your countertop:
1. Good Old Fashioned Soap & Water
Soap, water, and a little dish soap can go a long way, even on concrete countertops! Soap and water are safe to use on porous and nonporous concrete. If you are looking to remove stains from your countertop you can add 2 tablespoons of dishwashing soap to a medium sized bucket. Just dip in a rag and use the rag to clean off the countertops. This will help clean up spills and normal daily messes.
2. Stain Removers
Stain removers can be used on your countertops as well because the detergent is so mild. It is also safe for porous and non porous concrete. All you have to do is spray the stain remover right on the stain on your countertop, let it sit for a little bit, sprinkle on some powder laundry detergent, and clean it with a wet towel while scrubbing the stain.
3. Waxing
When you wax your concrete countertops it helps avoid stains and keeps them looking fresh and new. Wax acts a sealer and prevent stains from soaking in. This keeps your countertop looking good and protects your investment
Concrete countertops are durable and can last for decades. They will most likely never need to be replaced if they are well taken care of. Make sure you are following these simple rules to take care of your countertop and you will have durable, clean, fresh looking countertops forever.


text:
Welcome to Pixwords answers (7 letters word – level 232 answers)
For every word in the crossword puzzle players are given a picture; each new picture is unlocked when the player correctly guesses the last word. It may sound pretty simple and the idea is relatively simple, but the game gets difficult pretty fast. Getting stuck is something players should expect to happen often.
If you get stuck on this level you can find the answer below the image
Pixwords answer: CONTROL
If this was not the image or the answer you were searching for, go to the homepage of Pixwords 7 letters answers and select another image.
Not only is PixWords pretty difficult, it is also a very long game with more than 500 levels to work through which become increasingly more difficult as the games goes on. The game is also offers support for 21 different languages.
This is certainly a game for puzzle and crossword fans, so this could certainly be too difficult for some players but for those looking for a fun, smooth, difficult puzzle game, PixWords could certainly be what you're looking for.
It took us a lot of time to find all the answers to Pixwords. You can help us by sharing this page to your favorite social network (Facebook, Twitter etc).


text:
- 1 cup cooked broccoli pieces
- 1 tablespoon lemon zest
- 1 tablespoon chopped walnuts
- 1/4 cup vegetable broth
- 1/3 cup plain nonfat yogurt
If using the broccoli stems, peel them and cut them into chunks. Rinse, cover dish with plastic wrap, and microwave for 3 minutes. Put all ingredients in blender and blend for about 20 seconds. If mixture is too thick, add a little more vegetable broth. Serve hot or cold.
Serves 4
Each serving contains about 39 calories, 3 g protein, 1 g fat, 0 mg cholesterol, 5 g carbohydrates, 2 g fiber, and 90 mg sodium.
To make this recipe gluten-free, use broth that is gluten-free. Read food labels carefully and contact the company if you have any questions.


text:
"A rapid series of attacks spread over a wide swath of Iraqi territory killed at least 50 people on Thursday, targeting mostly security forces in what appeared to be another strike by al-Qaida militants bent on destabilizing the country," The Associated Press reports.
Various media reports indicate that more than 200 people were injured. Al Jazeera correspondent Jane Arraf, "reporting from the Iraqi capital on Thursday, said the attacks included car bombs, roadside bombs seemingly targeting police, and gunmen opening fire on police patrols. 'The blasts seemed to happen at almost the same time, in what are being seen as co-ordinated attacks,' she said."
According to the BBC, "the violence targeted predominantly Shia areas, in particular police officers and checkpoints." There were attacks in the cities of Baghdad, Mosul, Kirkuk and and in the province of Salahuddin, the network says.
The Guardian adds that "in the worst attack, a car bomb went off near a security checkpoint in the Baghdad's Karradah shopping district, killing nine people and wounding 26, including four policemen, officials said."
As the AP writes:
"There have been a series of large-scale attacks by insurgents since the last U.S. troops left Iraq in mid-December at the end of a nearly 10-year war. Shortly after the withdrawal, a major political crisis with sectarian undertones erupted as well when Shiite-dominated authorities sought to arrest Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi on allegations he commandeered death squads targeting security forces and government officials.
"While no group immediately claimed responsibility for the latest attacks, targeting security officials is a hallmark of al-Qaida in Iraq. In December, a wave of bombs tore through mostly Shiite neighborhoods of Baghdad, killing 69 people in a similar onslaught of violence that Sunni-dominated al-Qaida claimed."
Copyright 2021 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.


text:
Music Lessons
Music is a form of entertainment that puts sounds together in a way that people like or find interesting. Most music includes people singing with their voices or playing musical instruments, such as the piano, guitar, or drums.
Refine Search
Let us connect you with the Best Home Tutors. Just tell us your requirements for home tuitions.


text:
You must be logged in to access the address book.
This is not necessarily an error. If you feel this is an error then it could be something as simple as your browser not being set to accept cookies. If you feel this error is a problem with the server then please contact email@example.com and let us know what exactly went wrong so it can be fixed as soon as possible. Otherwise, please use your back button to return to the previous page.