text:
Visit Menu Plan Monday, sponsored by I'm an Organizing Junkie, but clicking here.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Menu Plan Monday
9 comments:
I am SO finding where you live and showing up at dinner time!ReplyDelete
I agree with bubba's sis, what time is dinner? I'm not much of a chef (or a baker or anything but a stand in front of the fridge and ask my husband what he's making for diner-er) so I've never participated in Monday Menu Planning. I'm thinking though I will modify it a bit and plan 2 meals a week, or at least commit to 2 recipes a week where my husband doesnt have to cook. I'll bump it up more perhaps when I get more confident in the kitchen. I'll think about it this week and maybe start it next week :)ReplyDelete
- AnonymousOctober 13, 2008 7:39 AM
You've inspired me to participate! IF my meals don't turn out, however, I'm headed to your house.ReplyDelete
Sounds yummy! I am going to try it one night this week.ReplyDelete
I'm a double dipper too. ;) It's taco soup this week here.ReplyDelete
I learned alot more about you on the song meme. Cool!
Fried Chicken is my all time favorite - what time is dinner? LOL I use my grandma's old recipe that almost the same except you soak it in buttermilk for several hours first. Have fun on date night!ReplyDelete
So it's Fried Chicken night tonight? I'll be right over as soon as my stalking skillz figure out where you live. ;)ReplyDelete
Jeff my DH could live on chicken me on the other hand if I never had to eat it again it wouldn't hurt my feelings any. But what ever you do don't take away my pasta.ReplyDelete
I'll have to pass your receipe onto my cook (aka. Jeff) LOL!
Bubba's Sis thinks I'm the only one in the world who plans my menus! And, I write them down in my calendar book, so I can tell, at a glance, what we had for dinner any night since about 1984. Is there anything better than home fried chicken??? I don't think so!ReplyDelete


text:
Satin Touch - Note Card and Envelope
Item Number: DWW8790F
Invitations by Dawn
Send your wedding guests these elegant thank you cards with heartfelt message inside. They'll love getting a personal message from you, and you'll enjoy sharing your appreciation.
- Price Includes: Thank You Cards, Envelopes
- Size: 4 7/8" x 3 1/2"
- Card Type: Folder, White Paper
- Paper Weight: 54 lb
- Printing Method: Thermography
- Ink Color(s) Shown: Black
- Font(s) Shown: Snell Roundhand (SRH)
- Personalization Options: Your choice of ink colors, fonts and wording.
If ordered today, we estimate your order will be ready for shipment on Friday, September 29.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute and the Sapien Transcatheter Aortic Valve: Clinical Trial of Non-Surgical Intervention for Aortic Valve Stenosis
Los Angeles - June 20, 2008 - On Nov. 26, 2007, doctors at the Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute performed the first "transcatheter" minimally invasive replacement of an aortic heart valve in the western United States, using the Edwards SAPIEN transcatheter aortic heart valve developed by Edwards Lifesciences Corp. Cedars-Sinai is one of 16 centers participating in a pivotal clinical trial (the PARTNER trial) of the device, and is the only site currently recruiting on the West Coast.
The aortic valve controls blood flow from the heart's main pumping chamber into the body's largest arterial trunk. Stenosis (narrowing) at the valve reduces the outward flow of oxygenated blood and leads to congestive heart failure as the organ stretches to accommodate a greater-than-normal volume of blood.
While replacement mechanical or biological valves can be implanted, this is traditionally done via open-heart surgery. Many patients with aortic stenosis cannot be treated because they are not considered good candidates for surgery.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is accomplished in much the way blocked heart arteries are opened with balloon angioplasty and stents. A tube (catheter) containing a compressed balloon is inserted into a blood vessel at the groin and threaded up to the heart. The balloon is placed inside the damaged valve and inflated to open the narrowed area. A "stent valve" consisting of bovine pericardial tissue and a stainless steel frame is then placed on the catheter, threaded up to the heart, put into position and the balloon is inflated to expand the valve and press it into the calcified tissue on the artery wall. The balloon catheter is then removed, leaving the new, functioning valve in place.


text:
Army Pfc. Bradley Manning released classified documents to WikiLeaks in an effort to "spark a domestic debate on the role of our military and foreign policy in general," according to a statement he will seek to read in a court hearing Thursday.
The lengthy statement, which Manning has already submitted to the judge presiding over his case at Fort Meade, Md., will be his first public account of his motivations for leaking hundreds of thousands of battlefield reports relating to U.S. operation in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as State Department diplomatic cables.
The statement appears intended to bolster the defense his lawyer plans to use at his court martial now slated for June -- that Manning was acting as a whistleblower intending to expose government misconduct.
Manning, a former Army intelligence analyst, is facing 22 criminal charges that include "aiding the enemy" and could result in a life sentence. He will seek to plead guilty to lesser charges -- such as unauthorized use of his government computer -- at the pre-trial hearing Thursday.
Prosecutors have objected to Manning's partial plea -- it is not the result of a plea bargain -- and made clear that they fully intend to bring him to trial.
See more investigative reports at The Isikoff Files
In reading his statement, Manning also "will speak to larger issues affecting his case" and will expand upon his guilty plea to establish that he acted from a "noble motive," according to a news release Wednesday by the Bradley Manning Support Network.
Although the group did not release the text of the statement, it cited an exchange in a hearing earlier his week in which prosecutors objected to Manning being allowed to read some portions of his statement -- including the passage in which he talks about his desire "to spark a domestic debate."
Prosecutors quoted some of the wording in Manning's statement during the hearing, saying the passage -- and another one relating to leaking information about corruption within the Iraqi Federal Police -- should not be allowed because it would be an admission by Manning to "uncharged misconduct." For example, admitting that he intended to provoke a public debate could expose Manning to an additional charge of intending to "discredit" the U.S. military, prosecutors argued.
Manning's case has been shrouded in secrecy by the military. On Wednesday, the Pentagon released 84 pretrial documents, bowing to public records requests by news organizations, including NBC News. The documents are the first of about 500 that the Pentagon said it will release in response to the requests.
But in the documents released so far, the name of the presiding judge, Col. Denise Lind, has been redacted.
More from Open Channel
- Deaths among beginning drivers on the increase
- Horse meat in the US? Unlikely, but tests are rare
- Feds say neo-Nazi with guns was tracking community leaders
- Expert: US in cyberwar arms race with China, Russia
Follow Open Channel from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook


text:
Two nights and two very different film screenings at Meltdown 2014, each accompanied by a live orchestra and the score's composer. For a festival that prides itself on the splicing of mediums and confluence of artistic talents, such pairings make perfect sense.
For someone who's never seen a film soundtracked in such an indulgent way, this is a real treat, especially in a room as visually and acoustically pleasing as the Queen Elizabeth Hall. For the most part it's the spectacle of the movies themselves that commands your attention rather than the assembled players. But alongside this there are those truly special moments where the score rears up and slaps you round the chops, and BOOM, the impact of live music reasserts itself. Perhaps it's just a product of the world we're living in, where images have a bottomless reservoir of meaning attached to them; regardless, it's something joyous when the sound drags your eyes from the screen.
Of course, it's not supposed to be a battle, and most of the time it's not. In Waltz With Bashir in particular, the film's emotional impact is massively intensified by the score. Max Richter's powerful compositions take on a whole new dimension in the flesh, particularly the aching melancholy of the central motif, The Haunted Ocean. The lead violinist tonight is utterly spellbinding, spinning out the central melody with a gossamer touch. The deep blasts of the horns swell and engulf the senses to spine-tingling effect.
Some of the more contemporary touches that make Richter's score so compelling are lost in translation; restricted by the film itself, the full breadth of the amazing Shadow Journal can't be realised, for example. There are moments when Waltz With Bashir's sound design works against the orchestra; this is never a big problem, but it must be said there are junctures where it almost feels redundant, and you wish you could just have the music on its own. However, when pictures and score come together perfectly (and they generally do), the power they muster is utterly jaw-dropping.
By contrast, Under the Skin's creeping strings and cold percussion plough a very different furrow to Richter's score. Mica Levi (of Micachu and the Shapes) and her players have to cover a massive range of weird, unsettling and otherworldy sounds, and they achieve it all with effortless panache. The canvas they produce is raw, tense and unsettling - an unflinching reflection of the film itself.
Like the Kubrick-esque dimension of director Jonathan Glazer's vision (delivered on screen by cinematographer Daniel Landin), Levi's score is indebted to an era when Hollywood sci-fi was plumbing some deep, dark, thrilling wells. There are touches of both 2001: A Space Odyssey and Ridley Scott's Alien in the DNA, and spliced with electronic elements it makes for a captivating experience. The soundtrack's central 'void' motif is a truly brilliant encapsulation of Under The Skin's slow-burning blend of body horror meets existential sci-fi, and gets an extensive, bruising workout.
Mostly it's simmering, squirming and willfully un-human, with the exception of the warm, yearning drones of Love, a stunning counterpoint to the overall effect. Levi's score is brilliantly conceived and performed, to the point where it prompts a scattering of standing ovations at the close.
All told, there's not a lot to be written about these two sensational screenings; there are, after all, no surprises. And that's just how it's meant to be. What curator James Lavelle has been kind enough to bring us is two great movies on sensory steroids; two groups of exceptionally talented musicians performing two cracking scores in a gorgeous setting. Sadly I'll never be able to watch either film on my shitty laptop after seeing them like this, but it's a price I'll have to pay.


text:
BADBADNOTGOOD is a formally trained trio of young musicians made up of Matthew Tavares on keys, Chester Hansen on bass, and Alex Sowinski on drums. Since first meeting at music school in 2011, the three have challenged the rule book on improvised instrumental music and taken a fresh look at the jazz tradition by setting their sights on the future.
With early champions including acclaimedBBC broadcaster Gilles Peterson and Tyler The Creator, the band released their first
EP BBNG in June 2011 to wide praise. The marriage of jazz virtuosity and hip hop source material offered a new take on the traditional "standard" applied to the hip hop songbook; writing inspired arrangements for golden era classics instead of one-dimensional covers.
The band hit a landmark when introducing original material into their compositions with BBNG2 in 2012. New songs like "Rotten Decay", "Vices" or "UWM" carried on the proud heritage of musical juxtaposition by bringing together jazz, hip hop, punk, and dance music into vigorous balance. Since then, they've won praise from the four corners of the globe and collaborated with Bootsy Collins, RZA, Frank Ocean, Earl Sweatshirt, MF Doom, and Danny Brown among many. Their notorious live performances have brought fans across the whole musical spectrum together, taking the band around the world from Coachella to Glastonbury.
Now, the inseparable friends are prepping to release their biggest project to date III on prodigious young label Innovative Leisure, a highly- anticipated project ushering in the group's newest explorations which are proving to be limitless.


text:
Ashlee Simpson + Pete Wentz's Divorice Is Finalized
The pending divorce between Ashlee Simpson and Pete Wentz has been finalized.
The two pop stars filed papers to end their three year long marriage back in February of this year, citing irreconcilable differences. The papers became finalized on Nov. 22, according to PEOPLE magazine.
Unlike most high-profile breakups and divorces, Simpson and Wentz, who have a three-year-old son, Bronx Mowgli, have remained civil with each other when publicly addressing their relationship and where they went wrong.
"Ashlee's been my best friend for five years," Wentz told Ryan Seacrest back in March, shortly after news broke of their split. "She's the mother of my child. I have nothing but love and respect for her. Going through something like this isn't easy, but we're friends, and the most important thing is to put our son first."
The marriage was the first for both Simpson, 27, and Wentz, 32. Bronx is the only child for Simpson and Wentz who wed in 2008.
Since their parting of ways, both sides have moved on with other relationships. Simpson is now dating 'Boardwalk Empire' star Vincent Piazza and Wentz is currently seeing model Meagan Camper.


text:
Nearly every week some think tank, lobbying group or financial service company reports what sad shape Americans are in, or think they are in, when it comes to retirement. This week, for example, AARP, the lobby for those 50 and up, released a collection of research reports showing that if current trends continue, the living standards of middle class retirees are in for a big decline. (The papers were produced in cooperation with reputable academics, but are being used by AARP as part of its campaign against any Social Security cuts, including a change in the way the annual cost of living benefits boost is calculated.) Meanwhile, financial advice firm HelloWallet was generating buzz (including on Forbes here and here) with a new report detailing how a quarter of folks have been "breaching" their retirement accounts and incurring tax penalties and fees that could have been avoided if they'd built up emergency funds first, instead of stuffing all their savings into 401(k)s. (For help with that, see 11 Ways To Tap Retirement Cash Early Without A Penalty.)
So this happy news subject line on an emailed pitch from Ogilvy Public Relations yesterday caught my eye: "Younger People Think They're On Track For Retirement." Turns out that in a survey of defined contribution plan participants conducted last October by
My professionally framed follow-up question to the Ogilvy man ("Are those kids smoking something?") brought Fredrik Axsater, a Managing Director and head of Global Defined Contribution for SSgA, to the phone for a chat. On the one hand, he pointed out, thanks to the spread of automatic enrollment in 401(k)s, young workers (or at least those who have regular jobs with benefits) are getting an early start on retirement savings. Moreover, those in the survey (maybe as a result of seeing their own parents struggle during the Great Recession) said they were increasing saving outside of work too. On the other hand, Axsater acknowledged, these 20-somethings are socking away only a fraction of what they need to save if they're to meet their stated goal of replacing 70% of their income in retirement. (Typically, automatic enrollment starts employees out saving 3% of their pay and may automatically escalate those contributions over time to 6%---still less than half what experts believe folks need to save.)
Indeed, the SSgA report says employers should be "somewhat skeptical" about young folks "self-assuredness" since they cash out their 401(k)s when they switch jobs more often than older folks do and a fourth of the young workers surveyed reported switching to a more conservative asset allocation (meaning fewer stocks) in the past year. (Standard allocation advice is to have a very high stock allocation at a young age; for a somewhat different, and I think smarter approach, read A Fighter Pilot's View Of Age Based Asset Allocation.)
Still, if the young workers are more confident than they should be, is this just the hubris of youth? Or is it possible, as some critics of automatic enrollment have suggested, that the process, combined with automatic defaulting of workers into target date funds, may lull workers into a false sense of security? (For example, in an SEC commissioned survey, only 48% of workers who owned target date funds knew that the statement "a target date fund provides guaranteed income in retirement" was false.)
Axsater didn't want to tackle that question directly. Instead, he said, he sees his survey's findings as a "call to action" for employers to do even more with financial education. To a surprising degree, the younger participants were much more receptive to workplace education and prodding to save—particularly when delivered through social media—than were their elders. For example, 50% of those 25 and under, versus just 28% of all employees, said an "employer sponsored buddy-program" would be likely to get them to save more for retirement. (A savings buddy? As a boomer, I find that idea laughable, if not patronizingly offensive.) And 54% of the young workers said an employer created Facebook page or blog would be likely to encourage them to save, versus just 19% of all workers who thought they'd be influenced by a Facebook page, and 28% by a savings blog.
Yet for all their interest in a social media savings message, 50% of young workers (compared to 39% of all workers) said one approach that would likely work is: "Stop trying to communicate. Instead, automatically enroll me with a high enough savings rate so I don't have to think about it.'' Of course if employers did ramp 401(k) withholding up to that level, young workers might be shocked at how much it reduced their take home pay and find it hard to save outside their retirement accounts---which takes you right back to the HelloWallet identified problem of workers lacking emergency funds and draining their retirement accounts. Plus, let's not forget the student debt many young workers carry or the fact that if the AARP has its way, these kids will be paying through the nose for the baby boomers' retirement, too. Bottom line: To stay on track for retirement, Gen Y is going to have to run a marathon.
Follow Janet Novack on Twitter
For retirement advice and tools, whatever your age or assets visit The Forbes Retirement Guide.


text:
Online personal fitness training has become an affordable, convenient alternative to face-to-face personal training. The internet offers the ability to receive instruction from a qualified fitness trainer in the privacy of your home or office and even while traveling. The number of certified fitness trainers working with clients online has increased more than 400% in 2004 compared to 2003 and is predicted to double again in 2005/2006.
This type of training is ideal for someone who doesn't have the income for a personal trainer or cannot commit to a scheduled session. What makes losing weight in cyberspace so appealing? CONVENIENCE! There are many people who would like to join a health club but do not have access to one due to location or simply the time to get to the gym. This is where online fitness training is a win-win situation because it provides an effective way to receive fitness advice and guidance from a fitness expert.
You will find similar programs offered on the internet for this service. A certified personal trainer will design an online training program specifically for you based on your individual profile. They will consider your age, exercise and medical history, fitness level and goals, available equipment and schedule availability. Workouts are e-mailed to you on a weekly bases and many services offer weekly encouragement e-mails and work-out tips. Each workout should include an animated demonstration and a detailed written instruction, just incase you have no idea how to safely perform a flat-bench dumbbell flye for your chest or a reverse trunk twist for your abs. Some also offer customized diet programs with access to meal plans.
Online training is also becoming very popular with preteens seeking a competitive edge in sports performance. Weather a young athlete is looking to increase his speed and endurance for soccer, needs a stronger arm for their overhand tennis swing or more leg power for football, online training can offer personalized training programs to help them achieve their goal. Parents who are concerned with cutbacks in school physical education classes are also taking an interest in online training to fight against the rising percent of obesity among children.
Online training is an effective, safe and convenient way to lose weight, tone your body and improve your health in the privacy of your own home. If you have trouble staying motivated, knowing what to do or just want a little extra help, this is a viable option available to you. But just like other workout programs, you have to follow the workout schedule and eat nutritious meals to reach your goals. But at least with online training you can train when and where it is convenient for you. In the comfort of your own home!
If you would like to learn more about online training, visit my website www.fitnessinhometraining.com and take the first step towards a heathier you!
Gina is an ISSA certified personal trainer. She works with her clients in their own homes and offers online fitness training. She writes a weekly fitness article for her local newspaper. Her passion is fitness and helping others reach their fitness goals. She participates in dualthons and 5K races all the way to marathons.


text:
The second of Jay M. Bernstein's series of lectures on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason in HTML format. The source material can be found at bernsteintapes.com.
Lecture Two: Vocabulary
Part 1 of 2
00:00: The claim last week was that Kant's fundamental breakthrough between rationalism and empiricism is that each of these believe that knowledge could come from one faculty: rationalism from reason; empricism from sense.
Kant's first claim is the breakthrough claim of modern philosophy all knowledge (notice here we are not saying all thinking, just all knowledge) requires both thinking and sense. Both concepts and intuitions. And these have to be joined with one another.
And they are joined with one another in what Kant calls a "judgment".
02:00: Kant wants to make use of the two-sidedness of thought: concepts without intuitions are empty; intuitions without concepts are blind.
03:00: The concept side is going to talk about form and what has form and informs.
It speaks to what is universal in knowledge—concepts are those things that take hold of more than one object. That is what it means to be a concept—to take hold of more than one object.
Also on the concept side we have the idea of knowing as an activity—we are agents. As knowers we are agents. That is what Hume didn't understand.
Even when we are knowing we are acting, shaping and forming the world.
But this is a heavy thesis. Unlike the rationalists for whom the ideas just build up—clear and distinct ideas—we really are going to say that knowing is a form of doing. This is one of Kant's revolutionary thoughts. Knowing is a form of world-making.
04:30: On the other side we talk about the contents of thoughts, or the "matter" of thought, which is sense.
Intuitions are particulars. And this is our passive or receptive relationship to the world—how the world imprints itself on us, how the world constrains us and plays a role.
05:30: The concept side is what allows for the a priori and the intuition side what allows for a posteriori.
So schematically we have the following dichotomy:
- concepts – intuitions;
- form – matter;
- more than one object – particulars;
- activity – passivity or receptivity;
- a priori – a posteriori.
06:00: Kant's second thought was that not only does knowledge require thinking and sensing—concepts and intuitions—but the work of judgment, which is not a form of seeing.
For Descartes—for whom you should have clear and distinct ideas—you should get the idea so clear that you can hold it in one simple mental glance, whatever that means.
At least with empiricists, they have some idea that we receive sensory impressions, but that again is a seeing, a having of a sense impression.
Kant thinks that this idea of knowing as seeing is a mistake.
And the notion of judgment is going to claim that bring intuitions under concepts is what judgments do, which we will get to later.
08:00: The notion is that we have to put these together in a judgment and thus knowledge is always for Kant discursive. It is an activity of thought, an activity of putting things together and, therefore, to use Brandom's language, to know something is to know relations.
That something is true is to know something else is true. Meaning that to know something is true means we are able to make inferences from it. If you believe X then you must believe Y and Z.
So this talk of judgment and discursivity is going to be about how knowledge forms logical and inferential and deductive chains of propositions and sentences that relate to one another.
So schematically then, a judgment brings together:
- concepts – intuitions;
- form – matter;
- more than one object – particulars;
- activity – passivity or receptivity;
- a priori – a posteriori.
09:30: In order to start getting this in motion we decided we needed a technical vocabulary having to do with the types and status of propositions and our capacity to evaluate them.
Our first thought was that thoughts can be either necessary or contingent.
A proposition can be necessarily true. When we talk about necessity and contingency and the like, philosophers call these "modalities".
Necessary, actual, or possible are three "modalities of judgment".
This is what gives you "modal logic"—the analysis of the relationship between necessity, actuality, and possibility.
11:00: So what is "necessary"?
The step from possible to actual is one move—but how do we take the step from actual to possible?
One way of talking about necessity is that it could not have been false.
We have a gap here between two types of necessity we will have to clear up later.
There is causal necessity and logical/propositional necessity.
Right now we are limiting ourselves to logical necessity.
Of course there is the question of whether there is any causal necessity—this is what Hume denies. Kant is terrified about is.
14:00: Another possible definition is that the converse or opposite is impossible.
Leibniz would say something is necessarily true in something which would hold in all possible worlds.
15:00: We will see that Kant has a problem with logical necessity. He wants a notion of necessity that… he wants to find a space between logical necessity and causal necessity.
For the time being we will label this as transcendental or epistemic necessity.
The first thing Kant has is a modal vocabulary of necessity and contingency.
We also discovered last week he makes a distinction between a priori and a posteriori.
Something is a priori true if we can determine it to be true independently of experience. Soemthing is a priori if and only if we can determine it without looking in the world, or searching out. We can do it by reflection or thought.
So a priori refers to the mechanism of how we evaluate it, so something is a priori if we can evaluate it independent of experience.
Conversely, if evaluation is dependent on experience, then it is a posteriori.
18:00: And last time we ended up with the distinction between analytic and synthetic.
Analytic and synthetic describe not the way we know propositions, not how they are validated, but what type of propositions or judgments.
So schematically it seems to me we have made the following distinctions:
|A priori
|A posteriori
18:30: Kant will say that analytic propositions are explicative while synthetic propositions are amplitive.
Something is analytic if we construe the judgment in such a way that the predicate of the judgment adds nothing to the concept of the subject. It is merely taking the subject proposition and breaking it up, analyzing it, so that the predicate is contained in the subject, and that we come to this by merely examining the subject concept.
20:00: Since we don't have to look at the world in order to do this, if we are just analyzing a concept, then it will follow that analytic judgments can be known a priori.
Last time we said that concepts were mediate "marks" for a determination of an object. So to say that a judgment is analytic is to say that the predicate is a mark contained in the subject proposition.
21:30: To make it a bit more formal, we can say that a concept is nothing but a set of marks. So the concept apple has certain marks: fruit, round, red-green.
The concept apple is marked out by the further marks of fruit colored in a certain way, roundish, grows, etc. All of that is contained in the subject proposition.
So in technical jargon, predicates are marks of marks.
23:00: Kant's other way of talking about analytic propositions is to say that a proposition is analytic if its denial ends up in a self-contradition.
So if we say this thing here is an apple and it is not a fruit, we will get involved in a contradiction, but without even looking at the object—we don't have to examine it because fruit is built in to the idea of apple.
24:00: So the point here is that we have to different concepts of analyticity, both of which Kant likes:
- containment; and
- contradictory denial.
A synthetic judgment is one which adds to the concept of the subject a predicate that has not been "in any ways thought in it and which no analysis could possibly extract from it".
So the idea is a synthetic judgment…
No examination of the concept apple will tell us whether an apple is ripe or not. This is because the claim we are trying to make here is not a claim about a concept but about an object in the world, and therefore we are making a claim about a "third thing".
Third things come up a lot in Kant. And this is the beginning of Kant's concept of judgment because what he is claiming here is that a judgment is more than an association of two impressions or ideas.
26:00: If you are an empiricist you would simply have an apple impression and a ripeness impression and they would be associated with one another. But without any question about how they are connected.
For Kant, for a claim to be synthetic is to claim that the object picked out by the subject term has the property—that is what the "is" of predication is—picked out by the predicate term.
X = S is P, or "apple is ripe".
X = some third thing, or some actualy object in the world about which we are saying both "apple" and "ripe" inhere.
27:00: So "Xs"—third things—tend to be in intuitions.
So synthetic knowledge is knowledge in which concepts determine an intuition.
28:00: Mitch asks whether it would be an analytic judgment whether or not an apple is "walking" or "happy". This will end up, after more leg work, being determinable analytically because these are the kinds of predicate that cannot be said of that subject.
Lots of analytic judgments are not obviously analytic because you don't see the contradiction immediately, the contradiction requires a lot of propositions.
Which is why the notion of containment can be tricky. Containment makes it look like analyticity is just a matter of investigating rather than complex inferential analysis.
29:30: Another question:
We can say that we can't transform a synthetic into an analytic judgment because synthetic judgments require a material extension. It has to refer to the third thing.
This is why Kantian synthetic judgments cannot be rerouted into analytic judgments.
We will come back to the original question here when we get to the Quine problem.
30:30: The point here is that synthetic judgments are material extensions of the subject concept. By material extension we mean everything that was on the right hand side of our earlier schema (intuitions, matter, particulars, passicity or receptivity, a posteriori).
So synthetic judgments really add to what we have, so we have to check out the world.
31:00: So the basic definition of a judgment is a relation between a subject and predicate which is not merely an association of their ideas but an assertion—and those who do Frege can understand why he thought he needed an assertion sign—Frege saw that there was something more involved in a judgment and he wanted to get it through an assertion sign.
A judgment is that an assertion of a connection between the subject and predicate terms holds in the object denoted by the subject terms.
Therefore there must be some third things between the subject and predicate, which Kant calls "X", into which S and P of a synthetic judgment are related and through which they are related to one other.
They are related to one another through their being related to the third thing.
33:00: Remember that intuitions are immediate representations of things.
This said we might suppose, as do all the rationalists and all the empiricists, it would seem rational to suppose that all synethetic propositions must be known a posteriori and all analytic judgments must be known a priori—and the only propositions that we can know a priori are analytic propositions.
That just follows from the definitions we have been examining.
But Kant wants to say there is another possibility. The claim is that there can be synthetic propositions that we can know a priori. There can be propositions that have a material extension that we can know a priori. There is a third thing, yet we can know it a priori.
Which is to say there are contentful propositions—propositions about intuitions—which can be necessarily and universally true and cannot be falsified.
We might have knowledge of the world—real material extension, not just moving around in concepts—and it be universal and necessarily true, a priori.
35:00: Question:
On the containment analysis, anything that is analytic is a priori. Because if I can know some truth just by closing my eyes and thinking of it, so anything I can know about apples simply by lying in bed on a Sunday morning, we are going to call that a priori.
Kant says famously that all knowledge derives from experience. Trivially, there is going to be no knowledge that we haven't got through our interactions with the world, but not all knowledge depends on experience for its truth.
And it is the notion of depending that is crucial.
38:00: Let's begin getting into synthetic a priori by asking: do we think there are any propositions that might qualify as synthetic a priori?
In the introduction, Kant says that 7 + 5 = 12 is synthetic a priori.
He thinks that 12 is a material extension, but why?
On the containment theory…
But what if we say 7 + 5 = m – n, we can imagine an infinite number of numbers that would satisfy m – n as placeholders. At the very least, it is the case that 7 + 5 = x is not contained in these two concepts m and n.
41:00: We all agree that 7 + 5 = 12 is necessarily true, but we are trying to see why Kant says it is synthetic.
What we have been trying to show is that on the containment theory, we cannot analyze 7 + 5 to get 12. So at least on the containment theory it is synthetic.
But what about the contradiction view?
You might think that the denial of 7 + 5 = 12 will lead to a contradiction. That is what Frege, Russell, and Whitehead thought. The thought that—and if it is false, it gives at least some legs to what Kant is trying to get at—of all arithmetic.
Poor Whitehead in all of the hard work of writing out the Principia Mathematica, the thought was that arithmetic could be cashed out purely in logical terms, using just the terms of formal logic, 108 axioms of symbolic logic, plus some extras.
The objection to that—which would take a whole course in itself—there are two standard objections to the Russellian-Leibnizian program.
- At least some of the axioms are questionable. Like the axiom of infinity which is meant to guarantee an infinity of possible mathematical objects. But some wonder how you are going to get that thought out of pure logic. That looks like a hefty extra thought. So it is not clear that all the axioms are purely logical.
- Gödels theorem, the incompleteness theorem, states that there cannot be any finite and consistent set of axioms from which every mathematical truth can be derived.
That would at least help us get going on the notion that 7 + 5 = 12 is synthetic.
45:30: Question:
But the point is, to short-cut through a lot of logical work, that it turns out that if you want to base 7 + 5 = 12 in logical analysis, you end up needing a lot more logical baggage then you might expect.
Indeed, it does look in retrospect—and this is what gives rise to the Quine problem—that 12 is just what we mean by 7 + 5, but it turns out that at least formally it can't be cashed out in terms of either containment or contradiction.
So that something is or is not analytic may not be obvious.
46:30: Another proposition that Kant doesn't discuss: we probably think that 'nothing can be red and green all over' is necessarily true, but Jay wants to argue that it has got to be synthetic.
Why would someone argue otherwise?
First of all it is necessarily true—we can't imagine a possible world in which something is both red and green all over.
The reason that it must be synthetic is that the way to make it analytic is that red by definition is not green, yellow, purple… you just do it by negation, so you can say that it is contradictory.
But that doesn't end up working. This is because at some point in this dictionary definition, I look up red which says 'whatever is not green, yellow, purple…'
But when we look up yellow we get 'whatever is not purple, red…'
This would be the analytic account of why nothing can be red and green all over, but is this still unsatisfactory?
At some point you have got to have some version of an ostensive definition, you have to go outside the series of concepts and bring in an individual.
50:00: Gabe asks: what if you leave actual colors out of it altogether and simply say 'something cannot be covered by both color X and color Y'?
Jay wants to say that this will involve us in a definition of color and to go Aristotelian, you can't have a notion of 'color' without 'colors'.
51:00: But in any event, all we are trying to do is problematize what seem to be obvious analytic a prioris to make synthetic a prioris at least seem less crazy.
Let's look at the case that really worried Kant, and that is Hume's argument, of which there are two propositions that are connected.
A: The first is the proposition of the causal maxim: everything that has a beginning has a cause.
B: The second is that particular causes must necessarily have certain effects. That is, there is a bond of necessity linking cause and effect.
The claim of classical causal theory: if the causal event happens, then necessarily the effect event is going to happen.
Hume discovered that at least the second one—and Kant interestingly never actually denies this claim—that this second one is false.
Hume does this by counter-examples. When I perceive the cause and I perceive the effect, I do not perceive a necessary bond between them. All that happens is that first I see one, then I see the other, but all that happens is that usually or regularly when I see A I see B—this isn't called the "regularity theory of causality" for nothing—and there is nothing more to it.
There is no magical necessity—no glue of the universe holding causes and effects together.
55:30: Kant says in the Prolegomena that it was that demonstration that awoke Kant from his dogmatic slumber.
And what Hume further thinks is that if B is false, if not B, then he thinks not A. If I can show that there is no ontological necessity in the world, then it follows that the causal maxim is not necessary.
56:30: So near the end of the book, at A766:
"That sunlight should melt wax and yet also harden clay, no understanding, he [Hume] pointed out, can discover from the concepts which we previously possessed of these things, much less infer them according to a law. Our experience is able to teach us such a law [… But, as we have discovered in the Transcendental Logic, although we can never pass immediately beyond the content of the concept which is given us, we are nevertheless able, in relation to a third thing, namely, possible experience, to know that the law of its connection with other things, and to do so in an a priori manner…]. If, therefore, wax, which was formerly hard, melts, I can know a priori that something must have preceded, ([that something being] for instance [in the case] the heat of the sun), upon which the melting has followed according to a fixed law, although a priori, independently of experience, I could not determine, in any specific manner, either the cause from the effect, or the effect from the cause. Hume was therefore in error in inferring from the contingency of our determination in accordance with the law the contingency of the law itself."
By the way, this is pretty much the argument of the entire Critique of Pure Reason.
59:00: Hume's argument in the Treatise was something like… we'll break here and start with this in the next section.
Part 2 of 2
A handout was passed around between sections whose contents were as follows:
—The Problem before Kant
Transcendental realism: Space and its contents are real but never directly known, a position you can attribute to Descartes, Newton, Locke and many others.
This has as its corollary:
Empirical idealism: Experience consists of ideas and some tour de force is needed to show that 'knowledge' of bodies isn't a mere illusion, e.g., God's veracity, occasionalism, causal theory of perception.
These moves, however, don't work and one is landed in skeptical idealism or dogmatic idealism, where our experience may be or must be illusory.
Kant's Solution to the Problem
Transcendental idealism: Things-in-themselves can't be known — we can make no judgements of the form "things-in-themselves are really x".
This Kant believed had the corollary of:
Empirical realism: Experience consists of ideas and appearances that are real. No doubt some are illusory, but we discover this by incoherence. The distinction veridical/illusory is between appearances and not a distinction between appearances and reality.
0:00: We begin with the argument that Hume puts forward in this Treatise, 133, saying that if something is a priori, its denial involves a contradiction.
This tells us that, on Hume's thinking, the a priori must be a matter of analysis. Therefore, if x implies a contradiction, then x is inconceivable—and Kant is going to have great worries about this notion of conceivability, because this notion turns out to be psychological and not logical.
If x implies a contradiction then it is inconceivable for Hume.
The denial of the causal maxim is conceivable and Hume thought it was conceivable because he thought that the denial of the particular causal bond entailed the denial of the causal maxim.
Hume's thought was that if a cause occurs, not only is there not a particular effect, but from this cause you could have this, that, or the other effect or perhaps no effect. That is conceivable too.
2:30: So we can conceive or imagine that when I punch you in the face, a rose would bloom out of your nose or nothing would happen at all.
Hume thought that all of these were just regularities, which we could conceive or imagine to be otherwise.
Therefore, the denial of the causal maxim is conceivable. Therefore, the denial of the casual maxim does not imply a contradiction, hence the causal maxim is not analytically true, therefore the causal maxim is not a priori.
3:30: That is what motivated Kant, because if you think in this way, then it will turn out that not even mathematics is a priori.
That would be because we can do conceivability games in which 7 + 5 = 17 or 7 + 5 = a tomato.
About this issue, Kant said that Hume's good sense saved him from going down this route. Hume realized that math is better than this, but still he can't give an account of how.
Kant's strong claim is that mathematics must be synthetic a priori, and, therefore, there must be other things that are synthetic a priori as well—among these he wants to include the causal maxim itself.
5:00: The question now becomes: if we are going to save knowledge from both rationalism and empiricism, then Kant wants to say that it will be a body of synthetic a priori propositions, and such a body of propositions will provide us with a "metaphysics of experience", those features of our experience that we are going to hold with necessity and universality.
6:00: So if metaphysics concerns what is invariant and unchanging, then Kant wants to say that there is something about experience itself that is invariant or unchanging, namely its form or structure.
We've been arguing that Kant claims that there are two sources of knowledge—concepts and intuitions or reason and sense.
Therefore, if there are going to be synthetic a priori truths, then there must be two things:
- pure non empirical concepts, or concepts not derived from experience, but which we bring to experience in order to form or shape it; and
- these pure or formal or non-empirical concepts must yield knowledge, which is to say that the knowledge must apply to something.
8:00: Kant wants to hold to the thesis that concepts without intuitions are empty. So if these pure concepts are not empty, then they must refer. And if they refer, if they are material then they must relate to, some x:
apple (s – subject) is (x – the object being referred to) ripe (p – predicate)
But that x cannot be from empirical intuition, because if that was the case, the concept could only be validated a posteriori and would not be pure. Hence, if there are pure concepts at all, if there are any, they themselves have to refer to something that is itself pure.
And Kant is going to call these "pure intuitions", or non-empirical intuitions.
9:30: So in Allison (page unknown) from Kant's text On the Progress of Metaphysics, we have the key to the Critique of Pure Reason (CPR):
"Knowledge is a judgment from which a concept arises which has objective validity (and now we know what objective validity means for Kant — it means that there is some corresponding object in experience that can be given) if and only if there is some object in experience corresponding to it which can be given. Otherwise the object is a mere thought thing. (the object has got to refer)"
You might say that this is Kant's own—this is why some of the empiricists actually like him—empiricist, positivistic, verificationist moment.
We can't get it from thought alone; we have got to refer to some object.
"All experience, however, consists of the intuition of the object. An immediate and singular representation through which the object is given to knowledge and of a concept in need of representation to a mark that is common to several objects through which it is thought. One of these two modes of representation alone cannot constitute knowledge and it is therefore to be synthetic a priori there must also be also be a priori intuitions as well as concepts."
11:30: There must be intuitions, singular immediate representations of particular objects that we can know independently of experience.
There are two fundamental pure intuitions—space and time.
The thought here which then gives us the structure of the entire book is that if there are to be synthetic a priori intuitions, then like any judgment…
Judgments are composed of concepts and intuitions and it is a matter of bringing intuitions under concepts, and Kant is going to call the pure concepts "categories" and the pure intuitions, the x we have been looking for, are going to be space and time.
Thus, for an empirical intuition, apple (s) is (x) ripe (p), and for a pure intuition, x refers to space and time — not objects of experience, but objects of the possibility of experience.
Synthetic a priori intuitions are going to be bringing the pure intuitions of space and time under the categories of thought.
13:30: If you look at the Table of Contents, that gives you the structure of the book. After the Preface and Introduction—these are the parts we have been going through— you get the first part which is called the "Transcendental Aesthetic".
The "Transcendental Aesthetic" is an inquiry into what we can know about our capacity for receptivity a priori, that is the Transcendental Aesthetic is the attempt to elucidate the fact that above all that space and time are a priori intuitions.
Next week we still try to see how space is an a priori intuition. Time as well, but for Jay (the lecturer) space is more fun.
15:00: The next bit of the text, the Transcendental Analytic, is the analysis of the Pure Concepts, the Categories, and the claim that they are necessarily applicable to space and time, or that we cannot have experience with out them.
The categories that are the most fun are the categories of substance and causality.
The claim of the text is going to be that we can know through transcendental reflection. By 'transcendental' we mean 'whatever is a necessary condition for the possibility of experience.' A transcendental inquiry is an inquiry into the necessary conditions for the possibility of experience.
16:30: If Kant can show that certain things are necessary for the very possibility of experience, namely that there be a unified spatial world in a unified temporal continuum and we can only have knowledge of that unified spatio-temporal world if and only if we employ the categories of substance, causality, and the like, then he will have shown that we have synthetic a priori knowledge—that is, truths that are true—but not in all possible world.
His critique of Leibniz is that he does not know what is possible in all possible worlds, and, furthermore, we shouldn't care. Why care about other possible worlds?
18:00: So modal logic—like Saul Kripke—is just fiction.
Modal logic concerns, according to Kripkean semantics, which is a Leibnizian project, what is true in all possible worlds. Kant says that that notion of necessity is of complete disinterest to us. We are transcendental philosophers—we are inquiring not into what is true in all possible worlds, but we are ratcheting down to ask what is necessarily true to us if we are to have experience of this world.
How must the world be if someone like me can have experience of it? We underline 'if someone like me…' because that is the Copernican Turn.
19:00: Preface, B xvi-xvii:
"Hitherto it has been assumed that all our knowledge must conform to objects…"
This is the correspondence theory of truth—how do I know that my representations, my propositions, how do I know they correspond to the object?
And Kant thinks that this very question, this is his most radical move, is the wrong question. All metaphysics has presumed the question 'how do I know my knowledge conforms to the world', and the simple reason why he thinks that this is a bad question is because—it assumes that our access to things out there…
For Kant, our access to things in the worlds like cups is through our judgment. But when we ask 'how do I know that my judgment that the cup is white corresponds to the cup', that looks to Kant like an impossible question because it is only through my representation or experience of the cup that I have access to the cup.
So the question how do I know that my representation corresponds to the cup is trying to get me to get out of my skin, out of my propositions, over to the other side, to the object. That is what the Cartesian circle is all about, jumping out of your skin, only you can't, so you say something else jumps out of your skin—call it God—then you have this silly story about having a thought in me bigger than me, that is God, therefore…
In order to do what? To bring me in touch with what I am already in touch with. So the very question 'how do I know that my knowledge corresponds to the object' denatures me, it is a denial of my relationship to the object, because it is a denial of the things that make the object available to me.
23:00: So Kant thinks that if metaphysics is always that, then metaphysics is an attempt to know the world by a denial of the means by which we know the world.
And of course he gives that a dirty name: intellectual intuition, the God's eye point of view.
23:30: "Hitherto it has been assumed that all our knowledge must conform to objects. But all attempts to extend our knowledge of objects by establishing something in regard to them a priori, by means of concepts, have, on this assumption, ended in failure."
And this is because it looks like if philosophy is the game of a priori thinking, how much by means of mere thought can I figure out about the nature and structure of the world and experience? It looks like that is simply an absurd question.
How can I by just sitting in my arm chair figure out what the world independently of anything I might think, reason, or believe be like?
So the very question looks like it is self-defeating. It is not just that it did end in failure, it had to.
"Hitherto it has been assumed that all our knowledge must conform to objects. But all attempts to extend our knowledge of objects by establishing something in regard to them a priori, by means of concepts, have, on this assumption, ended in failure. We must therefore make trial whether we may not have more success in the tasks of metaphysics, if we suppose that the objects must conform to our knowledge."
Jay takes this "trial" language very seriously.
The Copernican turn is an event. It is something we undergo. It is not as if we know exactly how to do it, but we have to try it in order to achieve a different, new standpoint.
26:00: And the word "must" is doing all the work in the passage above. Because if we drop the notion of must—that all objects must conform to our knowledge—then we have nothing but nominalism and constructivism.
The world wouldn't then have any say. We can just say anything we want to say.
27:00: Kant wants to ask if there is any way we can demonstrate that there is a necessity to objects appearing in a certain way?
Is there any grounds for it to be the case that if I have an experience, then it must be of an object in space and in time that is causally connected to other objects, by necessity?
Because he wants to say if that isn't true—this is the argument of the book—then there is no experience, there is no knowledge…
The Copernican Turn is the turning around of this and that entails Transcendental Idealism.
28:00: So far we have said that there are two sources of knowledge. Knowledge is either discursive, and Kant's final achievement is his notion of Transcendental Idealism in which you can say there are two ineliminable ways of viewing the world.
You might even want to call this a "two worlds" thesis. But in any event this is all opposed to realism.
What do we mean by Transcendental Idealism? What is Kant's "two world's" hypothesis? What is it to undergo this Copernican Turn? What do we have to eliminate in order to do it?
30:00: The first statement is that our knowledge must conform to objects. We are going to give this object a new name: "thing-in-itself".
We will define the thing-in-itself as the object that is independent of our knowledge and our means of knowledge of it.
That is, the thing-in-itself is the object conceived of as external to any human knowing.
In other words, it is the object "as God might see it".
31:00: So Kant's thought is trying to figure out of our representations of the object conform to the object is a hopeless endeavor.
Hopeless because if our relationship to the object is via our representations of the object, then we are not going to be able to find a way of matching our representation with something that is in principle something that is wholly independent of that representation.
Kant's way of thinking about this is to say let's just drop it and draw a boundary against the world of things-in-themselves.
Transcendental idealism is the thesis that we know appearances only. We know things in relation to our representations of them. Therefore, we are going to say that our means of representation are our body of synethtic a priori judgments.
The structure of experience—what gives us a representation—is treating things in terms of space, time, categories.
So what we know now is an internal correlate of our judgment, so that what the synthetic a priori propositions gives us is our concept of an object.
So there can be no object for us independent of the concept of an object for us.
And the idea of the concept of an object for us is what emerges in the light of our acts of judging and representing and the like, in terms of using the categories.
34:30: To call this idealism is simply to say that everything that appears does so under a description. And the description it appears under minimally is given, or specified by, the body of synthetic a priori judgments.
Therefore, for something to be an object, it is already embraced within these categories and intuitions.
We can think about this new object, we know appearances only and not things in themselves, that statement is true only as a transcendental statement.
37:00: Looking at the handout, of course Kant is an idealist, but the fact that he is an idealist doesn't mean that he lived in a world any different than that which you and I live in, with chairs and tables and hard things. Therefore, the purpose of our claim here, the statement that we know appearances only and not things-in-themselves is transcendental and not empirical.
We have to get the right perspectival relationship of philosophical understanding to ordinary experience.
38:00: Something about appearance talk is offensive.
Here we start by looking at the world through Kantian lenses with transcendental realism. This is Kant's way of thinking about both empiricism and rationalism. For Kant, both empiricists and rationalists, including Berkeley, were realists. What makes a realist a realist is that they believe that there is a world that exists independently of my thoughts and beliefs about it. And the question is: how do I get connected up to it? That is what realism is.
39:00: This transcendental realism is what Husserlians call "the natural attitude". This whole movement can also be done in terms of Husserl and the question of transcendental bracketing.
This can be done in terms of the natural attitude, but Jay thinks the Kantian route is much more thorough, although Husserlians disagree.
Here space and its content are real. They have always existed, there was a big bang, there is a world out there, it is real.
What empiricists and rationalist all agree is that it is never directly known—we can only know the thing by thinking if you are a rationalist or by having experiences if you are an empricist. But one way or another, I am tied to my representations of the world.
40:00: So what I know of the world is not what it is in itself, but I know it indirectly through my representations. Therefore, if you are a transcendental realist, you are inevitably going to become an empirical idealist.
You are going to believe as an empirical idealist, since you believe there are things out there but you can't touch them, all you have is representations, then you will ask: what do I know? What is it I have experience of?
The empirical idealist says: I experience ideas in my mind. So experience consists of ideas, whether they are impressions of the empiricist sort or ideas of a rationalist sort, and then we are going to somehow hook up my ideas with the world.
To do that we are either going to need something like God's veracity… that would be to know the world by faith?
That is the claim of all these characters, Locke, Hume, Berkeley, Leibniz.
42:00: So empirical idealism ends up in one of two places: you either end up a skeptic like Hume; or you become a crazy dogmatist like Leibniz and you go towards theodicy.
The Kantian claim is that the remedy to this impasse is empirical realism, which is the claim that experience consists of ideas and appearances, but these are real. The appearance of the chair is just the chair—it is not an idea in my head but an object in space and time that causally interacts with other things. Of course, sometimes I am mistaken and sometimes I get cut off from experience, which is why bad dreams are so bad because it is as if they were real.
43:30: But that just tells us how committed we are to empirical realism.
But empirical realism can be the case only if you are a transcendental idealist.
You can have a world of concrete things in the sense that you are not cut off from them, only if you agree that these things must conform to our knowledge.
44:00: There is a Wittgensteinian version of this same argument. There is a beautiful essay by Jonathan Lear called The Disappearing We.
There is a version of Wittgenstein that says that he is a transcendental idealist because he thinks that the necessary conditions for the possibility of knowledge are forms of life, language games, practices, etc.
An object is only an object in the context of all that stuff. Those are the necessary conditions for the possibility of experience, to use Kantian talk. That is what the Wittgensteinian 'meaning as use' means, which ties meaning to agency and practice.
45:00: What follows from that is that for any proposition we must put before it a kind of bracketing. Kant says 'the 'I think' must accompany all of my representations'. That is Kant's way of doing the Copernican Turn.
The "I think" means this whole apparatus.
Wittgenstein is going to give us something different. He is going to give us the "We think".
So 2 + 2 = 4, if we want to be accurate about why that is compelling, why we are convinced that 2+2=4, it depends on our form of life, that we are counting creatures, etc. All that goes into 2+2=4, then we are going to say "we think 2+2=4".
That is to treat the proposition 2+2=4 as a consequence of its being bounded by the transcendental conditions of possibility.
46:30: So we can now understand from a transcendental perspective that the proposition 2+2=4 as "we think 2+2=4", but now if we think about it, the "we think" is opposed here to what?
The "we think" doesn't contrast with anything, and once we realize that, we can drop it altogether and say "2+2=4" and now we are back to being empirical realists.
47:00: In the next twelve weeks, we want to be able to show that transcendental idealism, exactly by saying that we know appearances and not things-in-themselves, is the only thing that gives back to us the concreteness of experience—that is, allows for thick empirical realism and, therefore, there isn't going to be a "veil of perception"—the problem of classical epistemology—standing between us and the world.
Our claim is that our judgments put us in touch with the world. All the world I'll ever know…


text:
Joe Perry Jr. grew up in the restaurant industry, though when he was a kid at longtime (now closed) Bangor eatery Perry's Restaurant, he wasn't in the kitchen or waiting tables. He was watching his grandfather Charles and father Joe Sr. run the place, which closed in 1996 after nearly 50 years, when the city of Bangor razed the entire block to make way for Shaw's Supermarket on Main Street.
Now Perry, with his wife, Mary Beth McGinley, has taken up the family business, with their restaurant, The Brickhouse, on Route 1 in downtown Searsport. The menu item that Perry's Restaurant was undoubtedly best known for — the fried clams — is available at the Brickhouse, with the same secret recipe his grandfather developed in the 1940s.
"We don't like to divulge our secrets," said Perry, who opened the Brickhouse with McGinley in June 2010. "But it's the family recipe that we've had for generations. If you remember Perry's, these are the real deal."
According to a Bangor Daily News article that was published around the time of Perry's Restaurant's closing, a sign hung in the window for several decades that read simply "CLAMS," reminding their clientele about the menu item that had fed people of all stripes for all those years. Though that sign is gone, the younger Perry does have a number of bits of memorabilia from the old restaurant hanging in The Brickhouse, from old pictures to another sign that reads "Some of the finest people in the world come into this place," a quote from his grandfather, Charles.
"We try to keep the same feel the old place had, a nice neighborhood place you can come and relax," Perry said.
In addition to the fried clams, Perry's serves what he and McGinley call casual American cuisine informed by McGinley's Italian and Irish heritage. There are burgers and fried fish sandwiches, and there's an antipasto pizza and grilled portabellas. On the weekends, the Brickhouse offers live music — this Saturday, June 9, Celtic musicians Chris Brinn, Chuck Walsh and Emma Donnelly will perform.
The Brickhouse is open 4 p.m.-close Wednesday-Friday, noon-close Saturday, and 10 a.m.-2 p.m. Sundays for brunch.


text:
For the third consecutive year, The International Foodservice Manufacturers Association (IFMA) recognizes four outstanding foodservice chain operators through the COEX Innovation Awards.
The winners will receive their awards during IFMA's Chain Operators EXchange (COEX), March 3–6, 2013, at The Red Rock Resort in Las Vegas.
COEX Innovation Awards recognize regional and national chain companies that are shaping the industry through innovation in culinary, operations, marketing, and service.
National and regional chains were nominated and voted on by IFMA members, which include the world's most prestigious foodservice manufacturers.
"The annual COEX Innovation Awards allow us to honor pioneering chain operators that make foodservice the exciting industry it is today," says Larry Oberkfell, president and CEO, IFMA. "This year, we received more nominations than ever before, which speak volumes about the inventive work being done by the chain operator community."
2013 COEX Innovation winners are:
- Marketing/Service, National Chain: Wendy's International—Wendy's is in the midst of a comprehensive transformation to contemporize the brand and improve the customer experience. The company is connecting with consumers in new and innovative ways, with bold restaurant designs, fresh product innovation, more engaging advertising, and digital media advancements, including a mobile app that allows customers to personalize meals based on the amount of calories they choose. The brand transformation will soon extend to the introduction of a new, contemporary logo.
- Marketing/Service, Regional Chain: Smashburger— Smashburger is a fast-casual restaurant designed to be every city's favorite place for burgers. No two Smashburger menus are alike, as it creates special burgers using local ingredients for each market it serves. In 2012, it took this strategy to a new level with locally sourced craft beers. Smashburger collaborated with small, resident brewers to create unique burger and beer pairings specific to individual markets.
- Culinary/Operations, National Chain: Panera Bread—Panera is a driving force in the quick-casual segment. A forerunner in the bakery-cafe space, the company is focused on improving customer experience and identifying unique culinary experiences to bring to its consumer base. In addition, Panera is a leader in the "pay what you can" restaurant model, which raises the level of awareness about food insecurity in the U.S. and serves as a catalyst for change in communities.
- Culinary/Operations, Regional Chain: Noodles & Company—Noodles & Company has a broad-based pasta menu with a variety of cuisines available in a multitude of formats. The addition of new appetizers, sandwiches, and alternative proteins expand its already robust menu offerings, allowing for more flavors, textures, and daypart choices. The success of Noodles & Company's culinary innovations is evident in its growth. With nearly 330 units and climbing, it is eclipsing store growth of 10 percent, even in difficult economic times.
The 2013 COEX Innovation Awards are sponsored by Sargento Foods, Inc. and Surlean Foods.


text:
This Week in VMK (September 29-October 5)
This Week in VMK!
September 29-October 5
Welcome to the third installment of our new feature, This Week in VMK!
Take a peek into VMK's past as we remember some of the things that were happening...this week in VMK!
Click on the links to get more information from our VMK DOW wiki!
Missed an installment? Check out the "This Week in VMK" Archives.
September 30th:
The Hong Kong Disneyland Hotel Pin is released as the sixth pin in the Hong Kong Disneyland Pin Set. It is sold in the Emporium for 250 credits.
October 5th: BIG CHANGES
Tomorrowland Released
Tomorrowland opens! Players can visit the Star Traders Shop or visit the Tomorrowland Hub where they can check out the Tomorrowland Arcade. The only game available to play was Airlock Escape where players were challenged to solve a series of puzzles. Players who completed all 15 levels won a secret code that got them the Deep Sea Diving Jacket, Deep Sea Diving Trousers, and Deep Sea Diving Boots.
VMK Esplanade Released
A new addition to Main Street! The VMK Esplanade is released as the main entrance to VMK.
Haunted Mansion Sneak Peek
Players are invited into the Haunted Mansion Lobby as they are told that the new game will be "Haunting Soon!"
Halloween Decorations!
Main Street, Town Square, and the Castle Forecourt are decorated for Halloween.
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...earpumpkin.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...easure_Rug.JPG http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...letonchair.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...alldivider.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...abogcarpet.jpg
VMK releases some spooky items.
The Mickey Ear Pumpkin is available for purchase in the Emporium for 250 credits.
The Pirate's Treasure Rug is available for purchase in the Emporium for 250 credits.
The Skeleton Chair is available for purchase in the Emporium for 300 credits.
The Spider Web Wall Divider is available for purchase in the Emporium for 250 credits.
The Chernabog Carpet is available for purchase in the Emporium for 250 credits.
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...vingjacket.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ngtrousers.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ivingboots.jpg
Airlock Escape Prizes
Deep Sea Diving Jacket, Deep Sea Diving Trousers, and Deep Sea Diving Boots are released via the Airlock Escape game.
September 30th:
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...atadiscpin.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ransporter.jpg
The Tron Data Disc Pin is released as the fifth pin in the Tron Pin Set. It is sold in the Emporium for 500 credits.
The Tron Transporter is released. It is sold in the Inner-Space shop for 1000 credits.
Retired: 50th Celebration Quest
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ctorschair.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...keylantern.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...thquestpin.jpg
The 50th Celebration Quest at Disneyland is retired.
Guests who visit Disneyland can no longer win the prizes of the 50th Celebration Director's Chair, 50th Celebration Mickey Lantern, and the 50th Celebration Quest Pin.
October 1st:
Retired: 50th Mickey's Quest
The 50th Mickey's Quest (in-game) is retired.
October 2nd:
Happy Halloween!
Halloween decorations are put up again! This time a decorated Loading and Map Loading Screen are included in the mix. Town Square, Main Street, Central Plaza, Haunted Mansion Lobby, Haunted Mansion Stretching Room, Haunted Mansion Ballroom, and the Haunted Mansion Attic all get into the spooky spirit.
Pirate Treasure!
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ysingleuse.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ysingleuse.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ysingleuse.jpg
Pirate Treasure Keys are awarded from the Pirates of the Caribbean Game, plus new game options in Pirates (for example, the ability to switch sides).
Along with the Halloween changes, new hairstyles are released (one for boys, two for girls). There is also a new Settings Button on the toolbar, and the In-Trade icon (http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...Trade-Icon.jpg) above player's heads. The lanyard is expanded to hold 15 pins.
Discovery Island Removal
Discovery Island in Adventureland is removed.
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...pumpkinbag.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...Kingscrown.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im.../5b/Batbag.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...eyghostpin.JPG
Halloween Items are released!
The Halloween Bat Bag andHalloween Ghost Pin are released as HOST_ prizes.
The Halloween Pumpkin Bag and Turn Into Bat Magic Single Use are sold in the Emporium for 200 credits each.
The Kings Crown (Male Only!) is sold in the Emporium for 1000 credits.
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...acketbrown.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...usersbrown.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...shoesbrown.jpg
Brown Haunted Mansion Costume is released
Haunted Mansion Jacket Brown , Haunted Mansion Trousers Brown, and Haunted Mansion Shoes Brown are released. The Haunted Mansion Tophat is re-released.
Pirate Treasure Chest Prizes are released
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...teMazeWall.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...cannonwall.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...mazeturret.jpg
Prizes from the Pirate's Treasure Room Chests are released: Pirate Maze Wall, Pirate Maze Cannon Wall, Pirate Maze Turret, and Turn Into Coral Magic Pin Single Use
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...on_Top_Hat.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...acketblack.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...usersblack.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...hoes_Black.jpg
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/images/8/88/Tiara.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...llowBodice.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ellowSkirt.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...owSlippers.jpg
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...earpumpkin.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...letonchair.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...alldivider.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...abogcarpet.jpg
October 3rd:
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ankseatred.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...seatyellow.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ransporter.jpg
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...elmet_Blue.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im..._Vest_Blue.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...Pants_Blue.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...Boots_Blue.jpg
October 5th
Fin's Quivering Quest Madness is featured on the Q button today.
All September:
Dream Month!
Players spent the month of September hoping to be awarded a prize from the VMK Dream Squad. No new items were released during this week in VMK and nothing was retired.
October 1st
Dreams Items
Quest Items
Halloween Time!
Halloween decorations are put up again!
Game Updates
October 4th:
Candy Cauldron re-released.
October 5th
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...MickeyEars.JPG http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...amsLogoPin.JPG http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...msFairyPin.JPG
Dream Mickey Ears, Dreams Logo Pin, and Dreams Fairy Pin are now all tradeable.
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ColorBlack.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...GhostWhite.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...leCardsPin.jpg
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...pireJacket.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...mpirePants.jpg http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...mpireShoes.jpg
http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im..._Witch_Hat.JPG http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im..._Dress_Top.JPG http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...ess_Bottom.JPG http://www.disneyonlineworlds.com/im...itch_Shoes.JPG
:wave2: Thanks for reading and join us again next week as we remember VMK's past :wave2:
That's when I joined in 2005! Wasn't around for 2006 but 2007 I totally remember. Didn't they stop selling certain items a few days after they first went on sale? Boy's vampire hair, I still don't like that. And all those updates (loading systems)... yay?
This is really cool and fun. I like looking back and seeing what happened this time last year, the year before, etc.
Gosh...this brings back so many good memories again! Lol, I when I first read this, I was like "Oooh, I remember trying to get that!"
So many memories.. I miss VMK.
But, I do love the Halloween items. :)
Oooh, this was the week I won best game! :D
Woot, another week! :)
Let's see now...
2005, pin release. I remember seeing that pin, but not actually buying it due to it being too expensive. Remember this was the time when pirates only awarded 25 credits per game! I traded for it sometime.. no idea when though. Probably a few months after at a HOST Game.
Tomorrowland opening! Oh this was awesome. I loved the hub, I used to sit there for hours each day just LOOKING at it. Airlock Escape was cool too. The diving suit was nice and easy to get with the spoilers posted (woot!), and they also traded well. Until they made them untradeable.. boo.
Esplanade was awesome too, and so was the new Haunted Mansion. I remember people posting about the "NEW Haunted Mansion Game!!!11one" which was going to be so cool, and I had simply no information about it. Turned out to be one of the best mini-games though. :)
The Halloween decor was cool, but it was the same each time, so it DID get kinda boring after a while. Also funny when they left Halloween decor up until Christmas... LOL!! The furniture was pretty cool too. The Halloween and Christmas furni were probably my favorite two sets..
No more 50th quest? Boo! I loved doing that quest in park! (well.. I loved filling them out, getting the answers from the spoilers.. :rolleyes:)
Now the new pirates game.. what a GREAT day! I remember coming home from school. It was a Wednesday, and my mom was sat on the couch talking about a new pirates game, saying it's darker and spookier. Again, I remember everyone talking about some pirate keys, and I couldn't gather any information until yavn told me in the treasure room... crazy!
Dreams month.. let's not go there. :) They did give us some AWESOME prizes though, and the candy cauldron during Halloween. One of the best pieces of furniture!!
All that has just been written as what comes to my head when I read the post.. so it may be difficult to understand.
Thanks for posting Up, it's brought back some GREAT memories!
This brings back so many memories, and makes me miss VMK even more. It's hard to believe it's been over four months now...
I loved all of those items, especially the halloween bags.
Yeah I really loved the Halloween Bags. I always remember being so excited in VMK for Halloween as it was the best time for getting awesome items. I just wish I could get on and have that same excited feeling again...
Truly awesome work Up;-)
I love the fact that you are able to include so many pictures, it really brings back memories.
that made meh remember all of vmk and i miss vmk will it come back?
I remember all this . . . :(
It makes me so sad.
Hehe.. There were some items in VMK that I never got... :P
- acefredfred
Seeing the Tron stuff just kills me :(
That was my families favorite things. There was at least one character in Tron every day since it was released. I always knew when my boys were playing because they'd change the avatar into it. Last day was no exceptionm Furrest wore it to the bitter end.
I feel like crying all over again
Thank you for these reviews, I am completely enjoying them!
This is awesome!
Thx for doing this!
Played since beta, and I remember most of this. I love it!
|All times are GMT. The time now is 09:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


text:
While dismissed in scientific circles, the idea that we could arrive at some language that more accurately or efficiently communicates with spirits or our own deep minds is a common one in magic. The most famous of attempts to do is often called Enochian, although the creator, John Dee, called it "the Angelic Language." John Dee, who was court astrologer to Queen Elizabeth I in the sixteenth century, specifically characterized his attempt to contact angelic beings and learn their language as an attempt to recover an anterior Ur-language that was spoken by Adam before the fall.
What Dee ended up with, thanks to the help of his friend Edward Kelley, is a collection of short poetic utterances and many, many names, all derived from complex tablets. While Kelley was well known to be a charlatan in other things (he was famous for attempting to pass off fake gold as an alchemical success, for example), and while there are places in his records of his work with Dee where he tries, quite obviously, to lie about what the spirits are saying, it's not so easy to dismiss the entire proceeding as a fraud. Dee would ask Kelley to sit at a table and look into a shew stone or scrying device. Kelley would, presumably, enter some sort of trance while Dee prayed for angels to appear. Eventually, Kelley would announce the presence of an angel, and Dee would converse through the interpretation of Kelley. This procedure led to a series of complex tablets, filled with letters, whose general internal consistency must have meant Kelley, if a charlatan, had a profound memory. From these tablets, by some means or code now obscure to us (despite the fact that we have Dee's notes), the angels would point to certain letters, which Kelley reported and Dee transcribed. These letters spelled out eighteen angelic keys or calls, word by word, backwards. Once composed, the angels would provide translation, which Dee would try to match up with the calls line by line.
The main attraction of Dee's system is that it provides an almost infinite number of angels that, as Donald Tyson points out1, are associated with regions of the earth. Dee, being active in politics in Queen Elizabeth I's court, would of course find such a thing attractive, particularly because Renaissance magic was primarily conceived as begging the aid of certain spirits, whether demonic or angelic. Dee's system provided a very flexible system of magic, with many angelic (and therefore good) names to call on, to accomplish any number of tasks in various regions of the earth. Dee composed, in other words, the ultimate grimoire of "white" magic.
The evocation of such spirits has been dealt with in multiple books, and while there is controversy I'm no more qualified than the next fellow to elucidate it. What interests me are less the names and more the keys or calls. Linguistically these provide a puzzle, in the form of a series of questions: (1) Are they a language, and if so, from where? (2) What is their purpose? (3) What is their origin? (4) To what purpose can we put them now?
The first of these questions, is Enochian a language, is easily answered: no. Not, at least, by any standard definition of language. While there are elements that look language-like, such as grammatical endings, a cursory examination shows them to be completely random. Unless this language has nothing but irregular verbs, which could mean it is indeed the language of nonhuman entities and largely unlearnable by people, the verb endings are random. The fact that verb endings also seem to differ in words with the exact same case, tense, gender, number, person, and mood would indicate that these endings mean nothing. Of course, if it's not a human language, and is indeed the language of angels, then it very well may mark verbs for something no human language does, or even for some purpose no human could comprehend. If that's the case, and I doubt that it is, then human analysis couldn't possibly avail much.
While not a language, Enochian also isn't random. Words mean the same things consistently, and vocabulary is rarely mixed up. If Kelley or Dee fabricated Enochian, they did so very, very carefully—and if they did so, why not be just as careful about grammar? What Enochian appears to be is not a language but a sort of complex substitution code called a relexification. In a relexification, words from one language are replaced with different, or made up, words. One famous example of a relexification code is that used by Navajo code talkers during World War II. Navajo speakers were hired by the military to replace common and important words with Navajo code phrases. Such a code is incredibly difficult to break; one needs to collect a large number of messages and link them to various contexts to break the code, and by then the relexification could be changed. While it has been suggested that Dee developed Enochian for just this purpose, there is exactly zero evidence that he ever used the language to spy or pass messages, and there simply isn't enough of the language to do either. Plus, the language lacks some important words a spy might need—no words for soldier or war, for example.
So that raises the second question: what's the purpose of this language? The angels, if they just wanted to transmit a grimoire, could have transmitted the tablets and the means of drawing names from them, and left the keys out of it or provided them in English. Yet the angels seem to focus, largely, on the question of the language. They want Dee to learn it. To what end? Donald Tyson suggests that the keys may have been a means of bringing about the end of the world, or immanentizing the eschaton (speeding up the end of the age), as some might put it. What he overlooks is the fact that while the keys are filled with apocalyptic language, they are no more filled with such images than sermons of the time, and even sermons stretching back to the beginning of written English. There's a long tradition, in other words, of apocalyptic writing in English; Dee and Kelley's Enochian keys hardly stand out in the genre. While an interesting idea to "conjure with," there's simply not much reason to think so other than the eschatological imagery of the keys themselves, which are common in the religious literature of the time.
Dee frequently asked about a book he had in his possession, filled with similar tablets, that he suggested might come from Adam's own hand. The angels eventually reluctantly agree that, in fact, that book descends from Adam, as does, they say, the Enochian language. In this is the key of the language: the angels mean it to be a primal code for interpreting the magical world. Just as Adam defined his relationship to the animals with a series of labels, so Dee is—I suggest—to define his relationship to the world with a similar series. The keys are the beginning of that redefinition. Yet the language is incomplete, and the means by which the angels transmit it guarantees that it could not be finished before Dee's eventual death. If, indeed, Dee was in contact with some sort of supernatural entities, they must have had something else in mind. Tyson convincingly argues that Dee was not the one who was supposed to complete the work of Enochian.2 He doesn't suggest who might be.
That, of course, raises the question: is the origin of Enochian supernatural or human? While most scholars would argue that Kelley deceived Dee and created Enochian himself, I come down on the side of at least some supernatural influence. Kelley frequently didn't understand what was going on. He would often ask the angels questions about alchemy, which they were loath to answer. Kelley knew little Latin and no Greek. On one occasion he carried on a long conversation in Greek, which he didn't understand. In another, he created a complex Latin acrostic, something difficult to do with a language you don't know well. Furthermore, the information often channeled by the angels was heretical to a degree not seen for hundreds of years; it would have gotten both men killed if it had been discovered, and so there's no benefit for Kelley to fake such heresy. On the other hand, early drafts of some diagrams had been found on his person by Dee. Kelley explains them away with feeble excuses. The angels also spoke in bad Latin, when they did speak in Latin. They also contradict themselves, and in several places give blatantly wrong predictions. Often, they play up to Dee's paranoia. Dee, however, was not completely credulous. He called the angels on their contradictions, and demanded independent confirmation of many claims. The most unusual circumstance is when the angels demand that Dee and Kelley swap wives. I've written elsewhere that I did not think they had done so; I have now changed my mind. After examining the source material, I think there is some veiled reference to the swap. This may have been Kelley's attempt to get kinky; it also may have been a ploy by the angels. Even if Enochian did come from one of their minds, what a mind to create something so complex and yet consistent. Even the inconsistencies in grammar do not negate the careful memorization a hoax would imply. Such a hoax would be more work than getting an honest trade! And considering that neither Dee nor Kelley ever made money, as far as we can tell, out of Enochian, it would have been an elaborate hoax for little or no material gain. Dee even locked up most of his notes, to prevent being tried for heresy. That's hardly the way to engineer a hoax.
1Donald Tyson, Enochian Magic for Beginners: The Original System of Angel Magic. Woodbury, MN: Llewellyn, 2005.
2Tyson, Enochian Magic for Beginners: The Original System of Angel Magic.
From Magic, Power, Language, Symbol, by Patrick Dunn