ellauri042.html on line 732: In conclusion, the exact classification of Dostoevsky´s idiocy is pretty clear. Many signs indicate that this famous writer suffered from mesial temporal lobe epilepsy.
ellauri048.html on line 1078: Given that no one has ever doubted that Tennyson had some sort of "disembodied, spiritualized passion" for Hallam, this conclusion comes as rather a painful anticlimax. Admittedly, Alf named his son Hallam after Hallam, the one who went to Australia. Of course, the fact that members of Tennyson´s family succumbed to madness, alcoholism, and drug addiction already has made some readers aware that, like so many other Victorians, he should be taken down from a pedestal and join the rest of us. But think of the stir if one the greatest poems of the nineteenth century, one which has major influence on poets as different as Whitman and Eliot, turned out to be chiefly a gay lover's lament! (What's wrong with that? There are zillions of others, better yet.) Tän apologian kirjoitti on George P. Landow, Professor of English and the History of Art, (fittingly) from Brown University.
ellauri066.html on line 948: BLUEWIN; . . . you should know better . . . its way to early to make any kind of conclusions . . . maybe by this time next year we will have a good idea of the winners and losers . . . until then you are just stoking the fire . . .
ellauri080.html on line 512: These two attitudes can be summed up as ‘conjecturing’ and ‘examining’ respectively. The one axis seeks to discover, envision or predict the potential course (NI) plotted by their various raw experiences of things (SE); obviously the image I am summoning here is that of a scatterplot and line of best fit, though one could also summon the image of a researcher recording their observations and then forming overarching conclusions abstracted from that data.
ellauri080.html on line 803: “After long study and experience I have come to the conclusion that (1) all religions are true; (2) all religions have some error in them; (3) all religions are almost as dear to me as my own Hinduism.” He could not tell a lie, but did not shirk from contradiction.
ellauri089.html on line 576: § 83. (2) If "being good" and "being willed" are not identical then the latter could only be a criterion of the former; and, in order to shew that it was so, we should have to establish independently that many things were good—that is to say, we should have to establish most of our ethical conclusions before the Metaphysics of Volition could possibly give us the smallest assistance. …
ellauri089.html on line 595: § 90. and the rest of the chapter will deal with certain conclusions, upon which light is thrown by this fact. Of which the first is (1) that Intuitionism is mistaken; since no proposition with regard to duty can be self-evident. …
ellauri094.html on line 354: One should be skeptical of whether this is a Bible contradiction given the Skeptic Annotated Bible’s track record of inaccurately handling the Bible. See the many examples of their error which we have responded to in this post: Collection of Posts Responding to Bible Contradictions. Of course that does not take away the need to respond to this claim of a contradiction, which is what the remainder of this post will do. But this observation should caution us to slow down and look more closely at the passages cited by the Skeptic Annotated Bible to see if they interpreted the passages properly to support their conclusion that it is a Bible contradiction.
ellauri095.html on line 53: The initial “I” focuses attention on the speaker, but the explicit application of the lesson of the Book of Nature to him does not begin until the line “My heart in hiding/stirred for a bird” at the conclusion of the octet. One biographical interpretation of this line is that he was hiding from fulfilling his ambitions to be a great painter and poet. Instead of ostentatiously pursuing fame in that way, wearing his heart on his sleeve, he had chosen to be the “hidden man of the heart” (1 Peter 3:4), quietly pursuing the imitation of Christ. As Hopkins put it, Christ’s “hidden life at Nazareth is the great help to faith for us who must live more or less an obscure, constrained, and unsuccessful life.”
ellauri095.html on line 546: The phrase “And birds that call/Hoarse to the storm,” invites comparison with the son’s images of the windhover rebuffing the big wind in “The Windhover” (1877) and with the image of the great storm fowl at the conclusion of “Henry Purcell” (1879). The father’s prophecy, “thy sport is with the storm/To wrestle” is fulfilled in Gerard’s The Wreck of the Deutschland and “The Loss of the Eurydice” (1878). These two shipwreck poems, replete with spiritual instruction for those in doubt and danger were the son’s poetic and religious counterparts to his father’s 1873 volume, The Port of Refuge, or advice and instructions to the Master-Mariner in situations of doubt, difficulty, and danger.
ellauri096.html on line 90: W. V. Quine (1953) agrees with Weiss’ conclusion that the teacher’s announcement of a surprise test fails to give the student knowledge that there will be a surprise test. Yet Quine abominates Weiss’ reasoning. Weiss breeches the law of bivalence (which states that every proposition has a truth-value, true or false). Quine believes that the riddle of the surprise test should not be answered by surrendering classical logic. Me too. Right on Willard van Orman Quine! Thumbs up!
ellauri096.html on line 142: If you know that your beliefs are jointly inconsistent, then you should reject R. M. Sainsbury’s definition of a paradox as “an apparently unacceptable conclusion derived by apparently acceptable reasoning from apparently acceptable premises” (1995, 1). Take the negation of any of your beliefs as a conclusion and your remaining beliefs as the premises. You should judge this jumble argument as valid, and as having premises that you accept, and yet as having a conclusion you reject (Sorensen 2003b, 104–110). If the conclusion of this argument counts as a paradox, then the negation of any of your beliefs counts as a paradox.
ellauri096.html on line 151: If paradoxes were always sets of propositions or arguments or conclusions, then they would always be meaningful. But some paradoxes are semantically flawed (Sorensen 2003b, 352) and some have answers that are backed by a pseudo-argument employing a defective “lemma” that lacks a truth-value. Kurt Grelling’s paradox, for instance, opens with a distinction between autological and heterological words. An autological word describes itself, e.g., ‘polysyllabic’ is polysllabic, ‘English’ is English, ‘noun’ is a noun, etc. A heterological word does not describe itself, e.g., ‘monosyllabic’ is not monosyllabic, ‘Chinese’ is not Chinese, ‘verb’ is not a verb, etc. Now for the riddle: Is ‘heterological’ heterological or autological? If ‘heterological’ is heterological, then since it describes itself, it is autological. But if ‘heterological’ is autological, then since it is a word that does not describe itself, it is heterological. The common solution to this puzzle is that ‘heterological’, as defined by Grelling, is not a genuine predicate (Thomson 1962). In other words, “Is ‘heterological’ heterological?” is without meaning. There can be no predicate that applies to all and only those predicates it does not apply to for the same reason that there can be no barber who shaves all and only those people who do not shave themselves.
ellauri096.html on line 157: The student’s overall conclusion, that the test is impossible, is also self-defeating. If the student believes his conclusion then he will not expect the test. So if he receives a test, it will be a surprise. The event will be all the more unexpected because the student has deluded himself into thinking the test is impossible.
ellauri096.html on line 159: Just as someone’s awareness of a prediction can affect the likelihood of it being true, awareness of that sensitivity to his awareness can also affect its truth. If each cycle of awareness is self-defeating, then there is no stable resting place for a conclusion.
ellauri096.html on line 186: But the skeptic should not lose his nerve. Proof does not always yield knowledge. Consider a student who correctly guesses that a step in his proof is valid. The student does not know the conclusion but did prove the theorem. His instructor might have trouble getting the student to understand why his answer constitutes a valid proof. The intransigence may stem from the prover’s intelligence rather than his stupidity. L. E. J. Brouwer is best known in mathematics for his brilliant fixed point theorem. But Brouwer regarded his proof as dubious. He had philosophical doubts about the Axiom of Choice and Law of Excluded Middle. Brouwer persuaded a minority of mathematicians and philosophers, known as intuitionists, to emulate his inability to be educated by non-constructive proofs.
ellauri096.html on line 199: Several commentators on the surprise test paradox object that interpreting surprise as unprovability changes the topic. Instead of posing the surprise test paradox, it poses a variation of the liar paradox. Other concepts can be blended with the liar. For instance, mixing in alethic notions generates the possible liar: Is ‘This statement is possibly false’ true? (Post 1970) (If it is false, then it is false that it is possibly false. What cannot possibly be false is necessarily true. But if it is necessarily true, then it cannot be possibly false.) Since the semantic concept of validity involves the notion of possibility, one can also derive validity liars such as Pseudo-Scotus’ paradox: ‘Squares are squares, therefore, this argument is invalid’ (Read 1979). Suppose Pseudo-Scotus’ argument is valid. Since the premise is necessarily true, the conclusion would be necessarily true. But the conclusion contradicts the supposition that argument is valid. Therefore, by reductio, the argument is necessarily invalid. Wait! The argument can be invalid only if it is possible for the premise to be true and the conclusion to be false. But we have already proved that the conclusion of ‘Squares are squares, therefore, this argument is invalid’ is necessarily true. There is no consistent judgment of the argument’s validity. A similar predicament follows from ‘The test is on Friday but this prediction cannot be soundly deduced from this announcement’.
ellauri096.html on line 218: Since all the assumptions are discharged, the conclusion is a necessary truth. So it is a necessary truth that p&∼Kp
ellauri096.html on line 229: The conclusion that there are unknowable truths is an affront to various philosophical theories, but not to common sense. If proponents (and opponents) of those theories long overlooked a simple counterexample, that is an embarrassment, not a paradox. (2000, 271)
ellauri096.html on line 233: Those who believe that the Church-Fitch result is a genuine paradox can respond to Williamson with paradoxes that accord with common sense (and science –and religious orthodoxy). For instance, common sense heartily agrees with the conclusion that something exists. But it is surprising that this can be proved without empirical premises. Since the quantifiers of standard logic (first order predicate logic with identity) have existential import, the logician can deduce that something exists from the principle that everything is identical to itself. Most philosophers balk at this simple proof because they feel that the existence of something cannot be proved by sheer logic. Likewise, many philosophers balk at the proof of unknowables because they feel that such a profound result cannot be obtained from such limited means.
ellauri096.html on line 257: Binkley illuminates this reasoning with doxastic logic. The inference rules for this logic of belief can be understood as idealizing the student into an ideal reasoner. In general terms, an ideal reasoner is someone who infers what he ought and refrains from inferring any more than he ought. Since there is no constraint on his premises, we may disagree with the ideal reasoner. But if we agree with the ideal reasoner’s premises, we appear bound to agree with his conclusion. Binkley specifies some requirements to give teeth to the student’s status as an ideal reasoner: the student is perfectly consistent, believes all the logical consequences of his beliefs, and does not forget. Binkley further assumes that the ideal reasoner is aware that he is an ideal reasoner. According to Binkley, this ensures that if the ideal reasoner believes p, then he believes that he will believe p thereafter.
ellauri097.html on line 449: Recently a caller to the radio told me about a conversation he’d had about homosexuality. The caller made the teleological argument, that looking at what the natural functions of the male and female reproductive organs are for, we can draw certain conclusions about how they should properly be used. The person he was talking with challenged his argument that you can’t get an “ought” from an “is”. The challenger seemed to be saying that just because it is that way in nature doesn’t mean that we can derive a moral rule from it. The caller asked if the challenge was incorrect and how to respond to it.
ellauri097.html on line 453: The is-ought fallacy, first articulated, by David Hume is put simply as you can’t get an ‘ought’ from an ‘is.’ The more precise way of characterizing it is this; You cannot have a syllogism that has a moral term in the conclusion if there is no moral term in the premises. To be a valid argument, the conclusion has to follow from the premises. You can’t have anything in the conclusion that isn’t already set up in the premises. Hume identified this particular fallacy in arguments that were based on mere descriptive elements but had a conclusion with moral terms in it. That is the is-ought fallacy.
ellauri097.html on line 459: If they want to work on repairing the flaw in their argument, they’re welcome to try that. It would involve introducing a moral term that can be substantiated into the premise to arrive at a conclusion with a moral term. They might say, “If a thing is natural, then it’s moral. This is natural for me, therefore it’s moral.” Now, there’s a valid argument. I don’t think it’s sound, but at least it doesn’t commit the is-ought fallacy.
ellauri106.html on line 46: Philip Roth has not had much luck with biographers. Late in his life, furiously aggrieved after the failure of his marriage to the actress Claire Bloom and the publication of Bloom’s incendiary memoir of their years together, he asked a close friend, Ross Miller, an English professor at the University of Connecticut, to take on the task. Roth sent Miller lists of family members and friends he wanted to be interviewed, along with the questions that he felt should be asked. (“Would you have expected him to achieve success on the scale he has?”) It didn’t work out, for various reasons. Roth had wanted Miller to refute a familiar charge, “this whole mad fucking misogynistic bullshit!” that he felt flattened his long erotic history into one false accusation. But Miller came to his own conclusion. “There is a predatory side to both Sandy and Philip,” he told a cousin of Roth’s. (Sandy was Roth’s older brother.) “They look at women—I’m not gonna write about this—but they are misogynist. They talk about women in that way.”
ellauri106.html on line 84: In October 2012, Roth announced to the French culture magazine Les Inrocks that Nemesis was his last book. At the age of 74 he began to reread his favorite authors such as Dostoyevsky, Turgenew, Conrad and Hemingway as well as his own works. He came to the conclusion that he had made the best of his possibilities and did not want to continue working as an author, read or talk about new literature.
ellauri112.html on line 677: Eipäs ollutkaan! tai oli Marlo kyllä bi (niinkuin käsineitokin, se trendaa nyt) muttei siitä ollut kymysys. Tully olikin Marlon aikaisempi mä. Se tuli halvemmaxi. Olixe eerie vai healing? Tästä käänteestä ei yhtään pidetty. The movie struggles some in its third act. Playing with the tricks of the mind, “Tully” feels more contrived than astute, having the skilled group of actors working hard to avoid further damage as the movie falters towards its clunky and surprisingly not-very-good conclusion.
ellauri118.html on line 1157: Self-important, supercilious academic humor lightens the intense and chilling conclusion to Offred´s eerily bland recorded narrative.
ellauri119.html on line 674: Too many are introduced to Objectivism through its application to politics. Political conclusions reached by applying Objectivism are counter to the popular notions of how government should work and society should be structured . Without an understanding of the foundation and underpinnings, it is difficult to understand how Objectivist ideals apply.
ellauri119.html on line 686: From a political point of view, her novels motivate the more literate members of Libertarian groups, including the anarchist Tea Party movement. They use her positions as givens and are not critical of them. This ensures that they reach some far reaching and invalid conclusions regarding social policy.
ellauri119.html on line 688: From a philosophical viewpoint, Ayn Rand´s objectivism is an inconsistent pile of faulty axioms and absurd conclusions. Her tautological A = A and her invalid claim that all thought is verbal have been shown, long ago, to be either useless information or demonstrably false. Wittgenstein dismissed tautologies as telling us anything new about the world before Rand came to the USA and phenomenology had dismissed a verbal mentalese grammar of the brain. Noam Chomsky´s innate grammar is only true for words, but thoughts are far more than just words since all thought appears to be motor based. What you might need is a grammar of the body instead. Thoughts seem to be closer to the movements of an athlete than to the words in a sentence. For some reason most people ignore that all speech is base on wagging the tongue, and the vibrations in middle ear and cochlea, a motor based capability that we have learned to use to communicate with. Is there an isomorphism between the movement of the tongue and those of sign language that would show a fundamental grammar shared by both?
ellauri131.html on line 906: Hay described how in 1977 or 1978 she was diagnosed with "incurable" cervical cancer, and how she came to the conclusion that by holding on to her resentment for her childhood abuse and rape she had contributed to its onset. She reported how she had refused conventional medical treatment, and began a regime of forgiveness, coupled with therapy, nutrition, reflexology, and occasional colonic enemas. She claimed in the interview that she rid herself of the cancer by this method, but, while swearing to its truth, admitted that she had outlived every doctor who could confirm this story.
ellauri152.html on line 624: In conclusion. You know the idea that if you’re nonbinary then every attraction you feel is gay? That’s Yentl the Yeshiva Boy.
ellauri153.html on line 868: Our knowing consciousness is divisible solely into subject and object. To be object for the subject and to be our representation or mental picture are one and the same. All our representations are objects for the subject, and all objects of the subject are our representations. These stand to one another in a regulated connection which in form is determinable a priori, and by virtue of this connection nothing existing by itself and independent, nothing single and detached, can become an object for us. The first aspect of this principle is that of becoming, where it appears as the law of causality and is applicable only to changes. Thus if the cause is given, the effect must of necessity follow. The second aspect deals with concepts or abstract representations, which are themselves drawn from representations of intuitive perception, and here the principle of sufficient reason states that, if certain premises are given, the conclusion must follow. The third aspect of the principle is concerned with being in space and time, and shows that the existence of one relation inevitably implies the other, thus that the equality of the angles of a triangle necessarily implies the equality of its sides and vice versa. Finally, the fourth aspect deals with actions, and the principle appears as the law of motivation, which states that a definite course of action inevitably ensues on a given character and motive.
ellauri156.html on line 269: I am not suggesting that David purposed to see something he should not. (I bet he did, peeping Tom. You actually come round to the same conclusion below, Bob.) More than likely he is walking about, almost absent-mindedly, when suddenly his eyes fix on something that rivets his attention on a woman bathing herself. The text does not really tell us where this woman is bathing, and why at this time of the night? We only know that she is within sight of David's penthouse (rooftop). David notes her beauty. He does not know who she is or whether she is married. We cannot be certain how much David sees, and thus we do not know for certain whether he has yet sinned. (What the fuck? How much do you need to see to sin? Are boobs enough, or do you need to see the pudendum or the fanny?) If David saw more of this woman than he should (a fact still in question), then he surely should have diverted his eyes. It was not necessarily evil for him to discretely inquire about her. If she were unmarried and eligible, he could have taken her for his wife. His inquiry would make this clear.
ellauri156.html on line 301: It is clear from the words of our text that David sinned. It is clear from the actions of David which follow that he sinned. It is clear from the words of God through Nathan that David sinned in a grievous manner. The problem is that many wish to view the text in a way that forces Bathsheba to share David's guilt by assuming that she somehow seduced him. I would like to pursue this matter, because I believe there is absolutely no evidence to support such a conclusion. (Wow! That's a refreshing point of view! Like Ballsack's novel Comment la belle Fille de Portillon quinaulda son iuge.)
ellauri159.html on line 1175: You first estimate accurately how long a writing project will take. Then you generally dive into the first draft and develop a framework (table of contents). You may find it helpful to start with the closing paragraph to give yourself an end point to strive for. Don’t let this limit you, though: be prepared to rearrange the structure and change your conclusions as you explore the subject in more depth.
ellauri159.html on line 1221: You have a keen insight into the nature of things. Your prose often conveys startling images of mood or atmosphere rather than objects. Maybe you should consider poetry, or rap. You enjoy complexity and can patiently unravel dense material like a terrier. You are able to see many sides of an argument and so may have difficulty reaching a conclusion, or even reaching a period, like Pynchon. During the writing process, you may often pause to consider alternatives or to seek seeming connections between obviously disparate things. That´s a paranoid feature, so you may be an asthenic person. Consult Krezmer´s typology.
ellauri159.html on line 1224: You make the mistake to write in purely abstract terms. That just won´t do these days. You must communicate values and personal television through your writing. Nobody is interesting in abstractions. They search for the meaning behind the facts, and so consider the facts themselves to be of marginal importance. This is true; however, throw in some facts to dazzle your readers, like Bob Heinlein. During revision, add concrete details like the size of Peewee´s bra. Appeal to the five senses. Include Peeweeś vital statistics. Incorporate other points of view for balance. Make sure your research backs up your conclusion.
ellauri159.html on line 1230: You like to start projects first. You often map out their ideas to everyone to visualize the big picture before you begin writing. You sense how your various opinions flow together logically and build on one another. Because you develop a clear picture early on, you might reach a conclusion and skip writing completely before finishing your research. To ensure a balanced product, stay open to new information that may change your perspective. Don´t listen to idiots, however.
ellauri159.html on line 1240: With the desire for efficiency, you must sometimes be terse. Be sure to consider audience reaction. "Shut up!" is a good terse riposte. You already know how ideas relate to one another. Unless you’re writing for an audience of experts, assume readers know nothing about the topic. They don´t. Include faked data if necessary to support your conclusions. In your eagerness to finish, don’t skimp on those touches that will elevate your writing from good to great. You want to be great, not just good. Alexander the Good? Friedrich the Good? Catherine the Good? Naaw.
ellauri159.html on line 1289: You are a conceptualizer who tends to explore a narrow topic deeply. Guys like you take a systems approach, rather than a linear one, during the planning stage. They do a website not just a text! You start a project early to test the concept, then quickly drive toward the conclusion. Once the competitors´ bones are in place, you further develop the content, adding facts to flesh out their ideas. You may find it useful during revision to challenge yourself to consider alternatives, rather than locking yourself in to your original premise. Oh, why bother, since you got it all figured out already.
ellauri159.html on line 1295: If they write anything but checks, their writing can have a sense of inevitability, presenting an orderly progression of facts and ideas that can lead to only one possible conclusion. Their authoritative voice can instill a sense of comfort and trust in readers. Make sure that trust is warranted—use your natural skepticism to seek out possible flaws in your reasoning and research. Steer clear of the anti-trust laws, they can cut your earnings.
ellauri159.html on line 1329: Were I obliged to give a short name to the attitude in question, I should call it that of radical empiricism, in spite of the fact that such brief nicknames are nowhere more misleading than in philosophy. I say 'empiricism,' because it is contented to regard its most assured conclusions concerning matters of fact as hypotheses liable to modification in the course of future experience; and I say 'radical,' because it treats the doctrine of monism itself as an hypothesis, and, {viii} unlike so much of the half-way empiricism that is current under the name of positivism or agnosticism or scientific naturalism, it does not dogmatically affirm monism as something with which all experience has got to square. The difference between monism and pluralism is perhaps the most pregnant of all the differences in philosophy. Primâ facie the world is a pluralism; as we find it, its unity seems to be that of any collection; and our higher thinking consists chiefly of an effort to redeem it from that first crude form.
ellauri161.html on line 522: How ironic that the giant killer comet would now be reduced to millions of sub-microscopic particles. But the analogy is lame: the decimation of earth by a comet crashing into earth is quantifiable-the conclusion that viruses can cause widespread death is purely speculative based on computer simulations. Where of course is all the widespread death? Unless of course you believe in unsubstantiated propagandistic reports promulgated by fear-mongering mainstream media and social media platforms.
ellauri180.html on line 53: Executive producers Julie Plec and Kevin Williamson agreed that in the book series, Elena was turned into a vampire too early, which was around page 200 of The Awakening. Elena's transition into a vampire was planned for two years. Plec said: "That felt obviously too soon, and rushed, and we didn’t want to make a show about a teenage girl who instantly becomes a vampire. But we always knew that her journey would take her there eventually". At the second season's conclusion, Elena was nearly turned into a vampire. Dobrev was happy that she wasn't, because she felt "it would have been like she came too soon", and also didn't think it was something Elena or she wanted.
ellauri189.html on line 747: Although the common traditions of Pashtuns and Jews might not be enough on their own to prove Pashtuns are Israelis, they can certainly be used for further confirmation that our conclusion is correct. Amongst the common traditions are:
ellauri189.html on line 775: If we add those traditions to what we said above, we can be confident that our conclusion is correct.
ellauri194.html on line 316: Sedgwick's conclusion from a long-term project of anti-homophobic analysis is Axiom 1 – "people are different from each other".
ellauri197.html on line 301: In fact, the reader might assume the thing is the memory, but the fourth line reveals that this cannot be the case. The “recollect[ion]” is addressed as a reason why the “adversity” is not “easy,” and the two cannot be the same thing. It appears then that this is a general sentiment, that the situation that created the memory would be something to “eas[ily]” push past if she could keep from “recollecting” it, but the lack of subject requires additional time to come to this conclusion, thus – again – mirroring the narrator’s uncertainty.
ellauri198.html on line 300: Initial interest arose via the publicity campaign for Pazder's 1980 book Michelle Remembers, and it was sustained and popularized throughout the decade by coverage of the McMartin preschool trial. Testimonials, symptom lists, rumors, and techniques to investigate or uncover memories of SRA were disseminated through professional, popular, and religious conferences, as well as through talk shows, sustaining and further spreading the moral panic throughout the United States and beyond. In some cases, allegations resulted in criminal trials with varying results; after seven years in court, the McMartin trial resulted in no convictions for any of the accused, while other cases resulted in lengthy sentences, some of which were later reversed. Scholarly interest in the topic slowly built, eventually resulting in the conclusion that the phenomenon was a moral panic, which, as one researcher put it in 2017, "involved hundreds of accusations that devil-worshipping paedophiles were operating America's white middle-class suburban daycare centers."
ellauri198.html on line 728: Along the way they find Patrick Danville, a young man imprisoned by someone who calls himself Joe Collins but is really a psychic vampire named Dandelo. Dandelo feeds off the emotions of his victims, and starts to feed off of Roland and Susannah by telling them jokes. Roland and Susannah are alerted to the danger by Stephen King, who drops clues directly into the book, enabling them to defeat the vampire. They discover Patrick in the basement, and find that Dandelo had removed his tongue. Patrick is freed and soon his special talent becomes evident: his drawings and paintings become reality. As their travels bring them nearer to the Dark Tower, Susannah comes to the conclusion that Roland needs to complete his journey without her. Susannah asks Patrick to draw a door she has seen in her dreams to lead her out of this world. He does so and once it appears, Susannah says goodbye to Roland and crosses over to another world.
ellauri198.html on line 778: But something of the conclusion can be surmised here, however tentatively. Roland's equivocal triumph is an instance of Kierkegaardian "repetition" rather than of Platonic "recollection" on Hegelian "mediation," if only because the Romantic trope-upon-a-trope or transumption leads to a projective or introjective stance of which Kierkegaard is the conscious anti-Platonic and anti-Hegelian theorist. Precisely what Roland refuses is the Golgotha of Absolute Spirit that Hegel proclaims at the very close of his Phenomenology:
ellauri206.html on line 61: Show, don't tell is a technique used in various kinds of texts to allow the reader to experience the story through actions, words, thoughts, senses, and feelings rather than through the author's exposition, summarization, and description. It avoids adjectives describing the author's analysis, but instead describes the scene in such a way that readers can draw their own conclusions. The technique applies equally to nonfiction and all forms of fiction, literature including haiku and Imagism poetry in particular, speech, movie making, and playwriting.
ellauri213.html on line 335: In theory, San Francisco State University President Lynn Mahoney is correct in stating that a university is a place where different ideas are presented, discussed and analyzed so that individual conclusions can be drawn. But does that justify giving an unrepentant terrorist a forum to address the students? What will she teach them? The proper way to hijack an aircraft, based on her success in 1969, and what mistakes to avoid based on her failure in 1970? When I was a student in university, I often faced new ideas that ran contrary to my beliefs. But these perspectives were presented by knowledgeable, respectable academics. Some were Nobel Prize winners. None were terrorists. Most of them were Jews.
ellauri217.html on line 723: In conclusion, therefore, it appears that the least unsatisfactory solution of the complicated textual and exegetical problems of the Apostolic Decree is to regard the fourfold decree as original (foods offered to idols, strangled meat, eating blood, and unchastity—whether ritual or moral), and to explain the two forms of the threefold decree in some such way as those suggested above. An extensive literature exists on the text and exegesis of the Apostolic Decree. According to Jacques Dupont, "Present day scholarship is practically unanimous in considering the 'Eastern' text of the decree as the only authentic text (in four items) and in interpreting its prescriptions in a sense not ethical but ritual (whatever that means)".
ellauri223.html on line 146: Doctrina Protagorea aliquo modo ad relativismum epistemologicum referri videtur: qualem quilibet quamlibet rem perceperit, talis ei videbitur. At si nemo umquam erraret, omnes homines aeque sapientes essent. Constat quidem neminem erroris purum esse. Difficilius est hoc negare, suam cuique experientiam sensibus acceptam veram esse. Scientia non tamen ad sensuum experientiam pertinet sed in rationis conclusione ad hanc experientiam pertinenti posita est. Protagoras experientiam et scientiam confundere videtur.
ellauri223.html on line 230: This conclusion has been disputed by other faggots, who point to lack of consistent evidence, and consider the sources to be more open to interpretation. Publicly, at least, Bacon distanced himself from the idea of homosexuality. In his New Atlantis, he described his utopian island as being "the chastest nation under heaven", and "as for masculine love, they have no touch of it". Olipa 2-naamainen kaveri.
ellauri236.html on line 190: It should be noticed that the book is not in the ordinary sense pornography. In this respect it is a flop. Unlike most books that deal in sexual sadism, it lays the emphasis on the cruelty and not on the pleasure. Slim, the ravisher of Miss Blandish, has ‘wet slobbering lips’: this is meant to be disgusting (tho I didn't find it so). But the scenes describing cruelty to women are comparatively perfunctory. The real high-spots of the book are cruelties committed by men upon other men; above all, the third-degreeing of the gangster, Eddie Schultz, who is lashed into a chair and flogged on the windpipe with truncheons, his arms broken by fresh blows as he breaks loose. My conclusion: Chase is a closet homosexual (I should know)! He's an algolagniac, like Swinburne!
ellauri241.html on line 1645: The poem has been criticized for its inconsistencies and its somewhat disappointing conclusion. Seems Keaz whisked the guy away at the end quickly before he could get into any more mischief. He was probably thoroughly fed up with him. But then again Jack was just 22. Endymion presents many problems to its interpreters, as it did to Jack himself. Critics have, however, been able to agree that the poem contains considerable eroticism.
ellauri266.html on line 338: Let me quote a letter from a lady in Oakland after a recent weekend seminar. The lady is intellectually inclined. She goes to my seminars and is excited by my ideas and wants to be friends on an intellectual basis with some of the fine lecturers she has heard. Invariably, she gets the door politely slammed in her face. Men like me are terribly afraid of getting involved in sex with ladies past their better before date. "I am forced to the conclusion," she writes, "that if a man doesn´t want to get involved in sex,´ then he sees no point in talking to a woman at all. A homely looking thinking woman is to most men some sort of contradiction in terms." True, regrettably.
ellauri302.html on line 68: Regrettably, however, 'The God of Vengeance," despite conclusions too easily drawn, is not a sex play. When Ash wishes to deal with sex as sex he is not afraid to handle the subject with all the poetry and power at his command. Such a play as his "Jephthah's Daughter" treats the elemental urge of sex with daring, beauty and Dionysiac abandon. A lurid reader is referred to this other play. This one is bound to be a disappointment.
ellauri313.html on line 173: That being said, at 500 pages, the book takes on a lot and doesn't adequately address it all. There's the nominal plot, which concerns the Yugoslav mafia in Sweden; but there's also a new relationship for Annika, which is complicated; the politics of the newspaper she works for; fundamental questions about the role of the welfare state; and questions about the role of a newspaper vis a vis law enforcement. This all kind of dropped off toward the end of the book, and I didn't find the conclusion to be particularly satisfying. I felt impatient with Annika's (main character), histrionics and irrationality.
ellauri324.html on line 248:

1. Don’t jump to conclusions.
   ellauri348.html on line 385: Tää on pätkä pituushaasteisen Popen (1717) pitkänläntää arkkiveisua munattomasta Abelardista ja sen Eloisasta bändäristä. Eli it's from a poem about a woman named Eloisa who falls in love with her much older tutor Abelard, but her family forces them apart. Eloisa is forced to become a nun and writes about the grief of being without her star-crossed lover. She tries to forget Abelard, but she cannot and she comes to the conclusion that God cannot heal all wounds (such as the loss of Abelard's balls). She wishes she hated Abelard, but concludes her love for him remains. Despite her knowing about her doom with her love, she still longs for it. Just like Joel and Clem. They have knowledge about their destruction and loathing for each other if they continue with the relationship, but it doesn’t matter to them. It’s "Okay," “ignorance is bliss” by another name!
   ellauri389.html on line 234: Crazy or not, it’s a worrying sign for philosophy in the academy. Someone who’s very good at conveying complex philosophical ideas in plain English– a good teacher, in other words – has come to the conclusion that a university is not the best place for him to be. An applied philosopher is not like a real one: Barring ordinary language philosophers, if you ask them direct questions in ordinary language they can’t answer without jargon and mystification. When faced with the need to explain what they’re doing and why it should be of interest to anyone at all outside of that culture, they look like flounders, both eyes on the same side of the skull. Not the best ones, like Quentin Skinner, Philip Pettit, and Peter Singer, who are all praised for their minds and their humanity, as well as the ability to think out of the fly and express themselves lucidly. No Perer Rabbit ainaskin on sertifioitu paska, varmaan siis noi 2 muutakin n.h ja Nigel ize.
   xxx/ellauri027.html on line 1010: Esa’s examples of flourishing in the life of some leading people, demonstrating presence and being by the side of others as well as of astonishing uplift, were truly elevating. At the same time there were examples from the life of ”ordinary people” leading to the conclusion that we are all the same on some basic level.
   xxx/ellauri084.html on line 775: Woody Allen's film Annie Hall (1977) references The Sorrow and the Pity as a plot device. Film critic Donald Liebenson explains: "In one of the film's signature scenes, Alvy Singer (Allen) suggests he and Annie (Diane Keaton) go see the film. 'I'm not in the mood to see a four-hour documentary on Nazis,' Annie protests. In the film's poignant conclusion, Alvy runs into Annie as she is taking a date to see the film, which Alvy counts as 'a personal triumph.'
   xxx/ellauri086.html on line 412: In October 2016, investigative reporter Claudio Gatti published an article jointly in Il Sole 24 Ore and Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, that relied on financial records related to real estate transactions and royalties payments to draw the conclusion that Anita Raja, a Rome-based translator, is the real author behind the Ferrante pseudonym. Gatti's article was criticized by many in the literary world as a violation of privacy, though Gatti contends that "by announcing that she would lie on occasion, Ferrante has in a way relinquished her right to disappear behind her books and let them live and grow while their author remained unknown. Indeed, she and her publisher seemed to have fed public interest in her true identity." British novelist Matt Haig tweeted, "Think the pursuit to discover the 'real' Elena Ferrante is a disgrace and also pointless. A writer's truest self is the books they write." The writer Jeanette Winterson, in a Guardian article, denounced Gatti's investigations as malicious and sexist, saying "At the bottom of this so-called investigation into Ferrante's identity is an obsessional outrage at the success of a writer – female – who decided to write, publish and promote her books on her own terms." She went on to say that the desire to uncover Ferrante's identity constitutes an act of sexism in itself, and that "Italy is still a Catholic country with strong patriarchial attitudes towards women." Others responding to Gatti's article suggested that knowledge of Ferrante's biography is indeed relevant.
   xxx/ellauri091.html on line 489: are really enviable and which ones just a little. We’re wholly certain many readers will be astonished by our conclusions. Which is to say, we fully
   xxx/ellauri091.html on line 800: *Mr. Jahn delivered this speech in the auditorium of the Nobel Institute in the early afternoon of December 10, 1946. At its conclusion, Mr. Jahn read a message of acceptance from Miss Balch, whose health prevented her from attending the ceremonies, and presented the prize to Mr. Huston of the U.S. Embassy who accepted in her name. This translation is based on the Norwegian text in Les Prix Nobel en 1946, which contains, also, a French translation.
   xxx/ellauri113.html on line 114: Today, many physicists believe that the holographic principle (specifically the AdS/CFT duality) demonstrates that Hawking's conclusion was incorrect, and that information is in fact preserved. In 2004 Hawking himself conceded a bet he had made, agreeing that black hole evaporation does in fact preserve information.
   xxx/ellauri127.html on line 256: Hegel (mentioned in p.259 TAL; he married in 1811 and his sister Christian Luise died in 1832) was fascinated by Goethe (and also by Jean-jacques Rousseau (allusion to him in p. TAL « Jean-jacques Humbert« ) and the French Revolution). Goethe published a « Theory of Colours » concerning the light spectrum (a hint, more about this in the final conclusion part). There are recurrent mentions of Goethe in Freud‘s writings. Schopenhauer cited Goethe’s novel « Wilhelm Meister’s Apprenticeship » as one of the four greatest novels ever written, along with « Tristram Shandy« , « La Nouvelle Heloïse« , and « Don Quixote« .
   xxx/ellauri139.html on line 205: As the beginning of the conclusion shows, the end to the novel can hardly be considered a happy one. In most cases, whatever positive transformations the characters underwent through their friendship with Myshkin unravel, either because they were unable to sustain the wisdom they learned from him or because they were so traumatized by the cruel absurdity of their life that they are reduced to a state of helplessness.
   xxx/ellauri165.html on line 660: According to the Alliance Commission on Unity & Truth among Evangelicals (ACUTE) the majority of Protestants have held that hell will be a place of perpetual conscious torment, both physical and spiritual. This is known as the eternal conscious torment (ECT) view. Some recent writers such as Anglican layman C. S. Lewis[86] and J.P. Moreland have cast people to hell in terms of "eternal separation" from God. Certain biblical texts have led some theologians[who?] to the conclusion that punishment in hell, though eternal and irrevocable, will be proportional to the deeds of each soul (e.g., Matthew 10:15, Luke 12:46-48).
   xxx/ellauri166.html on line 448: Why was the Song of Moses (sehän oli se Deuteronomian loppuluritus!) deemed suitable as a tefillin parchment? In all likelihood because both the second paragraph of the Shema, as well as the verses immediately after the Song of Moses in Parashat Ha’azinu, contain references to length of days. A contribution to the wearer's longevity. Nobody is in a particular hurry to get to Paradise. Ei kiirettä kuin pirulla Heinolan markkinoille. Hiivitään ennemminkin hiljaa kuin tiaisen kivittäjä. In conclusion, The archaeological evidence, together with consideration of various biblical passages and even of halakhah, suggests that tefillin were originally practiced as a longevity amulet. Lisää aiheesta: https://www.thetorah.com/article/the-origins-of-tefillin
   xxx/ellauri208.html on line 1059: Atra-Hasis boards the boat with his family and animals, then seals the door. The storm and flood begin, and even the gods are afraid. After seven days, the flood ends and Atra-Hasis offers sacrifices to the gods. Enlil is furious with Enki for violating his oath, but Enki denies doing so: "I made sure life was preserved." In conclusion, Enki and Enlil agree on other means for controlling the human population, like global warming.
   xxx/ellauri215.html on line 394: "And this brings me to my conclusion. I’m a strong believer in academic freedom (BUAHAHAHA, stop, you're killing me!) and open debate. I’m somewhat worried coming from a country that lives next to Russia and have been attacked by the Soviet Union and had to survive WW2 as a Soviet neighbor and have had to lose my summerhouse in Porckala to the Soviet Union, that academics make claims that simply are untrue and it doesn’t help if you quote documentation and skew it in a certain direction… more important than international relations theory is the reality of what is happening on the ground.
   xxx/ellauri215.html on line 396: And when I try to describe a reality that simply does not exist, it can lead to false assumptions that can lead to false conclusions which can lead to the loss of life and summerhouse. I say this as someone who has been in the war and have been on the battle field meditating the peace. The real reason for Putin's attack is threefold (three points only, phew!)
   xxx/ellauri224.html on line 135: In the conclusion of the film, Moore notes that the United States Constitution no longer protects normal Americans from the wealthy and powerful of American society, and that the American Dream is now nothing more than a bad wet dream.
   xxx/ellauri224.html on line 137: David Walsh of World Socialist Web Site wrote: "The 'hope' now Moore expresses near the conclusion of the work that we might 'get rid of the whole rotten system that gave us Donald Trump' is empty and meaningless, in so far as he continues to support one of the principal props of that rotten system, the Democratic Party. Whatever occasional insights and striking imagery it might offer, Fahrenheit 11/9 is false and dishonest at its core."
   xxx/ellauri225.html on line 149: My conclusions suggest that the Fibonacci pattern in trees makes an evolutionary difference. This is probably why the Fibonacci pattern is found in deciduous trees living in higher latitudes. The Fibonacci pattern gives plants like the oak tree a competitive edge over solar panels while collecting sunlight when the Sun moves through the sky.
   xxx/ellauri228.html on line 498: Yes, and the enthusiastic singing of "Adon 'olam, 'asher malakh, b'ṭerem kol yeṣir niv'ra" was a climactic conclusion to an unforgettable Naivety Eve in the Eastern Europe.
   xxx/ellauri229.html on line 91: Here´s what Sarge has to say about the basis of catholic faith. Note that the catholic position on faith is quite analogous to B.C. Carlson´s conclusion in Rätten, ett rättsteoretiskt försök: trust the experts, that is us.
   xxx/ellauri235.html on line 573: Like other poets of the Archaic Age, he reveals a deep sense of the vicissitudes of life and yet, unlike them, he also articulates a passionate faith in what men can achieve by the grace of the gods, most famously expressed in his conclusion to one of his Victory Odes: Creatures of a day! What is a man? What is he not? A dream of a shadow Is our mortal being. But when there comes to men A gleam of splendour given of heaven, Then rests on them a light of glory And blessed are their days.
   xxx/ellauri354.html on line 279: The Black Pig’s front matter also mentions two earlier publications that reveal Notari’s anticlerical bias: Carducci Intimo (1903), a biography of Giosuè Carducci (1835–1907), the Italian poet, professor, classicist, translator, freethinker, fierce opponent of the Catholic Church, and author of “Hymn to Satan,” who would be awarded the 1906 Nobel Prize in Literature; and Il Papa alla porta! Inchiesta e conclusioni per l’abolizione del Papato (Throw the Pope out! An inquest and conclusions for the abolition of the Papacy), aimed at the recently elected and very conservative Pope Pius X. Notari’s anticlericalism is also visible in his dedication of The Black Pig: “A due invitti innovatori di un Italia pagana e virile, dedico questo libro di demolizione di una Italia chiercuta e bazzotta” (To two indomitable revivers of a pagan and virile Italy, I dedicate this book aimed at the destruction of a tonsured and limp Italy).
   86