Genady

Capitalism in the Marx's theory is a system of two classes. One owns the means of production, the other sells their labor.

I've learned an important system for "thinking backwards" from my high school math teacher. It included rules such as "don't use notebooks, use only separate sheets of paper", "write only on one side of the sheets", "have a large desk, so you can spread the sheets in one layer, having all the work visible", "don't use pencils, only pens; never erase what you write", ... The point of all this was that while solving a problem you keep your trials, errors, dead ends, intermediate results, etc. easily accessible and reusable. When you finally solve the problem, you "reconstruct" a logical way through this mess.

I wouldn't say that I fully understand what you mean, but I'm quite sure it is not in accord with the Marx's theory. A connection to the Marx's theory was the only reason I've asked.

I've asked this question because of your mention of "Marx's capitalist end game vision" and because this is what Marx's theory is about.

In what way is this story better than any number of others?

Does the wealth gap between classes widen? What is the critical mass? How far is there to keep approaching it?

Watching them is a nonstop fun. On one hand, we are not so different in the sense that we are also affected by the same factors. On the other hand, we are very different because we are affected by so many other factors.

Yes, when they are not starved, food related behavior can be very 'ritualistic'. Here is another situation. After the old dog died, we got a young male from Animal Shelter. At the first dinner time, he tried to jump at the dish as soon as it had food in it. But I held him until Amy, the now older female started eating. That was the only hint he needed. Never again he started eating before Amy.

I thought it might be confirming the hierarchy. The male dog was older and been in the house before the female has arrived. I think he had a higher rank, although they were very friendly and in spite of her being larger and heavier than him. During the meal, he moved sidewise from his dish to hers. She calmly walked around him to his dish. After several swallows, repeat.

A different story was how our two dogs danced around the food during dinner. They were both from Animal Shelter, a female with clear presence of Rottweiler genes and a male with Rhodesian Ridgeback genes. They had their dishes side by side and while eating they were constantly switching places. Looked like a ritual, but I don't know what a meaning of it was.

If you do, how can you know that you in fact follow the thread of your thoughts (assuming for a moment that such a thing exists) and not making up a new narrative?

What does make you think so?

The first half I never saw (I think). The others are too recent. Certainly not so for me. And now, that I can play some of them, it's like an orchestra - main part in my head and the glockenspiel accompaniment outside.

Interesting. My father loved opera and played the records - none stuck with me. My mother liked classical music and played records - I remember many of these. Surely Freud would have something to say about it. Yes, perhaps I picked that tune from a movie - there was a period when USSR got bunch of old American movies.

No, I do not understand the mechanism. I agree with both of you about what and when got remembered and what not. But I think it is more like a resonance phenomenon rather than associated contact points. IOW, memorization and retrieval works with some kind of Fourier transform of the thing rather than the original signal. Introduction to Pushkin's poem, Ruslan and Ludmila, brings to mind a mix of scenes and characters from fairytales, and they, together with a sweet flow of words make me feel like honey pouring over my heart: У лукоморья дуб зеленый, Златая цепь на дубе том: И днем и ночью кот ученый Всё ходит по цепи кругом; Идет направо — песнь заводит, Налево — сказку говорит. Там чудеса: там леший бродит, Русалка на ветвях сидит; Там на неведомых дорожках Следы невиданных зверей; Избушка там на курьих ножках Стоит без окон, без дверей; ... (Maybe TheVat gets it) When I started playing an instrument, not long ago, my wife told me, why won't you play Red River Valley? What is Red River Valley, I asked. Never heard of it. This is what you are humming to yourself all the years I know you, she said. I looked it up, and yes, that was the tune, and I don't have any idea when and how it got into my brain.

I don't think it is a matter of depth and significance of the contents or its effect on one's mind and life. To me, it is rather a memory thing. Same mechanism that makes some poetry lines and some musical tunes easy to come into one's mind.

(To Say Nothing of the Dog) +1 Me too. Even in translation.

A classic example of creativity in cooking:

If this is the case, then I did not misunderstand the OP, contrary to my previous post.

I bet on lazy journalism + lazy authors + lazy journal editors.

The next paragraph in the article says, 1. What does "extraterrestrial or terrestrial" means? Isn't everything in the universe "extraterrestrial or terrestrial"? 2. It appears to come from the authors of the research rather than from the journalist.

Perhaps I misunderstood the process described in OP. I thought that it is about a function, t -> {x,y,z | z=t, x2+y2+z2=1} for a sphere of radius 1 and t in [-1,+1].

Then computer graphics and animation people could know.

Maybe because it is not a commonly referred to thing? Where would you apply this term?

In the world of defense mechanisms, rationalization is fairly common. People may not realize when they offer a small excuse or justification. Although this is natural, confronting reality, even when it’s difficult, can be an important step to changing harmful habits in realms such as relationships, finances, and more.