Phi for All

It's all about pressure management. Two people who care a lot for each other can spread forces over a greater area, leaving them with less stress, and more pressure for squeezing each other tight.

What should we use? Something less precise, or more emotional?

You probably opened the drapes too quick, and all those photons combined into a brick. Hangover much?

I thought the thread was about homophobic, non-scientific ranting. Phobias and other conditions can be analyzed scientifically, but the posts you originally objected to weren't like that. They were merely slurs against groups of people.

Please avoid making them a group, and focus on the behavior.

Please report any posts you feel aren't focused on the science. Expressing prejudiced opinions about any group is against our rules.

Another alternative: stop the active campaign against intellectualism, start educating everyone to a higher degree, do as much as we can to remove the desire to smoke, and make anti-smoking treatments part of a universal healthcare system.

Science in the US seems to be caught in a nasty trap. Laypeople usually want looser definitions and more intuitive, popular explanations that end up causing a lot of misconceptions, which can only be cleared up by the precision and rigor the professionals want. I think, as public school funding continues to be diverted to finance extremist capitalism, the public is becoming incapable of comprehending complex situations. The blue collar sector won't listen to professionals anymore, including professionals in reality.

Why would you? Don't you want something you can trust more than religious beliefs? Don't you think requiring a preponderance of evidence accompany the explanations for various phenomena is better than placing "faith" in Iron Age spirituality? Why would you blend faith and wishful thinking with trust by calling them all religions?! To me, that's like calling every tool that does linear measurement a meter stick. It's neither helpful nor accurate.

! Moderator Note Unless you're proposing reasons or explanations that are against mainstream teachings, there's no reason for posting this in Speculations. I'll move it to Other Sciences for now, unless you have strong objections. Philosophy might be a good choice as well.

! Moderator Note ... but you got the warning point. Hmmm. Let's be civil, folks.

! Moderator Note And that sounds more like blog behavior. This is a science discussion forum. Do you wish to engage with others in discussion, or shall I close the thread?

! Moderator Note To have a meaningful discussion of your paper, it's necessary to clarify anything readers don't find clear. If you aren't willing to answer questions, how can discussion happen? Please address questions regarding your paper or the thread will be closed.

! Moderator Note You sound like you're tired of having an account here. Are you?

Because you've somehow convinced yourself that's all it is, you big dumb brute.

Who offered to blame the men as a solution? Who blamed it on the men? This behavior has been around at least since biblical times. Recognizing it is important, I think. Perpetuation of the behavior may be more human than gender oriented. We all tend to hold on to advantage.

My wife is the one who pointed this out. It's been instilled from childhood, when dad would come home from work and mom would usually caution the kids to let him relax after a hard day. Placating dad and deferring to his wishes becomes the watchword, but of course the boys grow up to be the dads, and the girls grow up to be women who are rarely deferred to. It may be improving as more families have two wage earners. The traditional role of the father as disciplinarian may be changing as well.

Introduction: I’m going to talk about the notion of Spaces and Exchanges. This notion represents a very broad concept, it related to the various ways of moving all around the world. Exchanges can be of various kinds, for instances cultural, economics, or movement of people. We will see the example of the British Asian community and I’ll try to show how the British Indian Colonization lead led to many exchanges and modifications of the space between theses two civilizations. I) The British empire and it’s its impact on India The colonization of India began at the end of the 16th century. Even if they were not the first, British settlers progressively settled in India and ends ended up by creating in 1600 the British East India Company to increase there their leverage. By means of this company, they started to exploited the resources of India and thus causing caused great modifications of the spaces. Indeed, the British built a lot of infrastructures on the Indian territory such as mines for the exploitation of diamond, coal, and gold, and they also built railway systems, churches or cathedrals. Theses spaces modifications will be supplemented by exchanges of different sorts. Before and even after the abolition of slavery, many Indian were hired by the British Indian Company and sent all around the British Empire. In that way, they widely contributed to the formation of migratory flows. At the cultural level, the English language became one of the new national languages with the Hindi. Many Indians were compelled to learn the English to be able to work with the British who had the control of many business lines. Still today, speaking English represents a very important asset for Indians during the globalization of the world. The colonization also triggered good changes, for instance the rise of schooling and literacy, the creation of new administrations, legal systems and escalation of democracy. The proximity between theses these two cultures also [[wage] Not sure at all what you mean by using this word! Pick a synonym for what you mean!] to the interracial marriages and apparition of a mixed populations whose descendant shape India today. We saw that this colonization had many impacts in India during time by leading to modifications of spaces but also exchanges between cultures and people. II) The British Asian community and it’s its impacts on Britain In a similar way, Indians also affect the British civilization. As a mater of fact, the decolonization induced the arrival of many Indians on the Britain territory. Very often, they migrate for economic reasons to flee the poverty on there their country. They come to Britain because they speak English thanks to the British Colonization as we saw in the first part. These British Asians gather in Indian neighborhoods and they open many restaurants and corner-shops were where they share there their gastronomic culture. To this extent, Indians contributed to modifying the British culture notably in cooking but also in music, cinema with the apparition of Bollywood which is the name of the Indian film industry who broadcast all around the world. These modification are still visible today, for example the tea, originally from India, has become an inescapable tradition in Britain. The cohabitation of these two civilization created positive exchanges and a link between these communities as we can see in an image we studied in class. On this picture there is an Indian women woman and a foot guard in front of the Buckingham palace Palace. The women woman represents all the Indian community and the guard the British. It appears that the guard gives it’s his protection to the women woman, this situation symbolize the good relationships between Indian and British. Even if usually there are no tensions between the communities, it’s sometimes complex to be integrated in a different culture. The disagreement can be of religious nature or simply cultural but however described, they lead to a culture clash. In the film Bend It Like Beckham, Jess is a teenager who wants to play football professionally but her parents who are Sikh so they want there their daughter to go to university and marry with a Sikh husband. The film focuses on the culture clash between the family which is very conservative of the Sikh religion and Jess who is open-minded and influenced by the British society. Conclusion: The British colonization of India has considerably altered spaces and cultures of both countries. Theses modification are still visible today and the result of the colonization and decolonization is the mixed society which exist as well in India as in Britain today. Most of the time, exchanges have been beneficial for both countries but they also sometimes provoke culture clash between the communities. Here are a few markups that will help, not comprehensive and mostly just grammar. Good luck!

It was pointed out to me recently that, being a tall, white male gives me much more advantage than I realize. I've started noticing that in public, when I show up in just about any situation (meeting in a conference room, turning a corner with my cart at the grocery, getting food at a party with a buffet table), there's a split second where others will look at me to see what I'm going to do. If I don't do anything, or mirror everyone else's behavior, nothing different happens. But if I choose to, this is the moment when I can take charge of the meeting and ram my ideas through, or push my cart in front of someone else with just a nod of my head, or reach across to help myself to whatever I want at the buffet even though others were there first. These are little things, but many women have been taught to defer to me in all things just because I'm a tall, white male, and whatever I need to do takes precedence over whatever they had in mind. Now take a subject like science, where who you are should never be as important as what you know. It must seem highly hypocritical to women in science to be told that objectivity is all-important, and then be treated as less than their male counterparts. Science is a field where merit should decide most everything, yet we still have this masculine domination in many fields where it's counterproductive.

No. I responded to a specific mischaracterized generalization of China as "Fascist China". I supported myself with accepted definitions, and showed where your definitions were lacking. I also told you that you can be vague and imprecise if you want to. I don't expect you to be persuaded by reason, since it's clear you don't use reason to reach any of your conclusions. You make emotional and sweeping generalizations that I think are detrimental to anyone who wants to learn anything, and they tend to clamp off your availability for reason. Do I want you to abandon your interpretation of fascism? I think you need to add depth to much of your worldview, and abandoning your subjective, emotional rhetoric about humanity in general would be a net benefit for you. But look at me, being reasonable with you . Go ahead, go back to your ranting.

You go right ahead being vague and imprecise. It suits your emotional style, it lets you move goalposts when you're shown errors, and it confirms all the biases you've allowed to build up on your worldview.

Strawman argument, since the metric "sucking" wasn't being objected to. Fascism was what I commented on, only that because that's where you were wrong, but refuse to admit it. Irrational behavior, use of fallacies, I'm helping to point out areas where you need work on your arguments. Please stick to facts and leave your emotional slant out of it, if you will.

! Moderator Note Hello. To avoid spammers, new members aren't allowed to post links for a bit. In any case, our rules state that discussions can't require members click outside links or videos. Please post your paper here so discussion can move forward. Welcome to the site.

Yeah, about that. Those are some bullet points put together by rense.com to push a commercial fringe agenda. I don't put much credence in them. A more in-depth and accredited article suggests fascism may be trending: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/world/asia/01iht-letter01.html And none of these points covers the lack of centralization in China's power structures. They cover the other two major characteristics of fascism, extreme nationalism that trumps the citizens in importance, and heavy authoritarianism. China hasn't been fascist since the 1930s.

If you don't mind imprecise definitions, yours is the mindset to have! Go for it! Be vague! Problem is, there are only three major facets to fascism. Does your method round up for 2/3?