Coronavirus could make remote work the norm, something companies need to know COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak could be the catalyst for a dramatic increase in telecommuting. Businesses should be preparing for the rise of remote work and the long-term effects on marketing budgets, corporate travel and commercial real estate.

Sixty years ago, research was underway to understand the structure of proteins, since Nobel Laureates Max Perutz and John Kendrew in the 1950s gave the world the first glimpse into what a protein looks like.

It was that pioneering work and decades of research that followed, which made Googles DeepMind announcement Thursday that an idea of the structure of a handful of proteins associated with respiratory disease known as COVID-19. which is spreading all over the world.

Proteins do a great deal of work for organisms, and understanding the three-dimensional shape of proteins in COVID-19 could possibly conceive of a type of virus behind the disease, which could be a vaccine. Efforts are being made around the world to determine the structure of these viral proteins, of which DeepMinds is merely an effort.

There is always a little self-promotion about DeepMinds AI accomplishments, so it helps to remember the context in which science was created. The DeepMind Protein Polling Program reflects decades of work by chemists, physicists and biologists, computer scientists and data scientists, and would not be possible without this intense global effort.

Since the 1960s, scientists have been fascinated by the difficult problem of protein structure. Proteins are amino acids, and the forces that pull them in a certain way are fairly straightforward because some amino acids are attracted or repelled by positive or negative charges, and some amino acids are hydrophobic that is, they hold further away. away from water molecules.

However, these forces, so basic and so easy to understand, lead to amazing protein forms that are difficult to predict only from the acids themselves. And so decades have passed, trying to guess what a given amino acid sequence will look like, usually developing increasingly sophisticated computer models to simulate the process of folding a protein, the interaction of forces that make a protein take it. whatever shape it ends up taking.

An illustration of the possible structure of a coronavirus-associated membrane protein, according to a model created by DeepMinds AlphaFold program.

DeepMind

Twenty-six years ago, a bi-annual competition, called Critical Evaluation of Predicting Protein Structure, or CASP, was held. Scientists are challenged to submit their best computer simulated predictions of a given protein after telling them only the amino acid sequence. The judges know the structure, which is determined by a lab experiment, so its a test of how you can guess what is in a lab.

DeepMind honored the latest CASP, CASP13, which took place throughout 2018.To grab gold, DeepMind developed a computer model, AlphaFold, which shares a naming convention with the DeepMind model that won. chess and Gos game. AlphaZero. In one of those trophy moments similar to other DeepMind headlines, the company found its closest competitor to the CASP13 competition in 2018, producing high-precision structures for 24 of the 43 domains of proteins, with the highest single effort. producing 14 models of this type.

Writing in Nature this January, Mohammed AlQuraishi with the Systems Pharmacology Lab at Harvard Medical School, called the development of AlphaFold a watershed moment for the science of protein folding. His essay accompanies DeepMinds formal AlphaFold scientific work in this issue, entitled Predicting Enhanced Protein Structure with Deep Learning Potentials.

AlphaFold is a union of AIs work with DeepMind, a product of decades of machine learning progress, but also decades of publicly-acquired protein knowledge. The deep neural network developed by DeepMind consists of a mechanism for measuring the local set of atoms in a convolutional filter-like protein perfected by Turing Yann LeCun winner and used in ubiquitous convolutive neural networks to determine structure local of an image. To that, DeepMind added the so-called waste blocks of the type developed a few years ago by Kaiming He and his colleagues at Microsoft.

DeepMind calls the resulting structure a deep two-dimensional diluted convolutive residual network. The purpose of this mouth is to predict the amino acid pairs distance given their sequence. AlphaFold does this by optimizing their convolutions and residual connections using the stochastic gradient descent learning rule developed in the 1980s, which powers all deep learning today.

This AlphaFold network would not be possible without decades of knowledge of proteins built into publicly accessible databases. The deep network takes in the known amino acid sequence, in a form called multiple sequence alignment, or MSA. These are the pixel equivalent of an image operated by a CNN when image recognition. These MSAs are only available for decades because scientists have been mounting them in databases, in particular the UniProt or Universal Protein Resource database, which is maintained by a consortium of research centers around the world. funded by a group of governments. offices, including the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation. The six DeepMind protein structures published this week for COVID-19 began by taking the freely available amino acid sequences at UniProt, making UniProt the raw material for DeepMinds science.

In addition, on the road to his impressive results, AlphaFold had to be trained. The deep web of convolutions and residual blocks had to take their form, giving examples of structures known as labeled examples. This was made possible by another 49-year-old organization called NSF-funded Protein Data Bank, the U.S. Department of Energy and others. The basic PDB database is managed by a consortium of Rutgers University, the San Diego Supercomputer Center / University of California San Diego, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. These institutions have the impressive task of retaining what you might consider as the huge data available to AlphaFold and other efforts. More than 144,000 protein structures have been gathered and can be downloaded and downloaded almost half a million times a year, according to the PDB. PDB also runs the CASP challenge.

The DeepMind structure predictions are published in a format called the PDB of the consortium. This means that even the language in which DeepMind can express its scientific findings is possible by the consortium.

The fact that dedicated teams have spent decades painstakingly assembling knowledge stores from which researchers can freely extract is a striking achievement in the history of science and, in fact, humanity.

DeepMinds publication of the protein files was praised by other scientists, such as the Francis Crick Institute. In their blog post about their work COVID-19, DeepMind scientists recognize a lot of work on the virus by other institutions. We are indebted to the work of many other laboratories, they write, this work would not be possible without the efforts of researchers around the world who have responded to the COVID-19 outbreak with incredible agility.

It is a responsible and worthy recognition. It can be added that it is not only the current laboratories that have made the AlphaFold files possible, but also that generations of work carried out by public and private suits have made it possible for the collective understanding of which AlphaFold is only the latest interesting wrinkle.

More:

Google's DeepMind effort for COVID-19 coronavirus is based on the shoulders of giants - Mashviral News - Mash Viral

Post Views: 5,197

Frederick Nietzsche, the 19th century German philosopher, transformed the fields of science and philosophy. His revolutionary ideas have drastically altered the history of modern intellectual thought, but during his lifetime, he amassed countless enemies with his antithetical beliefs toward religion and morality.

Following his renouncement of religion, he wrote a letter to his sister, explaining why he felt the need to leave the church. Nietzsche wrote, Hence the ways of men part: if you want to strive for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire. Here are five ways that Nietzsches ideals can be applied to your own life.

Nietzsches search for moral truth in his life led him to question why humans feel the need to discover truth. He began his critique of truth by emphasizing that all life is perspective. He thought that because everyones life is different, their beliefs, judgments and actions will also differ. As our interpretations and judgments change, our perspective shifts, leading individuals to have different perceptions of morality.

This realization led Nietzsche to question why people feel the yearning for immutable laws to govern morality. Nietzsche asked himself the questions, Why truth rather than perspective? Why certainty rather than more interpretation? He postulated that our will to truth was not a natural desire.

Instead, Nietzsche believed that the human demand for rigid morality was a choice that we make out of fear, in order to convince ourselves that there is order in the universe. Nietzsche claimed that, because our will to truth forces us to base our beliefs in the perspectives of others, it glorifies the least creative parts of ourselves.

In these times of political uncertainty, we could all benefit from the wisdom of Friedrich Nietzsche. If we sought to understand others perspectives, instead of screaming at those we disagree with, we could move past our party differences.

Nietzsche realized that everyones values are different because they have distinctive perspectives. Everyone has different perceptions of life, so the truth is never black or white. People engaging in confirmation bias are obeying their will to truth, and subscribing themselves to a particular ideology, while ignoring other possible principles. Nietzsche teaches us that our beliefs should naturally change over time, as our judgments and perceptions of life change.

Instead of engaging in confirmation bias and believing only the facts that fit your narrative, attempt to gather facts from different perspectives. Nietzsche wants you to recognize that your will to truth is not a natural desire. Next time you think your beliefs are right and someone elses are wrong, remember that your values may not coincide with theirs, but that doesnt mean you cant understand their perspective. Instead of judging their beliefs, interpret them, and try to figure out what led them to that way of thinking.

If you think someones beliefs are wrong, silencing them will only push them further away. The only way for us to come to a mutual understanding is by creating a more open discussion, focused on respecting varied perspectives.

What weve called universal values, what we have called truth, has always only ever been the personal expressions of those who promoted them. Nietzsche

Nietzsche believed that universal morality is merely personal maxims that have been universalized for everyone to follow. He explains that the real values we hold are not based on the perspectives of others, but are expressions of who we are, and what feels powerful or life-giving to us. Nietzsche believed a rigid religious code creates what he called the herd mentality. Like a herd of animals, a herd mentality aims towards sameness, comfort and the preservation of its population.

The herd mentality puts the community over the individual, and limits creativity and independence. Nietzsche realized the universal codes he previously followed were nothing more than tools for enforcement, used by the herd to limit his free choices and individuality. Because universal morality requires us to adopt our beliefs from others perspectives, it limits our free expression and appeals to the least creative part of ourselves: the part that craves inflexible moral truth.

Rainer Maria Rilke was a poet during the late 19th and early 20th centuries whose writing was fueled by his fluctuating beliefs concerning an increasingly secular, war-torn Europe. Prominent Nietzsche themes appear in his poetry and, like Nietzsche, much of his work was not appreciated during his lifetime.

All who seek you test you. And those who find you, bind you to image and gesture. I would rather sense you, as the earth senses you. In my ripening, ripens what you are. Rilke

This is because they adopt the perspectives of others, who see God rigidly in image and gesture. They refrain from seeing God in different ways, thus restricting Gods influence on their lives. Rilke, like Nietzsche, believed that spiritual enlightenment could never be synonymous with conformity because enlightenment comes from the unknown, something you can sense but not conform to.

Instead of keeping your spiritual beliefs stagnant, try to evolve your spirituality and change it for the better when an opportunity presents itself. It is the changing perception of God, Rilke suggests, that changes people for the better.

Nietzsche suggested that we can move past our will to truth, and free ourselves from the entrapment of the herd mentality, by becoming beyond good and evil. Instead of falling victim to our will to truth and borrowing the values of others, we should awaken our will to power, which is our passion and drive to create our life in the image of what we value.

Nietzsches philosophy proposes that we say yes to whatever gives us meaning in our own lives the things we find value in personally. Many critics believe Nietzsche to be a promoter of anarchism because of his hatred of government and religion but, although his work has been frequently associated with anarchists, Nietzsche denied these claims.

I dont think his goal was to demonize the values of those organizations. He was merely pointing out problems in the structures of government and religion. His philosophy doesnt condemn specific values; instead, it condemns values that are adopted from others. Nietzsche maintained his criticism of organized religion throughout his life, but he also recognized that spirituality can grant immense value to some peoples lives.

Although some religious scholars see Nietzsche as an enemy to be disproved, I see him as someone who exposed obvious problems in religion because he wished for people to autonomously discover their own spirituality. His attacks on organized religion lead many spiritual folks to reject his insights, but his intention wasnt for people to abandon spirituality. His philosophy was a renouncement of his faith, not an attack on the faith of others.

Although many religious individuals find his work repulsive, I believe you can appreciate Nietzsche and still find meaning in religion. Nietzsche preached individual freedom of belief, whatever that belief may be.

Nietzsches ethics ask us to take a bold step. Eliminating our sources of truth in the world will most likely lead to nihilism, which is the belief that nothing has value or meaning. Many perceive nihilism as a negative or destructive perspective, but in contrast to the common view, Nietzsche believed nihilism is a prompting, or an opportunity that can enable us to reevaluate what gives value to our lives. Nietzsche believed that if we destroy our previous set of beliefs, and suffer the initial existential angst of nihilism, we can discover where our true values lie.

Many misinterpret his view as an endorsement of pessimism, but they couldnt be further from the truth. His view enables someone to experience the full depth of their character. Nietzsche advises a revision of self but doesnt require us to get rid of all of our past herd-built values. He is asking us to consider our existing values, as well as all other possibilities.

Nietzsche is not advising you to adopt a nihilistic outlook on life. He is saying that to find your own truths in life, you must first reject the truths given to you by the herd. To find value in your life, you cannot blindly follow the values of others. Next time you feel a loss of meaning in your life, interpret that depressed state as an opportunity for change. Instead of sulking in your perceived loss of self, realize that you feel that way because you avoided your true values. Look at nihilism as a gift that enables you to find true value by cleaning your slate of its narrow imitative beliefs.

What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus?

The greatest weight is a metaphorical situation put forth by Nietzsche. His goal was to make you think about what gives value to your life. Nietzsches hypothetical makes us ask ourselves if we would want to live eternally as we have been living. He proposes that most of us would curse the demon. The greatest weight is the feeling that crushes you into repeating past mistakes, and it is built from the unevaluated values you adopt from your herd.

Nietzsche suggests that in every little thing ask yourself, do you desire this once more and innumerable times over? If you change yourself and reevaluate your values, the weight can be lifted. However, if you remain under the same influences of the herd-prescribed guilt, you will become crushed under the weight, and submit to your unoriginal repetitive ways.

His vision, from the constantly passing bars, has grown so weary that it cannot hold anything else. It seems to him there are a thousand bars; and behind the bars, no world.

As he paces in cramped circles, over and over, the movement of his powerful soft strides is like a ritual dance around a center in which a mighty will stands paralyzed.

Only at times, the curtain of the pupils lifts, quietly. An image enters in, rushes down through the tensed, arrested muscles, plunges into the heart and is gone. Rilke

In Rilkes poem The Panther, he observed a panther behind the bars at a zoo, insightfully comparing the panthers will to live with that of mankinds. This poem examines how the greatest weight confines humankind to a subservient state. Like the panther, mankind lives behind bars. The panther is held captive in a cell made from human ingenuity, while mankinds personal jail cells are blandly pre-subscribed by social beliefs that captivate the wildness and individualism of the human spirit.

Humanitys confinement is built from its defined limitations. The social norms and beliefs of an individuals herd composes the bars of their prison, restricting that persons actions, and inhibiting their freedom of original self-expression. Rilke, like Nietzsche, recognized that we can escape our enclosure of forced beliefs and awaken ourselves to what we value personally. But, upon realizing all the bars that stand in the way of our dreams, many of us submit to the comfortability of our cage.

When you feel overtaken by the greatest weight, dont hide your wild aspirations in fear of them once again resurfacing. Break out of your self-made, herd-based enclosure and chase after the dreams that give meaning to your life.

Link:
5 Themes of Nietzsche That You Can Apply to Your Life - Study Breaks

On February 11th, Professor Curtis Dozier (Class of 00) spoke to a packed room about The Big One: The Fall of Rome and Contemporary Hate Groups. As the director of the Pharos Project out of Vassar College, Dozier seeks to combat the appropriation of the classical tradition by hate groups online through documenting appropriations, correcting the errors, omissions, and distortions that underpin these groupss interpretations, and to articulate a politically progressive approach to the study of Greco-Roman antiquity. While the stated purpose of his presentation was to discuss the appropriation of the fall of the Western Roman Empire by these groups, the discussion quickly took a broader focus.

Professor Doziers work with the Pharos Project falls into the domain of classical reception: the study of how antiquity and its relics have been portrayed, interpreted, and represented since. To introduce us to his work, he began with the case of The Colleges own Hovey Murals. Previously located in the basement of the Class of 53 Commons, the murals depict Eleazer Wheelock setting out into the wilderness to teach the Abenaki. Dozier asserts that implicit in these murals is the presentation of classical education as a civilizing influence: from the recurring presence of a Latin textbook Gradus ad Parnassum, to the Latin inscriptions, to the explicit reference to the Department of Classics on the panel of the first image. While the Hovey Murals are products of the early 20th century, Dozier sees the ideas represented as not just an artifact but emblematic of how white supremacists groups talk about a classical education todaya tool to preserve their warped understanding of Western Civilization.

At its most basic, this appropriation of the classical tradition is an appeal to authority. While they will often falsify the historical record, when they do use legitimate sources, they attempt to draw parallels from antiquity to inform our present behavior; our forefathers did this, and thus so should we. The fall of Rome occupies a special place in their thought as the Roman Empire is paradoxically something great and worthy of emulation, yet, something we need to account for the collapse of. Dozier asserts that this has led to the appropriation of scholarship to support whatever political agenda these groups wish to advance: Rome falls because of the barbarians at the gates; Rome falls because of the sexual liberation of women. Such claims pose a particular challenge to academics as, while these hate groups present simplified narratives with absolute certainty, to do so in response would be intellectually dishonest to the complexity of the scholarship. However, Dozier asserts that all of this debate only matters so long as we continue to view the fall of Rome as something that mattersone of the few assumptions that both those published in peer-reviewed journals and Reddit seem to agree. Why do we need it to matter? Why do the classics matter at all?

Dozier finds his answer in the re-appropriation of the classical tradition to advance his politically progressive agenda. Due to antiquities central place in academia, there is apossibly undeservedcache of authority in the classical tradition. Those who reference Greece and Rome sound intelligent. Thus contemporary scholars have an obligation to positively politicize the classical tradition such that it advances progressive narratives and creates new methodologies that place the consideration and advancement of the historically marginalized as central.

An example of this ideology in practice is Vassar College renaming its Department of Classics, the Department of Greek and Roman Studies. He asserts that no other disciplines name includes an implicit endorsement of the subject contained. We use the term classic to denote that which is essential to study, and thus the name classics implies antiquity is worthy of our study. Here is where Doziers argument begins to fall apart; etymological evidence shows that we should flip this causal chain. We use the term classic to denote something of value as the culture of antiquity was so universally considered vital that we borrowed its name. Classic comes from the Latin classicus, an adjective describing that which pertains to the patrician class. The use of the term to refer to those standard texts of exemplary quality emerges during the 6th century AD to refer to the products and pursuits of this patrician class. The classical predates the word classic.

I further object to Doziers deviation from the accepted methodology in his work rebutting the hate groups. While he asserts that the classics have always been secretly politicized in favor of a conservative agenda, and, he only wishes to do the same openly in a left-leaning manner, he is arguing for a false dichotomy. It may be true that the accepted scholarship contains biased actors and positions, but methodologically we should strive for apolitical accuracy. In deviating from the accepted methodology to arrive at a desired end, that which we create is equally erroneous as hate groups using the classics to further hateful ends. Regardless of the moral message, its still a case of motivated reasoning.

Similarly, Dozier presents the narratives constructed by these groups as problematic, but not why they are flawed beyond failing to compart with a progressive viewpoint. One example that was brought up during the talk is the case of Doziers attempt to debunk an interpretation of Juvenal the Satirist as sexists. When Dozier reached out to the experts in his field on Roman satire, to his surprise, they confirmed that the interpretation of the hate groups is historically accurate. This example demonstrates an intellectual dishonesty both in committing the logical fallacy of discrediting an argument because of the associated speaker and in his motivation to simply oppose these groups, not accurately document the history.

While these critiques are responses to Doziers answer to the question of the value of classics, if we dismiss his answer as fallacious, there is still the question of why do the classics matter? Why does the study of history matter at all beyond just existing as an appeal to tradition? Nietzsche provides an answer to this question in his essay On the Uses and Abuses of History for Life (1874); history is useful in so far as it serves life. The beasts of nature live unhistorically, acting in each moment before immediately forgetting. Man lives historically; his actions bound by the ever-increasing burden of the past, which weights against his ability to act. This burden finds its extreme in the superhistorical man, who knows so much that he is rendered entirely impotent. To put this point more colloquially: the man who knows everything fears everything. A person must know just enough to keep them safe, but not too much as to be paralyzed by fear. While we desire the bliss of an unhistorical existence, we, too, want the products of historicism. The obligation of the intellect is to mediate between these extremes. We must both be able to learn from the past but not be made useless by our knowledge of it. Thus, if knowledge breeds inaction, we must distinguish not only what we save but what we discardsacrificed as it has become unproductive to our ends.

Nietzsche continues that there are three types of history that each inspires different actions and dangers. Monumental History is that which preserves and motivates greatness yet can breed resentment if that greatness becomes mythical and unachievable. Antiquarian History is that which seeks to protect the tradition of our civilization yet can become fetishistic if too removed from its content and dangerous if in lieu we substitute in our own. Critical History is that which condemns the past for its failures yet can become so broad as to make one believes nothing matters lest it all be problematic. Much like how the quest of man is to mediate between the extremes of the unhistorical and superhistorical, so too must you navigate between the poles of history itself. Nietzsche saw his period as defined by the overabundance of knowledge that exclusively exists for its own sake. Those who generated this knowledge never asked why or reflected upon its value. Put succinctly, Nietzsche studied the classics because to do so served his life. It motivated greater action.

The hate groups Dozier discusses represent the extreme form of Antiquarian History, attempting to apply the past to the present without any regard for its context. As Nietzsche explains to these groups, it seems presumptuous or even criminal to replace such an antiquity with something new and to set up in opposition to such a numerous cluster of revered and admired things the single fact of what is coming into being and what is present. Hate groups have become so thoroughly invested in this unchanging conception of the past as to render all action which incites change impossible. As even the most celebrated scholars have an incomplete knowledge of the context of antiquity, those without this formal education dangerously substitute their own. Worse, they attempt to do this with falsification generated through unsound methodologies. This inability to make the present look like the past is what breeds their defining featureresentment.

Dozier himself, however, represents the extreme form of critical history. In so thoroughly condemning both antiquity and the tradition of studying it for its failures, he has concluded that it is of no inherent value. Thus, he can use it most cynically to advance his agenda. In the words of Nietzsche through this excess an age attains the dangerous mood of irony about itself and, from that, an even more dangerous mood of cynicism. He made this view clear to the audience when asked by Professor Michael Lurie of the Classics Department why it would not be philosophically consistent for him to resign his position. Tragically, Dozier concurred.

While there are valid conversations about the accessibility of Ivory Towers, the excess of critical history has led Oxford to consider removing Homer and Virgil as required reading in attempt to make classics more accessible. This is not unique to Oxfordseemingly the last refuge of classical educationbut the culmination of a process that has gone for the past century. Dartmouth does not require I read Homer for Classics or Shakespeare for English. However, in attempting to concede to the critical historian and in making things too available, we sacrifice the very value they contain.

I didnt come to Dartmouth to be a Classics major. I came here to learn; I came here to engage in the liberal arts; I came here to engage in an intellectual community. I thought I wanted to be a Government major but those people I most enjoyed talking with, who seemed the most shaped and inspired by what they studied, were the Classicists. Everything I found valuable about the classics does not relate at all to the criticisms Dozier madehe missed the point of classical education and history entirely.

Read more:
Dr. Schliemann or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Classics - Dartmouth Review

The Enabler

This is a video interview from our podcast Tech Startups Germany. All the recordings on this channel are made possible by Invest in Hessen (learn more herehttps://www.invest-in-hessen.com/home).

We will post this interview and all others as podcast(s) next Tuesday night Central European Time. Subscribe here and have them on our device when you wake up:

Audio only Tech Startups Germany by Startuprad.io iTuneshttps://apple.co/2Z17bfl Deezerhttp://bit.ly/2Qbh1rl TuneInhttp://bit.ly/2M8vpzn Stitcherhttp://bit.ly/34xTANO Video Tech Startups Germany by Startuprad.io iTuneshttps://apple.co/2M8ZxKJ

We come to love the work ethics here. Frankfurt is a work minded city. Peter Hart during his Startuprad.io interview

In this interview for Invest-in-hessen.com we are talking to Peter Hart (https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-hart-94373435/), a serial entrepreneur, based in Frankfurt. Despite being just 28 years old, Peter already launched 12 ventures. He started out back in 2015 with his consumer product brand Dr. Severin (https://drseverin.com/). During his first venture launch, Joe interviewed Peter in German back in 2015. We talk to him about his newest venture Pythia AI (https://www.pythia-ai.com/)

I dont divide between business books and private books. If you grow personally, you grow as a leader. Peter Hart during his Startuprad.io interview

We talk to him to learn more about his 12thventure, called Pythia AI (https://www.pythia-ai.de/). Pythia was started when Peter followed his data-driven approach to launch new consumer products and he got approached by Rossmann (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossmann_(company)), Germanys 2ndlargest chain of drug stores. The drug store chain invested in the startup (https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/pythia#section-funding-rounds) to help them with forecasting trends for product development.

In case you are wondering: The venture is named after the priest, founding and serving the Oracle of Delphi in Greek mythology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythia).

Peter looks a bit tired in the interview, since he just returned from opening an office in Sunny Vale, in the Silicon Valley.

We are very happy with the talent pool here (in Frankfurt), especially the engineers. Peter Hart during his Startuprad.io interview

During his time in Silicon Valley, Peter wanted to reach out to venture capital investors. He went along the two main streets where they are headquartered and knocked on their doors. Surprisingly this was very successful, and it appears no one has done this before.

Despite knocking on many doors in Silicon Valley, Pythia is not done with their fundraising and they are looking for additional investors for their Series A fundraising.

I think philosophy goes really well with business. You formulate a more concrete business philosophy. Peter Hart during his Startuprad.io interview

Pythia forecasts the next trend in consumer products

Principles by Ray Daliohttps://amzn.to/38ZgmB7

The man who solved the markethttps://amzn.to/2SZ6Jgw

What You Do Is Who You Are: How to Create Your Business Culturehttps://amzn.to/2SYi00x

The little princehttps://amzn.to/3c6hWDm

Friedrich Nietzsches Books:

Herman Hesses Books

Before the Top Book List we talked about The hard thing about hard thingshttps://amzn.to/32symSb

Herman Hessehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Hesse

Friedrich Nietzschehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche

Arthur Schopenhauerhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer

And maybe you want to have a look at the often quoted VC Ben Horowitzhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Horowitz

This is a video interview from our podcast Tech Startups Germany. All the recordings on this channel are made possible by Invest in Hessen (learn more here https://www.invest-in-hessen.com/home).

We will post this interview and all others as podcast(s) next Tuesday night Central European Time. Subscribe here and have them on our device when you wake up:

Audio only Tech Startups Germany by Startuprad.io iTunes https://apple.co/2Z17bfl Deezer http://bit.ly/2Qbh1rl TuneIn http://bit.ly/2M8vpzn Stitcher http://bit.ly/34xTANO Video Tech Startups Germany by Startuprad.io iTunes https://apple.co/2M8ZxKJ

We come to love the work ethics here. Frankfurt is a work minded city. Peter Hart during his Startuprad.io interview

In this interview for Invest-in-hessen.com we are talking to Peter Hart (https://www.linkedin.com/in/peter-hart-94373435/), a serial entrepreneur, based in Frankfurt. Despite being just 28 years old, Peter already launched 12 ventures. He started out back in 2015 with his consumer product brand Dr. Severin (https://drseverin.com/). During his first venture launch, Joe interviewed Peter in German back in 2015. We talk to him about his newest venture Pythia AI (https://www.pythia-ai.com/)

I dont divide between business books and private books. If you grow personally, you grow as a leader. Peter Hart during his Startuprad.io interview

We talk to him to learn more about his 12th venture, called Pythia AI (https://www.pythia-ai.de/). Pythia was started when Peter followed his data driven approach to launch new consumer products and he got approached by Rossmann (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossmann_(company)), Germanys 2nd largest chain of drug stores. The drug store chain invested in the startup (https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/pythia#section-funding-rounds) to help them with forecasting trends for product development.

In case you are wondering: The venture is named after the priest, founding and serving the Oracle of Delphi in Greek mythology (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythia).

Peter looks a bit tired in the interview, since he just returned from opening an office in Sunny Vale, in the Silicon Valley.

We are very happy with the talent pool here (in Frankfurt), especially the engineers. Peter Hart during his Startuprad.io interview

During his time in the Silicon Valley, Peter wanted to reach out to venture capital investors. He went along the two main streets where they are headquartered and knocked on their doors. Surprisingly this was very successful, and it appears no one has done this before.

Despite knocking on many doors in the Silicon Valley, Pythia is not done with their fundraising and they are looking for additional investors for their Series A fundraising.

I think philosophy goes really well with business. You formulate a more concrete business philosophy. Peter Hart during his Startuprad.io interview

Principles by Ray Dalio https://amzn.to/38ZgmB7

The man who solved the market https://amzn.to/2SZ6Jgw

What You Do Is Who You Are: How to Create Your Business Culture https://amzn.to/2SYi00x

The little prince https://amzn.to/3c6hWDm

Friedrich Nietzsches Books:

Herman Hesses Books

Before the Top Book List we talked about The hard thing about hard things https://amzn.to/32symSb

Herman Hesse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermann_Hesse

Friedrich Nietzsche https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche

Arthur Schopenhauer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer

And maybe you want to have a look at the often quoted VC Ben Horowitz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Horowitz

Follow this link:
(Audio) Pythia forecasts the next trend in consumer products - Startuprad.io

Jennifer Lawrence makes the secret agent of Russian are in Red Sparrow by Francis Lawrence (not related to work, by the second Chapter of the trilogy the Hunger Games). Charlize Theron the secret agent of the British Atomic Blonde by David Leitch had. Woe, to think that the films have something in common. Has forbidden, one interview after the other, Jennifer Lawrence. In the course of time released, of course, who wanted to put him a coat, as he on the terrace, in london, moved out Versace. You answered that with a dress an hour or so of frost, other that the five minutes are required, the photos would be it. And in the rest of the no woman has ever taken a cold, owing to which it is a backless dress (Friedrich Nietzsche, as quoted him Ennio Flaiano in language guide is important to not go unnoticed in the society; whether true or well invented, hits the point).

Red Sparrow is not Atomic Blonde, says Jennifer, for this thing called the female gaze, the last category of criticism received in the course of the harassment, and the movement #metoo. In the meantime, in terms of the Oscars, two of the artists, which was sitting not far away from the Dolby theatre is a statue of Harvey Weinstein in a Bathrobe on the sofa, a statuette in hand as bait. The Female gaze in contrast to male gaze, the previously imperato. View of women against the male gaze. Always, that it is impossible to distinguish, without trust, only intentions are. After you have read and approved the screenplay, Jennifer Lawrence is the veto has on the result. If a scene has not mentioned it, or he felt uncomfortable, the Director would have the cut in the Assembly. The film version of the agreement, ribadirsi step-by-step. A kind of final cut in sex (the other final cut not even the filmmakers, because then the dvd with the directors cut is usually longer and boring; with the gender of the trend could be reversed, who would not want to see the cutscenes from Jennifer?).

To see the movie two hours and twenty for a history of spies, you should access the whole not see a big difference just. Naked there and it seems the same to many others. We hope it served at least as Jennifer explained undressed the control over his body after the hack photo private use, in the year 2014. Very well, we are satisfied that the healing has worked. Now Jennifer is a little bit of control over his films again. The Oscars, the risk at a young age, the career, the power of the statuette as best actress in a receipt in the year of 2013 for The positive side there is no exception. Two games for the ex-ballerina of the Bolshoi theatre, after the accident is taken up as a spy (in order to ensure that hospitals are decent mother sick) are a big step in the right direction.

Read the original here:
Red Sparrow, Jennifer Lawrence, and the movement #metoo - Play Crazy Game

In 2004, political scientist Francis Fukuyama visited Israel and found himself at an unusual event. The author of The End of History and the Last Man shared a stage with Labor Party leader Shimon Peres and with Benjamin Netanyahu, who was then finance minister in the government of Ariel Sharon. At that time, several years after the attack of the World Trade Center and while the second intifada raged, the idea that the only political model still relevant in modernity was a combination of liberal-democratic regimes and capitalist-global economies, seemed dubious.

In the discussion, Peres tried to press his own concept of the New Middle East, whose spirit is compatible with Fukuyamas theory. He argued that in conditions of economic prosperity, based on free trade and cooperation between states, regional terrorism would be defeated. Netanyahu offered a far grimmer picture of the Middle East, focusing almost entirely on terrorism. He talked about Palestinian and Islamic fanaticism, about the terrorism they spawn and about the need to fight them determinedly in the foreseeable future. That future, from his point of view, looked like more of the same of what Israel was then going through.

As I left the event, in honor of Fukuyama and his work, I saw a somewhat stunned look on the American who organized the evening. Whats wrong? I asked him. I dont know what to think, he confessed, and explained: Nowhere in the world would I be able to persuade two former prime ministers, both well-known internationally, to come and talk about a philosophical book and polemicize about it. On the other hand, nowhere in the world would serious people speak publicly about a book which they obviously havent read. Did you see how embarrassed Fukuyama looked?

Indeed, neither Peres, nor, in particular, Netanyahu, addressed the important part of Fukuyamas analysis. His thesis had an empirical dimension, which was proved wrong. Around the time of his visit, the democracy indices, such as those measured by the American democracy watchdog Freedom House, started to indicate that a global recession of liberal democracy was underway. That tendency has only become stronger in recent years.

But Fukuyama didnt only address a historical reality at a given moment; his argument was also based on political imagination and how it mobilizes people. In that regard he was less mistaken. The liberal model has indeed weakened, but no alternative model has arisen, certainly not in global terms. Despite demands for reforms of various sorts, there is at present no new ideology or vision for regime, society and individuals parallel to communism in its day, for example in whose name masses of people are taking to the streets against democracy, against human rights and against capitalism (certainly not in its restrained form). It is not as if we see people demonstrating in the town square in favor of authoritarianism as an ideology, or urging the government to reduce their rights as individuals.

What we do see, rather, is primarily the erosion of the existing liberal model, for a variety of reasons (inequality, loss of community identity, migration, terrorism and more). We do not see political eros an energy, a passion around a model that creates a better future. Neither nationalism nor religion and tradition constitute a new and sweeping alternative; they are, rather, a replay of faith systems that proved disappointing in the past hence their limited strength.

In 2004, when Netanyahu stood on the stage at Tel Aviv University, it wasnt yet clear that he would become a key player, at the world level, in the conceptual vacuum that was emerging with the recession of the liberal-democratic model. It was equally impossible to know that he would be among those who would try to exploit that vacuum in order to transform democracy into a faade, behind which in fact exists a regime with soft authoritarian characteristics. That regime sanctifies one goal above all: power.

Immunity no matter what

For years, the prime minister has hardly spoken about the state of the nation and about the challenges it faces at least not in Israel, not to its citizens. This highly articulate person confines himself largely to calculated messages on Facebook, tweets and relatively brief statements in internal Likud meetings. Until his proposal late in the recent election campaign to engage in a debate with Benny Gantz, he had refrained for a decade from confronting his rivals head-on, and he has been stingy with press conferences. He was careful to be interviewed only by outlets convenient to him, particularly ahead of elections, and was apprehensive about appearing in the central media outlets, which for him constitute a dangerous realm rife with potential pitfalls.

The surprising television interview the premier gave to journalist Keren Marciano last March continues to haunt him, regarding the issue of parliamentary immunity against indictment: He denied then the possibility that he would seek such immunity from the Knesset, although he did just that later in the year and thus demonstrated his lack of credibility. Whereas his friend, U.S. President Donald Trump, talks for hours on end without choosing his words, Netanyahu adopts the opposite approach: making a conscientious effort to control his words and messages, avoiding an open dialogue with ordinary citizens. The absence of a policy platform in Likud is also consistent with this approach, which holds that words can constitute a danger, a limitation on power and its elasticity.

Netanyahus growing flight from certain uses of language raises a fundamental question: Does he have, or has he ever had, basic beliefs? A case in point is journalist Amit Segals fascinating series on Channel 12, Yemei Binyamin (Days of Benjamin), in which a lively, multi-participant debate was held on the question of whether Netanyahu believes in Greater Israel that is, incorporating the entire West Bank into sovereign Israel. Was his 2009 speech at Bar-Ilan University, in which he endorsed a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, merely a tactical device that didnt reflect a true intention to forgo territories? Or could it be that the Wye agreement and the Hebron agreement at the end of the 1990s, by means of which he committed to continuing implementation of the withdrawals required of Israel by the Oslo Accords, show that his only considerations are his and his partys political survival?

Its the same with economic issues, the relationship between religion and state, the status of the High Court of Justice in fact, on almost every subject, Netanyahu can be interpreted in several different ways: ambiguity is his middle name. But in regard to one supreme goal, he is not in the least ambiguous, and his flexibility on other issues serves this. Surprisingly, that goal is not getting the attention it deserves.

The accumulation of power in its various forms was always a goal of Zionist ideology (as it was in other countries). Leaders such as David Ben-Gurion and Zeev Jabotinsky understood that well. But in their rhetoric, power was to be wielded in order to fulfill other values of the Jewish peoples state. The components of a normative worldview, in this context, include, for Ben-Gurion, a social-democratic, republican society founded on solidarity, one that would be, a light unto the nations; and, according to Jabotinsky, a democratic state (behind an iron wall) based on individual rights and equal citizenship, including a recognition of the collective rights of the minority. The conceptual revolution of the past decade, of which Netanyahu is the principal fomenter and its embodiment, maintains that the power of the nation-state has for the first time become the primary and organizing goal of the whole; it stands on its own and is no longer part of a future vision of human goodness.

The thrust for power has made inroads all across life in Israel, so its perhaps only fitting that it also receives a dual expression in the shaping of the most important law promulgated in the Netanyahu era a Basic Law that defines the character of the state itself. On the one hand, the 2018 Nation-State Law enshrines the absolute ownership of the Jews over the state, and hence proclaims their superiority vis--vis the Arab citizens in the country. On the other hand, this law does not restrict the content of Jewish nationalism by way of values beyond it (with the exception of land settlement). Such a normative limitation of nationalism, as well as a future moral vision, existed in the Declaration of Independence, with its well-known commitment to civil and political equality of individual rights, as well as to freedom, justice and peace in the spirit of the prophets of Israel. The frightening meaning of the Nation-State Law, in contrast, is that it renders nationalism autonomous of both the Jewish and liberal universes of values, and forsakes any desire to shape the future in these terms. It cultivates a collective consciousness rife with a sense of power, one unshackled by anything that lies beyond it and this precisely in an era in which the state, as an institution that serves the potent nation, has become much more formidable than ever before.

To a certain degree, choosing the path of power is a response to the Jewish exilic past. In his 1997 book Rubber Bullets, the late political theorist Yaron Ezrahi argued that in Israel, the craving for power stems not only from the conflictual circumstances in which the state exists that is, by force of reality but also from the collective memory of a people that for the most of its history was a helpless, humiliated victim, and now wants to ensure that it will never be vulnerable again in any situation, even if this entails shutting its eyes to the suffering of others because of its own deeds. Part of Netanyahus political art lies in his ability to evoke that formative, traumatic memory, which is one of the main things that Menachem Mendel from the shtetl and Saadia from the Moroccan mellah have in common. He encourages the fusion of the historical experience of fear with the present-day anxieties of life in the brutal Middle East, and sells himself as the only figure who can fulfill the collective fantasies of Israelis for immunity under any condition.

Vertices of strength

One of the rare occasions in which Netanyahu spoke more comprehensively about his worldview was the conference of the business newspaper Globes, held in Jerusalem in December 2018. It was semi-formal, unpolished, but still an exceptional opportunity to understand Netanyahus worldview.

He began by asserting the primary insight that guides him. The weak do not survive, he said (echoing Jabotinskys well-known essay, Man is wolf to man). Nations find the strength to grow and develop, or they disappear. An ancient people like the Jews needs to learn from other ancient peoples who maintained continuity over time and whose survival is the key to their strength and their growth: for example, China and India. For Netanyahu, political action, certainly in the Middle East, must focus on one supreme goal: a constant cultivation of power in its full range. We are forging three tremendous dimensions of power, he said, and then enumerated: Military power, economic power and diplomatic power. In other words, power as a defensive and offensive ability through the use of violence; power as the accumulation of riches, assets and knowledge; and power as the ability to influence and shape actions of others.

The most important of these is military power, Netanyahu said the same point he has made on other occasions because without it, life itself would be unfeasible. Warplanes, submarines, a superb intelligence community, cyberwarfare capabilities and so forth are its foundations. Afterward comes economic power and economic growth, underlying which are a free market, privatization, competition, entrepreneurship, reduction of taxes and diminishment of regulation. Israeli technology, which focuses on the world of computers, on artificial intelligence and on big-data processing, is in the forefront of this policy, particularly through large companies and corporations. In third place is diplomatic power, manifested in strategic military alliances and in economic cooperation, including ties with countries in Africa, Asia and South America, and increasingly also with Arab states. This global influence and sway, he emphasized, derives primarily from the first two elements, and in fact the three nourish each other and constitute a single totality.

Toward the end of his speech at the conference, he was interviewed by Globes publisher Alona Bar-On. In reply to her question about the status of Israels Arab citizens, he said, We are currently fomenting something tremendous. What you see here, the tremendous revolution that minuscule Israel is becoming a rising world power, bursting out, forging ties with everyone and able to bring all our citizens Jews and non-Jews into this process. That is my vision, and I believe that in the end we will unite around this vision.

Indeed, as part of the attempt to build up Israeli power, Netanyahu and his successive governments have made a significant effort to integrate the Arab population at both the economic-productive and individual levels, while at the same time excluding them from partnership as a community with a distinct identity and inciting against them at the civil and political levels. Most recently, this includes a new threat to change the countrys border in the central Triangle area and thereby deprive many Arabs of their citizenship.

Netanyahus remarks at the Globes conference about the essence of his policy as augmenting power was not a one-time event: It is his worldview. Only recently, in a December 25 interview with the popular Army Radio, ahead of the Likud leadership contest, he listed Israels economic achievements and added, Israel has never been stronger, neither economically, nor in security, nor diplomatically, and that did not happen by chance. It happened because I am leading the country on a path of power. The premier also boasts that Israel under his leadership has become a power.

It is undeniable that Netanyahu and the governments hes headed have chalked up significant achievements in all three aspects of the strength he is referring to. Perhaps his greatest accomplishment, from his perspective, is Trumps peace plan. It is based on the existing reality in the West Bank, which was forged under the auspices of a military regime. The plan assumes a priori that at the end of the process the Palestinians will accept Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, the rejection of the right of return, Israels status as a Jewish state, Hamas disarmament and also their own hollow sovereignty.

But the most blatant translation of the existing relations of power into the shaping of the American plan lies in the fact that it makes possible unilateral annexation of 30 percent of the West Bank, without the signing of a peace treaty and without dependence on Palestinian consent. In the old world of Oslo, there was still talk of a peace agreement in terms of justice and (limited) fairness, of the memory of past injustices and responsibility for rectifying them, of the dignity of both sides and an absence of humiliation, of recognition of the interests of each people as it defines them itself, and of an avoidance of one-sided measures. In the Trump-Netanyahu plan, by contrast, all the cruelty of the existing situation as understood solely from the perspective of relations of power and dominance is presented in all its intensity. Reciting past narratives about the conflict is unproductive, the plan states theres no point rehashing narratives about who did what to whom and why.

The Trump blueprint is indeed a fresh start. It completely transforms the language and the terms in which we think about a solution to the conflict: In place of a peace agreement that is understood as a dialogue between parties that respect each other and with hard work strive to create long-term mutual trust an arrangement is proposed in which one dominant side shapes the other side in its own image and solely according to its interests and needs.

Israelis disagree about Netanyahus actual achievements or their absence. But the important issue here is the worldview that he is imparting and that some of his followers are promoting. We can assume that its not by chance that when he talks about the sources of Israels power, he doesnt mention democracy. That is nothing less than astonishing. From Pericles in Athens to Churchill in World War II, the democratic regime and the free way of life were considered the countrys most crucial source of power. For Netanyahu, however, the states resilience and status are due primarily to the fact that he personally is leading Israel on a path of power and that he is safeguarding life itself with his exceptional abilities and by the might of his hand.

What governance conceals

If human reality is grasped through the prism of power, its only natural for that notion to shape political life not only in foreign relations, but also domestically as well. In the Netanyahu era, a link that did not previously exist in Israel has been created: the imperative of safeguarding the states strength has been linked to the necessity of promoting the personal power of the leader, and the latter has been linked to the notion of efficient governance and dominance of the executive branch.

As far back as ancient Athens, democracy was depicted by its detractors as a regime that encourages factionalism, inefficiency and rule wielded by amateurs who lack experience or talent. This viewpoint occasionally led to coups in a city-state and to the adoption of a tyrannical, one-man regime. In our era, there are very few coups of that kind, but there are attempts to void democracy of most of its content. The result is the emergence of hybrid regimes, in which democracy is maintained as a faade that allows power to be wielded in practice by an authoritarian leader who uses the law and institutions to promote his or her personal sway.

Emergency situations, certainly if theyre chronic, provide a good excuse for leaders to create a regime of this kind. In Israel of 2020, journalists arent thrown into jail the way they are in Turkey, universities arent shut down as happens in Hungary, and the election process itself remains relatively untainted but the mistrust of and contempt for democracy run deep. For example, a great many parties have adopted the principle of concentrating power in the hands of a single leader, and lack internal democracy and elections. As a result, there arent 120 independent MKs in Israel (as it is, the Knesset is a small parliament relative to the size of the population); instead, the whole system is controlled by a few individuals, and to justify their status, a culture of personality cult is taking root, something that demeans both the MKs and the public.

Likud does have internal elections, but its well-known DNA, as the norms by which it operates are often called, actually exist from the end of the Menachem Begin era until the second Netanyahu era) means that the leaders status is not at risk.

In fact, in adopting power as the dominant and organizing principle, the prime minister is completely circumventing democratic politics, which is based on discussion, on an exchange of views and of course on disputes over ideas both within the parties and outside them. Citizens can disagree over whether to view those who came from Eritrea to Israel as labor migrants or as refugees entitled to protection, and over whether to expand the welfare state or shrink it. But Netanyahu hardly engages in such concrete issues of policy: He focuses on the necessity of extending the states power and what sort of political debate can take place about such an overarching goal when it is presented as stemming from the need to preserve citizens very existence?

Whereas Netanyahus rhetoric is, on the one hand, engaged in incitement against the left and the elites, on the other hand, it hammers into the collective consciousness an interest that is seemingly shared by the entire public an interest we can call existential and pre-political which places him outside and above every concrete political dispute: In a different league. Below, in the dregs of democracy, there are still people who are occupied with shifting ideological disputes, whereas the prime minister without a platform is the only one who has the ability to identify the deep and stable will of the entire nation and all of its segments: power for the sake of survival. And with such a reduction and flattening of democratic politics, who really needs a house of representatives that possesses significance and importance of its own? The prime minister doesnt even need the party as a mediator and as a pluralistic body he is in direct communication with the public via Facebook.

This is also the most important context in which the discourse about governance in Israel arose by the right, in recent years a discourse that was not necessarily intended to solve the problems of the countrys citizens by improving effectiveness. (Whats the connection between governance and the unwillingness of leaders to confront frequent rocket fire from the Gaza Strip, overcrowding in hospitals, traffic jams and air pollution?) Rather, the main purpose of this discourse is to buttress the standing of a muscular executive branch vis--vis the legislative branch and especially the judicial branch; it seeks to justify the concentration of power in the hands of the government and the person who heads it.

Absolute supremacy

In Israel, a discussion about power cannot take place in disassociation from the military regime in the West Bank (which operates at different levels of involvement in Palestinians lives). If the backsliding of democracy in Israel is part of a global phenomenon, it also has very local causes. The military regime running the occupation has existed for 53 years, and most Israelis were born into it. It exists adjacent to Israel and in practice as part of the country. The Palestinians in the territories are subordinate to it, but so are the hundreds of thousands of Israelis who live there (at least as long as the settlements havent been formally annexed to Israel), and it is maintained by successive generations of soldiers. Within the Israeli elite are senior figures who were responsible over many years for managing the regime, which has proven to be highly effective as a model for controlling a population. Its not surprising, then, that the rationale of that regime has penetrated that of Israel proper, in a process that runs deeper than political views of one sort or another.

Although a military regime that is formed after an occupation of a foreign territory is subject to international law, it embodies a type of primary sovereignty in which there is no separation of branches and power has one center only. In this regime, there is dominance of the executive branch: It is the very embodiment of unhindered governance. The supreme law in this administration is promulgated by the military commander in the form of generals orders, and the military judges, though they do not operate according to orders from their superiors, do act to ensure the rulers preservation and security. The act of governing is thus carried out on the basis of a centralist conception of sovereignty as embodied in one person (the military commander responsible for the territory); in silence and without any need for a public sphere, for explanation or discussion; by promulgation of laws (orders) that serve above all the continuity and stability of the regime, not necessarily the needs of the residents; and with the commander-sovereigns absolute supremacy over those who are subject to his authority, as though they were different types of human beings.

For many years, Israeli democracy succeeded in separating this method of military rule, which is based wholly on the use of power (military, in this case), from developments inside Israel itself but apparently no longer. It would be mainly the representatives of the Israeli citizens who are subordinate to the military regime and know it first-hand the various settlers parties who would adopt elements of this regime model and rationale, contribute to their integration into Israeli democracy, and who would help Netanyahu justify his vision of himself as the authentic embodiment of Israeli sovereignty.

Sanctifying strength, scorning democracy

An increasing focus on the crucial role of power in politics has yet another important advantage for the criminally accused Benjamin Netanyahu, who is set to face trial on charges of fraud, breach of trust and acceptance of bribes beginning March 17. Contemplating political life in terms of power and strength alone makes it possible for him to belittle the gravity of the offenses hes charged with.

Institutions and norms, which are the fruit of generations of work, place restraints on those who rule; in a functioning democracy, there is an attempt to decentralize power and authority and to critique them. Netanyahus attacks on the institution of the press and his desire to control media outlets like Walla News are part of his attempt to avoid public critiques. Whereas the media is external and independent, Netanyahu has even called into question the integrity and motivations of actors and institutions representing part of the state. Indeed, he has gone so far as to allege that the police and the state prosecution have attempted to foment a governmental coup against him, as though he were an outsider and not a person who has embodied the state establishment for decades and who achieved his status through it. Instead of the prime minister acting according to the public-institutional interest, which of course includes respecting the Israeli legal and judicial system, he began defining this interest as mandating first and foremost his continued rule.

Even more depressing is the damage he is causing to the public ethic: The prime minister is the No. 1 educator in the country, a subject of emulation and a figure who influences our childrens concept of a desirable personality. Although anyone familiar with the Bible doesnt expect a leader to be a saint, the text of the indictment obligatory reading for every citizen of Israel does not paint a picture of a person who tripped up once, exceptionally. Rather, the picture that emerges is of a serial liar who assails even facts, an uninhibited hedonist whose sense of entitlement puts him above the law, a person who is driven by a notion of whats good for him and who uses the states resources as though they were his personal property. Its difficult to quantify the long-term damage that Netanyahu has caused to Israels ethical infrastructure: Can a democratic society, one based on mutual trust and faith in peoples ability for self-rule, be based on values like these?

Its doubtful that Netanyahus deeds would have taken place with the brazenness that characterizes them without the broader separation between power and ethics in Israel, one that gradually formed primarily in the wake of the occupation. If the human condition is by its nature a relentless struggle for survival between the weak and the strong as Netanyahu professes, and if states are measured by their concrete strength and not by the excellence of the character and virtues of their citizens then an ethical discussion in public life becomes a luxury. On the one hand, how can one complain about the plunder of land, the prevention of freedom of movement, the unjustified death of a demonstrator, the deprivation of the right to self-determination and more, if the way of the world is to have conquerors and conquered? On the other hand, why criticize a prime minister for his personal criminal offenses and his lack of brakes if he is a magician when it comes to wielding the power and influence needed to preserve the occupation, promote annexation in the West Bank and bolster Israels international standing? Reality, as noted, cannot be judged in moral terms of good and evil, of justice and wrongdoing, but according to the implementation or non-implementation of power politics at the national and personal levels.

The path to this line of thought in modernity was carved out by Friedrich Nietzsche. Hand in hand with our recognition of the death of God, he said, we must also liberate ourselves from the Judeo-Christian perception of the good and the just vs. evil and sin. Nietzsche was particularly critical of the slave morality in that tradition, which openly advocates empathy for the other, modesty, decency, a vigilant conscience, a sense of guilt and the encouragement of atonement and the like. That morality must be rejected, he maintained, because man is fundamentally driven by a desire for power, an urge to shape himself and the world around him, including his moral codes. The innermost essence of being is will to power, Nietzsche says, and, It is part of the concept of the living that it must grow that it must extend its power. Nietzsche does not usually draw a connection between power and ruling over others, nor does he identify it with violence. Power in his eyes requires primarily an ability to sublimate, meaning that a person translates natural energy and free will into an ability to act in the world and to shape himself creatively and authentically.

But at times Nietzsche attributes a darker import to the will to power. For example, in his book The Will to Power (a controversial work), as it was edited by his sister after his death), he writes, At least a people might just as well designate as a right its need to conquer, its lust for power, whether by means of arms or by trade, commerce and colonization the right to growth, perhaps. A society that definitely and instinctively gives up war and conquest is in decline: It is ripe for democracy and the rule of shopkeepers. The sanctity of the power of a nation (not necessarily the German nation) thus involves not only legitimization to seize control of others and of their land, but also entails scorn for democracy and liberalism, which introduce anti-bellicose tendencies and universal elements into the political culture.

Nietzsche influenced many and diverse thinkers and writers of early Zionism, among them Martin Buber, Yosef Haim Brenner, the writer Gershon Shofman and Uri Nissan Gnessin. They were drawn to the radicalism, the individualism and the freedom from conventions they found in him. More than anyone else, Nietzsche influenced the writer Micha Josef Berdyczewski (the favorite author of the young Ben-Gurion). Whereas Ahad Haam spoke about a strict Jewish national morality that included reluctance to use violence, Berdyczewski wrote, in the spirit of Nietzsche, that conquest of the land is certainly a national endeavor and it also rests on a certain national morality, but it stands in major conflict with human morality. The core of national morality is simple: self-love of the people .... In contrast, the purist national morality of Ahad Haam, Berdyczewski added, is founded on the immorality of conquering lands, expanding their borders, doing away with the faltering and inheriting their place.

These intellectual connections between Nietzsche and Zionist figures are too complex to be delineated here. They are well described and analyzed by David Ohana in his Hebrew-language book Zarathustra in Jerusalem, which includes a discussion of Nietzsches influence on the Revisionist movement as well as on the pre-state Lehi organization and on one of its members, the thinker Israel Eldad, Nietzsches translator into Hebrew. Suffice it say here that the concept of power that the German philosopher articulated intertwined well with the rebellion of some Zionists against the dominance of the discourse of commandment and transgression, of good and evil in Judaism, and with the understanding that Zionism would succeed only if it recognized that relations between nations are founded (also) on force.

Thus, until recently, the worship and role of power in Israeli politics remained constrained by various faith systems socialism, liberalism, the Jewish tradition and, some would say, even currents in religious Zionism. However, these limiting ideologies and ideas are increasingly crumbling in Israel. The discourse of power trickled down steadily, and in order to confront Netanyahu, three former Israel Defense Forces chiefs of staff gathered together at the head of one slate in the hope that their reservoirs of symbolic power would suffice to defeat him; their slate, it should be noted, is composed of three parties, none of which has free internal elections. The legacy of the Netanyahu era is above all the transformation of power into an end in and of itself, and into an autonomous entity. Israeli democracy will be coping the implications of this legacy long after he is gone.

Eyal Chowers teaches political philosophy at Tel Aviv University. His book The Political Philosophy of Zionism: Trading Jewish Words for a Hebraic Land, was published by Cambridge University Press in 2012.

Read the original here:
Netanyahu's worldview? All means sanctify the pursuit of power - Haaretz

Chicago Public Library (Image byDavid MarkfromPixabay)

Chicago, Carl Sandburgs city of big shoulders, is not necessarily thought of as a literary city. As home to the famous Poetry magazine and countless successful authors, the Windy City has carved out a place as a literary capital that takes a back seat to no one, including our own New York City.

As Chicago took off as Americas leading manufacturing city in the early 20th century, it attracted many an ambitious youngster from the rural Midwest and the American South. Chicago wanted to be known as a cultural capital in addition to an industrial hub. In time, so many aspiring writers flocked to the city that the joke was that one couldnt take two steps in either direction without bumping into a budding poet.

Sandburg was a native of Galesburg who worked as a newspaperman before gaining fame as a biographer of Abraham Lincoln while competing with Robert Frost for the title of the good gray poet originally held by Long Islands Walt Whitman.

Another Midwesterner who made a beeline for the big city was Ernest Hemingway. A native of suburban Oak Park, Hemingway was too restless for Chicago or the U.S. itself, but as a young man, did much journalistic work in the big city while polishing his fiction skills.

Chicago as a venue for fiction hit high gear with the sprawling novels of Theodore Dreiser, an Indiana native who also worked in the rough and tumble world of Chicago journalism. The city was a backdrop for such classics as Sister Carrie (1900) and An American Tragedy (1925), works dramatizing the great American obsession of pursuing wealth at virtually all costs.

As the city grew, its native sons also contributed to literary Chicago. Ben Hecht followed the Hemingway mode of working as both a newspaperman and a novelist, before writing screenplays in Hollywood. Nelson Algren continued the naturalist tradition of both Dreiser and Hemingway in such popular novels as The Man With The Golden Arm (1949). His nonfiction book, Chicago: A City On The Make (1951) became synonymous with the citys image as a haven for hustlers and swindlers of all types.

We were mad for literature, wrote the novelist Saul Bellow of his West Side pals as they read and discussed Nietzsche and Spengler during the Depression-era 1930s. Bellows friends included Isaac Rosenfeld and Oscar Tarnov, both highly regarded novelists. It was Bellow, however, in such wide-ranging novels as The Adventures of Augie March (1953), Herzog (1964), Humboldts Gift (1975), The Deans December (1982) and Ravelstein (1999) who made the city come alive for millions of readers around the world. Bellows friend, Phillip Roth, was not a native of Chicago, but he used the city as the backdrop for his 1962 novel, Letting Go. Bette Howland, another writer in the Bellow orbit, captured the bleak side of the city in Blue In Chicago (1978). Journalists competed with novelists to best capture the citys frenetic pace. Studs Terkel was a broadcast journalist who, like Bellow, immortalized the city in such thick classics as Division Street (1967) and Working (1974), in which average Chicagoans talked into the tape recorder to tell the joys and anguish of everyday life in the imperial city. Mike Royko, the longtime newspaper columnist, also captured the citys color in thousands of columns, some collected in such volumes as Sez Who? Sez Me (1983) and Like I Was Sayin (1985). Roykos 1971 biography of longtime mayor Richard Daly, Boss, became another instant classic.

Central to the citys intellectual life is the University of Chicago. The South Side-based institution has boasted numerous intellectuals vital to the growth of conservative thought in the United States. Its faculty has included such Nobel Prize Laureates as Milton Friedman and Frederick von Hayek, both of whom championed free market economics in a Keynesian age, and in the process changed the worlds mind about how next to achieve prosperity.

University of Chicago

Other University of Chicago professors who fought a rearguard action for the traditional West were Leo Strauss, Edwards Shils, Richard Weaver and Allan Bloom. Weavers Ideas Have Consequences (1948) became a defining text in the bid to attract traditionalists and libertarians under the same conservative banner. Blooms 1987 best seller The Closing Of The American Mind put the author at ground central of the coming culture wars of the 1990s and beyond. The university, under the legendary leadership of Robert Hutchins, became famous for championing the Great Books pro-Western curriculum, which became the source of both its fame and controversy. Also central to American conservatism was the Chicago-based Regnery Gateway publishing house, which introduced the public to such prolific authors as Russell Kirk and William F. Buckley, Jr. before making the move to the more prosperous pastures of Washington, DC.

Recent decades have seen the rise of such bestselling authors as Scott Turow, plus James Atlas, Bellows first major biographer. A most prolific author has been the essayist, Joseph Epstein. A literary and cultural critic, Epstein has been a keen, if somber, observer of American life for decades, culminating in his longtime editorship of The American Scholar. His many thought-provoking books include Essays In Biography (2012) and A Literary Education (2014).

Life in Chicago, Bellow once maintained, is an ongoing high wire act. Will the city make it or eventually collapse? Plenty of writers will be chronicling the citys trajectory as the years unwind.

Continue reading here:
Literary Chicago: A Haven For Hustlers And Swindlers - Long Island Weekly News

If this was said in the mythological context, then perhaps it is not sure. But now science has also started to believe that meditation forms an invisible shield. Also, in that environment, this shield protects against infections surrounding the body. According to the experts, meditating twenty minutes daily should be done, then there are changes in the body that it starts to combat diseases and stress attacks. It does not require separate medical precautions.

In addition, during the research work, Herbert was attracted to attention by experimenting on the working of the cardiovascular system and the reciprocal relations of the emotions. Apart from this, he along with his colleague Dr. Wallace and his team tested about two thousand persons, who used to meditate regularly. Apart from this, he has presented the findings of the study in the book Response Medicine and Tension. At the same time, he has written that due to meditation, there is also an increase in the inhibition capacity of a person's skin. Along with this, within three minutes, the oxygen consumption rate decreases by sixteen percent within three minutes, although in five hours of sleep there is only eight percent reduction.

For your information, let us tell youthat an experiment similar to this was also done by Dr. Peter Fenwick of Madslow Hospital and Institute of Psychiatry, London. Along with this, he has written in his book 'Meditation and Science' that he examined the electrical activity of the brain of some people who had been practicing meditation regularly for at least a year. Apparent changes were noted at the time of meditation. At the same time, the freshness gained by these waves, the body and mind gather enough strength to withstand external adversities.

If this was said in the mythological context, then perhaps it is not sure. But now science has also started to believe that meditation forms an invisible shield. Also, in that environment, this shield protects against infections surrounding the body. According to the experts, meditating twenty minutes daily should be done, then there are changes in the body that it starts to combat diseases and stress attacks. It does not require separate medical precautions.

In addition, during the research work, Herbert was attracted to attention by experimenting on the working of the cardiovascular system and the reciprocal relations of the emotions. Apart from this, he along with his colleague Dr. Wallace and his team tested about two thousand persons, who used to meditate regularly. Apart from this, he has presented the findings of the study in the book Response Medicine and Tension. At the same time, he has written that due to meditation, there is also an increase in the inhibition capacity of a person's skin. Along with this, within three minutes, the oxygen consumption rate decreases by sixteen percent within three minutes, although in five hours of sleep there is only eight percent reduction.

For your information, let us tell youthat an experiment similar to this was also done by Dr. Peter Fenwick of Madslow Hospital and Institute of Psychiatry, London. Along with this, he has written in his book 'Meditation and Science' that he examined the electrical activity of the brain of some people who had been practicing meditation regularly for at least a year. Apparent changes were noted at the time of meditation. At the same time, the freshness gained by these waves, the body and mind gather enough strength to withstand external adversities.

Also Read:

Read this article:

These are the amazing benefits of meditation - News Track English

Charles Warner | The Union Times Sally Summers sings Sign Us With Ashes during the Ash Wednesday Community Service at Grace Methodist Church on Ash Wednesday. Ash Wednesday is the start of the 40 days of the Lenten Season, a time of preparation for Christians through prayer, doing penance, mortifying the flesh, repentance of sins, almsgiving, and self-denial. Its institutional purpose is heightened in the annual commemoration of Holy Week, which commemorates the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, beginning on Palm Sunday when Christ entered Jerusalem, through His crucifixion on Good Friday, and culminating with His resurrection on Easter Sunday.

UNION What would give up for Lent? What should give up for Lent?

Lent is a six-week period that begins with Ash Wednesday and ends approximately six weeks later before Easter Sunday. It is traditionally described as lasting 40 days, the number of days Jesus Christ spent in the wilderness before beginning His earthly ministry and during which He faced and rejected three temptations offered Him by Satan.

The institutional purpose of Lent is to prepare Christians through such things as prayer, doing penance, mortifying the flesh, repentance of sins, almsgiving, and self-denial. Its institutional purpose is heightened in the annual commemoration of Holy Week, which commemorates the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, beginning on Palm Sunday when Christ entered Jerusalem, through His crucifixion on Good Friday, and culminating with His resurrection on Easter Sunday.

Locally, Lent is celebrated at Grace United Methodist Church which hosts a service each Wednesday during the Lenten Season. Each service is lead and the Lenten message delivered by a different minister from a different church in Union County. After each ceremony, worshippers adjourn to the Grace Methodist Social Hall where they will enjoy a meal prepared by church members.

This year, Ash Wednesday was February 26, and, as it has for many years, Grace Methodist held its annual Ash Wednesday Community Service that day.

As in previous years, the service included the Lenten Meditation, the sermon delivered by a local minister. Wednesdays Lenten Meditation was delivered by Rev. David Bauknight, Pastor of Grace Methodist Church, who began by telling a story about the confrontation between a priest and a mugger during Lent.

The priest was walking down an alley at night in a bad section of town when a mugger steps out of the shadows behind him and puts a knife to his back and demands all his money. Terrified, the priest turns around, opening his coat to give the mugger what he wants. In doing so, he reveals his clerical collar. The mugger, realizing hes dealing with a man of God, steps away, apologizing profusely, saying he doesnt want the priests money. The priest, however, does reach into his pocket and offers the mugger a cigar. The mugger, however, says he cant take the cigar because hes given up smoking for Lent.

Bauknight then spoke about how that when people think of Lent they often associate it with giving up something, usually something they enjoy. He said while this is true it often leads people to view Lent as something unpleasant because they are giving up fun things. However, he said that this is a misunderstanding of Lent which he said is best illustrated by the phrase spring has sprung, which he said is a good time we can be part of. Bauknight said the purpose of Lent is to remind us of the time Jesus spent in the wilderness, a time of purification and preparation that Christ underwent in preparation for His ministry on earth in which He preached and taught about humanitys relationship to God, bringing the message that God cares for each and every one of His children.

Lent, Bauknight said, is time we think about what God is asking of us to bring us closer to Him through Jesus Christ, a process that He assists us in by sending His children comfort and guidance through His Holy Spirit.

The question remains, however, what would you give up for Lent? Or, better yet, what should you give up for Lent that would draw you closer to God? Bauknight made some suggestions about what we can give up for Lent.

Grumbling

Bauknight suggested that something we can give up for Lent would be grumbling, pointing to Ephesians 5 which calls upon us to be giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

15 Minutes In Bed

Bauknight also suggested giving up 10-15 minutes in bed and instead spending that time in prayer, studying The Bible, having a devotional, things that can help give us a better understanding of Gods love for us and what He wants for us.

Finding Fault

Bauknight also suggested giving up finding fault in others, pointing out that while constructive criticism is a good thing, everyone has faults and that each of us hopes others will overlook our faults so each of us should do the same for others.

Speaking Unkindly

Bauknight also suggested giving up speaking unkindly of others and instead speaking of others in ways that are kindly and uplifting.

Hatred

Bauknight also suggested giving up hatred of others and instead practice loving one another, pointing out that love covers a multitude of sins and so each us should be generous in Christian love for others.

Worrying

Bauknight also suggested giving up worrying and instead turning the things that are worrying us over to God and live for today and let Gods grace be sufficient in helping us through the challenges of life.

TV

Bauknight suggested giving up TV one evening a week and instead using that time to go visit someone who might be in need.

Spending

Bauknight suggested giving up buying anything but essentials and instead using the money to give to others who are struggling with obtaining the necessities of life.

Judging Others

Bauknight also suggested giving up judging the appearance of others according by the standards of the world and instead look at others as Christ looks at all of us.

Giving up these things, Bauknight said, is in keeping with the spirit of Lent, bringing us to a closer understanding and appreciation of all that Christ has done for us including His suffering and sacrifice on the cross and enabled us to truly prepare ourselves for the sheer job of Easter morning when Christ rose from the dead in triumph over death, hell, and the grave.

Lenten Season is continuing and so are the Lenten Community Services at Grace Methodist Church. The next service will be held today (March 4) at noon with the Lenten Meditation delivered by Rev. Lee Moseley of Union Presbyterian Church.

Each Lenten Service in the Grace Methodist Sanctuary is followed by a $7 lunch in the church social hall. Todays menu features chicken casserole, green beans, fruit salad, rolls, dessert, tea & coffee.

The remaining services will be held on the following dates with the following ministers leading worship and the following menus served those days:

Wednesday, March 11

Speaker Father Mike McCafferty from St. Augustine Catholic Church

Menu Baked Ham, potato salad, green beans, sliced cucumbers, cherry tomatoes, rolls, dessert, tea & coffee

Wednesday, March 18

Speaker Rev. Merritt Wentz from Bethel/Duncan Acres UMC

Menu BBQ w/buns, baked beans, coleslaw, potato chips, pickles, dessert, tea & coffee

Wednesday, March 25

Speaker Rev. Robbie Stollger from First Baptist Church

Menu Meatballs w/sauce, copper pennies, brown rice, dessert, tea & coffee

Wednesday, April 1

Speaker Rev. Jeff Farmer from Sardis UMC

Menu Pork Loin, Asian slaw, sweet potatoes, rolls, dessert, tea & coffee

Wednesday, April 8

Speaker Rev. Dr. A.L. Brackett from St. Paul Baptist Church

Menu Fried chicken, green beans, macaroni/cheese, biscuits, dessert, tea & coffee

Charles Warner | The Union Times Rev. David Bauknight, Pastor of Grace Methodist Church, delivers the Lenten Meditation during the Ash Wednesday Community Service hosted by the church. Grace Methodist hosts a series of Lenten Services during Lent, the 40-day period that begins on Ash Wednesday and ends just before Easter. During his Lenten Meditation, Bauknight spoke about the things people can give up for Lent that can help draw them closer to God such as grumbling, worrying, hatred, and judging others.

https://www.uniondailytimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/web1_thumbnail_20200226_120244.jpgCharles Warner | The Union Times Rev. David Bauknight, Pastor of Grace Methodist Church, delivers the Lenten Meditation during the Ash Wednesday Community Service hosted by the church. Grace Methodist hosts a series of Lenten Services during Lent, the 40-day period that begins on Ash Wednesday and ends just before Easter. During his Lenten Meditation, Bauknight spoke about the things people can give up for Lent that can help draw them closer to God such as grumbling, worrying, hatred, and judging others.

Charles Warner | The Union Times The Ash Wednesday Community Service hosted by Grace Methodist Church on Ash Wednesday (February 26) featured the singing of hymns including Have Thine Own Way Lord and What Wondrous Love Is This! Those attending also took part in the Call To Worship and Prayer In Unison while also enjoying the performance of In The Hour of Trial during the Prelude and The Glory of These Forty Days by Organist Tommy Bishop.

https://www.uniondailytimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/web1_thumbnail_20200226_120357.jpgCharles Warner | The Union Times The Ash Wednesday Community Service hosted by Grace Methodist Church on Ash Wednesday (February 26) featured the singing of hymns including Have Thine Own Way Lord and What Wondrous Love Is This! Those attending also took part in the Call To Worship and Prayer In Unison while also enjoying the performance of In The Hour of Trial during the Prelude and The Glory of These Forty Days by Organist Tommy Bishop.

Charles Warner | The Union Times Sally Summers sings Sign Us With Ashes during the Ash Wednesday Community Service at Grace Methodist Church on Ash Wednesday. Ash Wednesday is the start of the 40 days of the Lenten Season, a time of preparation for Christians through prayer, doing penance, mortifying the flesh, repentance of sins, almsgiving, and self-denial. Its institutional purpose is heightened in the annual commemoration of Holy Week, which commemorates the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, beginning on Palm Sunday when Christ entered Jerusalem, through His crucifixion on Good Friday, and culminating with His resurrection on Easter Sunday.

https://www.uniondailytimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/web1_thumbnail_20200226_120608.jpgCharles Warner | The Union Times Sally Summers sings Sign Us With Ashes during the Ash Wednesday Community Service at Grace Methodist Church on Ash Wednesday. Ash Wednesday is the start of the 40 days of the Lenten Season, a time of preparation for Christians through prayer, doing penance, mortifying the flesh, repentance of sins, almsgiving, and self-denial. Its institutional purpose is heightened in the annual commemoration of Holy Week, which commemorates the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, beginning on Palm Sunday when Christ entered Jerusalem, through His crucifixion on Good Friday, and culminating with His resurrection on Easter Sunday.

Charles Warner | The Union Times Kathy Stepp has a cross drawn on her forehead by the Rev. David Bauknight of Grace Methodist Church during the Imposition of the Ashes that concluded the Ash Wednesday service hosted by Grace Methodist last Wednesday. Ash Wednesday is the first day of Lent, the six weeks leading up to Easter Sunday. Each year Grace United Methodist Church hosts a celebration of Lent with a service each Wednesday for the duration of the Lenten Season. Each service features a different minister from a different church in Union County delivering the Lenten Meditation. Bauknight delivered the Lenten Meditation last Wednesday and the Lenten Meditation at todays service will be delivered by the Rev. Lee Moseley of Union Presbyterian Church.

https://www.uniondailytimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/web1_thumbnail_20200226_122557.jpgCharles Warner | The Union Times Kathy Stepp has a cross drawn on her forehead by the Rev. David Bauknight of Grace Methodist Church during the Imposition of the Ashes that concluded the Ash Wednesday service hosted by Grace Methodist last Wednesday. Ash Wednesday is the first day of Lent, the six weeks leading up to Easter Sunday. Each year Grace United Methodist Church hosts a celebration of Lent with a service each Wednesday for the duration of the Lenten Season. Each service features a different minister from a different church in Union County delivering the Lenten Meditation. Bauknight delivered the Lenten Meditation last Wednesday and the Lenten Meditation at todays service will be delivered by the Rev. Lee Moseley of Union Presbyterian Church.

Grace Methodist hosts Ash Wednesday service

Charles Warner can be reached at 864-762-4090.

[ajax_load_more seo="true" posts_per_page="1" offset="1" ontainer_type="div" repeater="template_1" post_type="post" transition="none" button_label="Next Article" category="Church"]

Originally posted here:

The priest, the mugger, and Lent - Union Daily Times

Peterson himself described some of its symptomatic features in Maps of Meaning when he discusses how the breakdown of traditional mythopoetic traditions generated a sense of nihilistic uncertainty

Introduction

We live in an increasingly chaotic world. This owes much to the precarity engendered by 21st century neoliberalism, which put forward the allure of unlimited personal freedom so long as working people and minorities abandoned their civic capacity to demand egalitarian change. In the aftermath of the 2008 Recessionwhen the contradictions and instabilities of the Washington consensus and neoliberal governance exposed the naked emperor in all his ideological frailtyone saw a resurgence of energy on the Left. Many once more saw the opportunity to push for a fairer world, where resources and power were distributed in a more just manner. These developments are climaxing now in the push to get genuinely Left candidates into office in both the United Kingdom and the United States, which would solidify a major sea change in the politics of developed states.

The Decay of the Post-Modern Epoch

For all the optimism this may induce, every progressive step forward brings with it the risk of conservative reaction. We are currently inhabiting a highly reactionary period, with post-modern conservatives like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson advancing right-wing agendas designed to re-entrench traditional authority figures (and groups) atop the social hierarchy. Many are calling for the retreat of democracyor are castigating the advance of marginalized groups who agitate for their fair share, dismissing them as the resentful, ungratefulproduct of so called post-modern neo Marxist indoctrination. By far the most famous intellectual associated with this pushback is Jordan Peterson. The Canadian psychologist and University of Toronto Professor is the author of the best-selling 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos and has millions of followers on YouTube and Twitter. He is also well-known as a critic of the radical left, characterizing social justice activists as totalitarian and offer scathing denunciations of progressive thinkers and agitators. Peterson is also a frequent guest at various conservativemedia outlets to denounce the evils of political correctness and identity politics. These efforts have made him a hero to many conservatives, while also catalyzing an onslaught of progressive commentary pointing out the numerous flaws in his analysis. These shortcomings range from his questionable understanding ofleft-wing theory to his unfortunate tendency to associate with some unsavory figures on thefar-right,which cost him a prestigious gig at Cambridge. These critiques are often well-founded, but so far there has been a lack of systematic engagement with his thinking as a whole. This includes a lack of in-depth examination of his works such asMaps of Meaning and his other academic publications.

Our bookMyth and Mayhem: A Leftist Critique of Jordan Peterson is intended to fill this gap. It is going to be released on April 24th with Zero Books. It examines Petersons intellectual output and offers comprehensive criticisms of many dimensions of his thought, ranging from his support for capitalism to his denunciation of the post-modern left. It is written by four authors, Matt McManus, Ben Burgis, Conrad Hamilton, and Marion Trejo, each of whom brings their respective expertise to the table when examining Petersons work. The book also includes a lengthy introduction by Slavoj iek, which both examines the place of Peterson in contemporary culture and looks back on their debate several months ago.

One of the major topics of analysis is the nature of post-modernity and how to deal with it. Post-modernism is typically described as a left-wing philosophical outlook, and it is often misleadingly lumped in with a number of different forms of identity politics such as radical feminism. However, these various other approaches such as radical feminism have independently complex genealogies and outlooks. While there are certainly left-wing forms of political agitation, post-modernity is better interpreted as a cultural condition characteristic of late 20th and early 21st century life. Peterson himself described some of its symptomatic features in Maps of Meaning when he discusses how the breakdown of traditional mythopoetic traditions generated a sense of nihilistic uncertainty, leading some to retreat into cynicism and others to embrace new dogmatisms.

What Peterson misses is the way in which capitalist processes contributed to the upending of traditional values and the establishment of an increasingly relativistic culture. Professor Gabriel Andrade expressed a similar point in his recent article Listen Jordan Peterson, Marx Is Your Friend. The characteristic feature of capitalismas Marx and Engels expressed in The Communist Manifestois that it is a revolutionary mode of production where all that is sacred is profaned and, everything that is solid melts into air. The logic of capital is to quantify the value of everything in the world so commodities can be placed into relations of exchange with one another. Each thing that exists has its price. This is true even of human beings, which even the classical liberals like Kant insisted should not be subjected to the quantifiable appraisals of capital. For Kant, each human being possessed an inherent dignity which placed a person, beyond price. By contrast in the neoliberal capitalist era of the 21st century, human beings must have a price:about $10 million USD,according to the EPA. The sacred quality of life that persisted in earlier epochswhere each individual was considered beyond price as a unique subject of Gods loveis replaced by an era where atomized individuals have a carefully calculated relative value, which can be traded off against other values. As this logic gradually permeates all areas of the lifeworld, we see even religious beliefs for which people live and died given an instrumental worth related to health and good-functioning in society.

Conclusion: An Ongoing Project

Our ambition is for our book to be a jumping off point for a more robust discussion on Peterson and the political right generally. With that in mind the authors have also prepared a websiterun by our online manager Greg Talion, which is taking submissions for articles discussing and criticizing any element of Petersons thought from a Left perspective. Anyone interested in making a contribution is welcome to submit to us from any theoretical background. We are also very open to submissions defending Peterson provided they are written in a spirit of dialogue and debate. With that said, we are especially interested in essays criticizing Peterson from a feminist, critical race, queer-theoretical, and socialist perspective. The website should supplement Myth and Mayhembyproviding an ongoing intellectual resource for activists and intellectuals eager to push against Petersonian argumentsor other positions staked out by the Right. These resources are vital in a reactionary era. This is all the more the casewhen for the first time in decadesthere is a serious opportunity to win the battle of ideas along with political power ala the election of a Democratic Socialist candidate to the White House.

Matt McManus is Professor of Politics and International Relations at Tec de Monterrey, and the author of Making Human Dignity Central to International Human Rights Law and The Rise of Post-Modern Conservatism. His new projects include co-authoring a critical monograph on Jordan Peterson and a book on liberal rights for Palgrave MacMillan. Matt can be reached atmattmcmanus300@gmail.comor added on twitter vie@mattpolprof

See more here:

Announcing the Release of Myth and Mayhem: A Leftist Critique of Jordan Peterson - Merion West