Former Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh here on Friday stressed the need for unity of thought and action, saying it was required now more than ever.

"More than any other period of human history, the need for unity of thought and action today is the most urgent," said the former PM speaking on the concluding day of an international conference on Guru Nanak Dev by the Centre for Research in Rural and Industrial Development (CRRID) here.

"When the world is breaking up into fragments, and fragments clash with fragments, surrendering all sense and purpose of living for the larger humanity, it is the humanity which seeks transcendence from narrow limits and boundaries," Singh stressed.

Saying that today's world was beset with violence and rejection, the former PM said the humanity needed to provide succour to the people "ejected from their land and hearth".

"We are hearing the cry of the refugees and their children in the middle east, we hear the cry of the deprived and we hear the cry of those who are abandoned by the unjust social and economic order," he said.

The former prime minister also called for an alternative model of society based on truth, gender equality, protection of the environment and universal responsibility due to serious challenges posed by unchecked exploitation of natural resources, growing race for arms, continued exploitation of the poor by the rich and growing environmental degradation.

"For a lasting peace in the turbulent world that we live in, let me conclude by offering a prayer from the Guru Granth Sahib: This world is burning O' Lord, show thy mercy, thy grace and save it through whatever door thou can," said Singh.

Earlier, speaking on the Sikhism founder he said, "Guru Nanak Dev ji's hymns contained in the Guru Granth Sahib show that India at that time was passing through a period of civilisational conflict."

"Fortunately, the wise and women from different faiths joined together for the cause of peace and love, which resulted in the formation of the Bhakti and Sufi movements," he added.

Singh said both movements emphasised transcending narrow boundaries created in the name of caste, colour, creed and preached love, peace and devotion to God.

He said Guru Nanak demonstrated his concern for the poor and needy at an early age when he was given Rs 20 by his father for a profitable business.

Instead, he purchased food for hungry sadhus and began the institution of langar (free community kitchen), where food was served to all without any distinction of high and low, he said.

Speaking on the stay of the Guru at Sultanpur Lodhi, where he got enlightenment on the banks of the Kali Bein, Manmohan Singh said, "It is important to note that the first words the Guru uttered after his enlightenment were 'na koi Hindu, na Koi Musalman', clearly indicating that his mission was to unite humanity."

The former PM said the Guru's teachings could be summed up in three Punjabi words--naam japna, kirat karna and wand chhakna (meditation, hard and honest labour, and sharing fruits of one's earnings with others).

Continue reading here:
Need unity of thought, action: Manmohan Singh - Moneycontrol.com

Published Nov 8, 2019 at 8:00 am(Updated Nov 8, 2019 at 12:26 am)

Dockyard sunset (Photograph by Janos Lengyel)

Letters to the Editor

Dear Sir,

We are facing some challenging times. Will we get through them? Are we up for the challenge? We can be, for we live in a universe of infinite possibilities.

Everywhere we look there is upheaval, unrest as citizens and governments are at odds. We are inundated with leaders wielding worldly power and trying to implement questionable strategies that impact on their citizens in ways that their peace and wellbeing are being threatened.

It is time for us all to take and spend time in the hallowed chambers, alone, in the silence, seeking the path of enlightenment, asking for guidance, wisdom and understanding.

As we each take this inside journey in honesty, we will eventually realise we are all children of the universe and so entitled to its blessings, and as we hold in consciousness, so shall we create in reality.

It is time for us to awaken, be enlightened and fill the world with our love and not our fears. The choice is yours. Be blessed.

A. CONSTANCE McHARDY

Smiths

Read more from the original source:
It's time to awaken and fill the world with love - Royal Gazette

Riley Brown, Contributing Writer

WONY Radio is proud to announce that Abby Perrin, Baylee Bruno, and Lindsey Geoghegan are this weeks DJs of the week! Their show, This Is Gonna Hurt is a weekly talk and music show hosted by the trio. Each week, the hosts play their Song of the Week and then discuss their Pick of the Week, which could be anythingfrom a brand of marinara sauce to a recent concert they went to. The show ends with Rose, Thorn, and Bud, a review of the hosts good and bad moments of the past week and then something they are looking forward to. In between segments, they enjoy discussingcurrent pop culture events, nostalgia, and favorite movies.

Abby is a junior music industry major and computer art minor. Formerly the host of Full Circle, Its Spherical, and Block Party Whisper, she has been a WONY DJ since Spring 2018 and became the Communications Director in fall 2019.This year, she serves as the stations Operations Manager. Outside of WONY, Abby serves as the Music Industry Clubs Vice President. She loves to be involved in local live music and in her free time travels all around to see her favorite bands.

Baylee is a junior music industry major and event planning minor. She has been a WONY DJ and events department member since Spring 2019, and is the former host of The Buzz. Outside of WONY, Baylee serves as the Music Industry ClubsSecretary. She loves to travel and will be studying abroad in Japan during the spring 2020 semester.

Lindsey is a sophomore music industry major. She has been a WONY DJ and events department member since Fall 2018 and is the former host of Enlightenment. Outside of WONY, Lindsey serves as Hooked On Tonics Vice President. She lovesmany types of music and watching comedy shows.

Tune into This Is Gonna Hurt every Tuesday night from 10 p.m. to 12 a.m. to hear Abby, Baylee, and Lindsey play some music and give you a laugh.

Interested in joining WONY? Contact our TrainingDirector at[emailprotected]and dont forgetto Keep It Locked!

See the rest here:
WONY's DJ of the Week - The State Times

The Columbia Maison Franaise hosted dozens of audience members for a debate on navigating the limitations of tolerance and intolerance in an increasingly divided social landscape on Thursday evening.

Should We Tolerate the Intolerant? was a debate between Denis Lacorne and Bernard Harcourt, moderated by Sheri Berman, centered around todays increasingly divided political landscape and ambiguous definitions of tolerance and intolerance. It was co-sponsored by the Alliance Program; Columbia University Press; the European Institute; the Columbia Center for Contemporary Critical Thought; and the Institute for Religion, Culture, and Public Life.

Lacorne, a history professor at Sciences Po in Paris, has authored several political titles including The Limits of Tolerance: Enlightenment Values and Religious Fanaticism. Harcourt is a law and political science professor at the Law School, and has authored The Counterrevolution: How Our Government Went to War Against Its Own Citizens. Berman is a political science professor at Barnard and the author of Democracy and Dictatorship: From the Ancien Regime to the Present Day.

Berman initiated the conversation by gauging the panelists definitions of tolerance and intolerance, two terms that would remain central and contested throughout the conversation. Lacorne drew on historical context and defined tolerance in terms of constitutional and natural rights that were introduced by the end of the 18th century.

Harcourt challenged the notion of non-restricted tolerance by claiming that speech can never be completely free, citing Columbia as a site of restricted speech.

For instance, on a campus like Columbia, there isnt anything like free speech; its not free. There are always attachments: Its funded by an organization that receives money from the University or another organization. It costs money to bring in speakers, etc. And all of that is regulated, where you get space to have your speech, etc., Harcourt said.

The theme of societal regulations of speech permeated much of the remainder of their conversation, with Lacorne noting, [Theres] nothing rigid about [what speech is allowed], and norms of behavior are also changing all the time.

When Berman urged the panelists to name the specific conditions under which something would be deemed intolerable in todays society, Harcourt highlighted current impacts and ramifications of the past and said people should address the issues of today with an understanding of the histories of oppression that precede.

What we should do is try to address historical legacies of oppression. In other words, that today, we live in a time that is the product of a series of oppressive relations. ... Those legacies continue, we live with them, Harcourt said.

In response to an audience members question regarding whose responsibility it is to define and combat intolerance, Harcourt stated, It is an exercise for civil society, for us, to not be tolerant toward intolerable conditions of exploitation, of inequality.

Staff writer Defne Egbo can be contacted at defne.egbo@columbiaspectator.com. Follow the Spectator on Twitter @ColumbiaSpec.

See the article here:
Should We Tolerate the Intolerant?: a debate on the limits of free speech and tolerance - CU Columbia Spectator

SALT LAKE CITY Not cinema. Theme parks. Despicable.

Decorated filmmakers Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola have pointed opinions about superhero movies. The directors behind Taxi Driver and The Godfather, respectively, have both made headlines in the past few weeks for sharing their critical opinions of Marvel movies in particular.

On Monday, Scorsese penned an opinion piece for The New York Times, writing that franchise films have become the primary source of entertainment making this a difficult time in the movie industry.

Theres worldwide audiovisual entertainment, and theres cinema. They still overlap from time to time, but thats becoming increasingly rare, Scorsese writes. And I fear that the financial dominance of one is being used to marginalize and even belittle the existence of the other. For anyone who dreams of making movies or who is just starting out, the situation at this moment is brutal and inhospitable to art. And the act of simply writing those words fills me with terrible sadness.

The stars and directors of Marvel movies, and (of course) social media users, fired back.

The debate started with an interview Scorsese gave to Empire magazine in early October. Stating his belief that Marvel movies are not cinema and that they are more like theme parks, Scorsese told Empire these films are not the cinema of human beings trying to convey emotional, psychological experiences to another human being.

Coppola took things a step further, saying in a recent interview that he calls superhero movies despicable, according to The Guardian.

When Martin Scorsese says that the Marvel pictures are not cinema, hes right, Coppola said, adding that we expect to learn something from cinema, we expect to gain something, some enlightenment, some knowledge, some inspiration.

What is it about superhero movies that are so polarizing? Marvel turning into such a pop culture behemoth probably has something to do with it. Theres a sort of David-versus-Goliath element to many of the comments from Marvel detractors, a feeling that cinema and the independent filmmakers behind riskier projects need to be defended from the encroachment of men (and women) in capes.

But are they right? Are Marvel movies really just a cinematic amusement park, as Scorsese says, made only to entertain and take our money? Or are they capable of imparting enlightenment, knowledge and inspiration what Coppola defines as cinema?

A lower art form?

The debate over what type of movies can be labeled cinema or art is nothing new.

Genre films, which include fantasy or science fiction (like superhero movies), as well as anything from horror to romance to Western, tend to be looked down upon, according to Jeffrey A. Brown, an associate professor of popular culture at Bowling Green State University and author of The Modern Superhero in Film and Television.

Critics often dismiss horror as a genre worthy of critical acclaim. A recent movement in Hollywood has referred to certain films that are well-received by critics as elevated horror like Get Out or Hereditary in order to distinguish them from more run-of-the-mill horror films (like the Scream franchise), according to an article from BBC last year.

Whenever a horror movie makes a splash ... there is invariably an article calling it smart or elevated or art house horror, novelist and critic Anne Billson tweeted. They hate horror SO MUCH they have to frame its hits as something else.

Superhero movies seem to be in the same boat, and it doesnt help that their source material comic books have also been traditionally viewed as a lower art form. The very first superhero adaptations were considered B movies, Matthew McAllister, a professor of media studies at Pennsylvania State University, told the Deseret News.

You know, you release them to kids, you have third-rate stars, you make them quickly, the dialogue is hackneyed.

Superhero movies and reception

It wasnt until the 1970s and 80s that Hollywood began to see any real potential in superheroes. Superman, starring Christopher Reeve in 1978, and Tim Burtons Batman in 1989 were game-changers for the genre, McAllister said.

Superman brought in big stars like Marlon Brando and planned sequels, McAllister said. And Batman brought in all the merchandise.

But even still, the success of these films were seen more as one-off events than part of a larger trend toward superheroes in general. Though both Superman and Batman had sequels, they didnt do as well at the box office.

It wasnt until the launch of the X-Men franchise in 2000 and particularly Sam Raimis Spiderman in 2002 that superheroes really began to take off. Spiderman, starring Tobey Maguire, was the first summer blockbuster after 9/11. It was an unprecedented hit, breaking box-office records when it took in $114.8 million after just three days in theaters.

The popularity of superhero movies at this time is no coincidence. Their rise has coincided with the 9/11 era, and superheroes that come in and save the day serve a cultural purpose during this moment of American history, Brown said, adding that when the world is in a state of disorder, it can be inspiring to watch a clear-cut battle between forces of good and evil and see the good guys triumph.

Other superhero films quickly followed in the wake of Spiderman, including two Spiderman sequels, more entries in the X-Men franchise and Christopher Nolans Batman Begins in 2005. There were also less-successful films such as Daredevil, Ghost Rider and Fantastic Four.

But the game changed again in 2008, when Marvel Studios released a film about Iron Man a lesser-known hero. Not only was the film wildly successful, but Marvel released it with an endgame in mind: Iron Man was only part of a larger picture, phase one of a larger wave of superhero movies to come.

This forethought has defined the superhero genre ever since. Superhero films are no longer just series both Marvel and DC refer to their collection of films as a universe. And earlier this year, Avengers: Endgame broke box office records to become the highest-grossing film in history, earning more than $2.7 billion worldwide, according to Box Office Mojo.

These are things that are not planned by the year, McAllister said. Theyre planned by the decade.

The dangerous side of superhero movie success

With movies like Avengers: Endgame dominating the box office (seven of the top 11 highest-grossing films in 2018 were superhero movies, according to reports), the concern from filmmakers like Coppola and Scorsese is understandable.

Superheroes are taking over Hollywood, often at the expense of other types of films. Many independent filmmakers are seeing this play out as studios are unwilling to spend money on what they view as riskier projects.

Even Scorsese said hes been affected. The director worked with Netflix rather than a more traditional movie studio to release his newest film The Irishman. The film will have a limited theatrical release before moving to the streaming service in late November. In his New York Times op-ed, Scorsese implied that at least part of the reason for the shorter theatrical release of The Irishman has to do with an overabundance of superheroes.

Would I like the picture to play on more big screens for longer periods of time? Of course I would, Scorsese wrote. But no matter whom you make your movie with, the fact is that the screens in most multiplexes are crowded with franchise pictures.

In a somewhat surprising move, Marvel superheroes like Benedict Cumberbatch have stepped into the ring and come to Scorseses defense.

I know theres been a lot of debate recently with these very fine filmmakers coming to the fore saying that these film franchises are taking over everything, Cumberbatch said, according to the Guardian. And I agree, you know. We dont want one king to rule it all and have a kind of monopoly. ... We should really look into continuing to support auteur filmmakers at every level.

What does this mean for cinema?

With their dominance in the industry, should Marvel movies be considered cinema?

If we follow Coppolas definition that we gain some enlightenment, some knowledge, or some inspiration from cinema, then it possibly can.

The lessons are there, Brown said, adding that sometimes theyre easy to miss because theyre wrapped up in entertainment.

He pointed to Black Panther a film that grapples with racial issues and frustrations and also the recently released Joker that deals with mental health issues. But other films may be more subtle about their treatment of serious topics.

At a basic level, the stories are about right and wrong, good and evil, how people should behave, Brown said. There are lessons in there about justice, about the law, about how we should treat each other. And theyre wrapped up in explosions and a lot of fun, and characters that can fly, which just makes it a lot more digestible.

But while there are valuable lessons to be gained from superhero films, McAllister said the oversaturation of the market and Hollywoods love affair with superheroes could be problematic.

Are they the only lessons we can learn from film? Are they the only ways we can get excited about movies? I think the answer is no, he said. Theres a lot of ways we can learn from film, and a lot of ways we can get excited. But are those other ways getting shut out?

Here is the original post:
Martin Scorsese and Francis Ford Coppola have slammed Marvel movies. But theyre missing the point - Deseret News

Cogito, ergo sum, Rene Descartes. Translation: I think, therefore I am.

What makes us, us? How is it that were able to look at a tree and see beauty, hear a song and feel moved, or take comfort in the smell of rain or the taste of coffee? How do we know we still exist when we close our eyes and lie in silence? To date, science doesnt have an answer to those questions.

In fact, it doesnt even have a unified theory. And thats because we cant simulate consciousness. All we can do is try to reverse-engineer it by studying living beings. Artificial intelligence, coupled with quantum computing, could solve this problem and provide the breakthrough insight scientists need to unravel the mysteries of consciousness. But first we need to take the solution seriously.

Theres been a rash of recent articleswritten by experts claiming definitively that a machine will never have consciousness. This represents a healthy level of skepticism, which is necessary for science to thrive, but there isnt a lot of room for absolutes when theoretical future-tech is involved.

An untold number of experts have weighed in on the idea of sentient machines computers with the capacity to feel alive and, for the most part, they all believe the idea of a living robot is science fiction, at least for now. And it is. But so too are the ideas of warp drives, teleportation, and time travel.

Yet, as you can see, each of these far-out ideas are not only plausible, but grounded in serious research:

We could be hundreds or thousands of years away from conscious AI, but thats a drop in theocean of time compared to never.

The prehistoric scientists working on the problem of replicating naturally occurring fire and harnessing it as an energy source may have been the brightest minds of their time, but their collective knowledge on thermodynamics would pale beside an average 5th graders today. Recent work in the fields of quantum computing and artificial intelligence may not show a direct path to machine consciousness, but theories that say it cannot happen are trying to prove a negative.

We cannot definitively say that intelligent extraterrestrial life does not exist simply because theres evidence that life on Earth is a universal anomaly.And, equally so, we cannot logically say machines will never have consciousness simply because we havent figured out how to imbue them with it yet. Citing the difficulty of a problem isnt evidence that its unsolvable.

Somehow, consciousness as we understand it manifested in the universe once. It seems arrogant to imagine we understand its limits and boundaries or that it cannot emerge as part of a quantum function in a machine system by the direction or invention of a human.

But, before we can even consider the problem of building machines that feel, we need to figure out what consciousnessactuallyis.

Scientists tend to agree that consciousness is the feeling of being alive. While we cant be sure, we like to think that animals are living and conscious, and plants are just living. We generally assume non-living things are not conscious or aware of their existence.But we dont know.

The reason we dont know that grass and clouds arent conscious is that we cant measure consciousness. As researcher Philip Goff points out in this article, we can only measure the activity associated with consciousness, not the awareness itself. Goff writes:

The best scientists are able to do is to correlate unobservable experiences with observable processes, by scanning peoples brains and relying on their reports regarding their private conscious experiences. But how do you detect and measure the feeling of being alive?

We know that consciousness cant depend on the kind of feeling that comes from our senses. We can easily demonstrate that none of the five senses are necessary for the mind to emerge. We do not need our eyesight, hearing, sense of touch, ability to smell, or taste buds, or even our physicalbody to be considered conscious (see: brain in a jar).

Two main schools of thought have risen to prominence over the millennia to explain where consciousness comes from: Panpsychismand dualism. The former says all matter is imbued with consciousness and humans got a lions share, the latter states matter and consciousness are separate entities and consciousness works like the religious idea of a soul.

It boils down to whether you choose to believe that trees, rocks, stars, and subatomic particles all have a modicum of consciousness, or if you prefer thinking that only certain entities have the spark humans, good doggos, and dolphins seem like proper candidates.

Theres also a third option: what we describe as consciousness is merely a derivative function of the unconscious act of observing the universe. In essence, consciousness isnt its own thing anymore than an inch or a hour are tangible constructs. Consciousness is, by this theory, just a generalized measurement: our existence isnt necessary to the universe, but our consciousness is necessary for observation to take place. If there were nothing around to observe the universe, it might not exist. An unconscious entity, by definition, cannot observe.

That may sound like an if a tree falls in the woods and nobodys there to hear it, does it make a noise? kind of statement, but its rooted in quantum theory. At the core of quantum mechanics lies an idea called superposition. The tiniest particles in the universe work together to form systems, and these systems determine how energy and matter conduct themselves. These tiny specks manage this by aligning themselves in quantum states where each particle can be one way, another, or both ways at the same time.

Think about it like thetifo fan displays you often see in live coverage of sporting events. The ones where the members of the crowd hold up individual signs to display a giant image or spell out huge words for the TV audience:

At the perfect moment in every quantum system, subatomic particles in a state of superposition choose to end up in one resulting position, another, or both at the same time. Quantum mechanics tells us that quantum particles act differently when theyre observed.

If you can imagine this on ascalegazillions of orders larger than our brains can compute, thats how the quantum universe functions. Probably. Its all theoretical at this point, though quantum mechanics is more like the theory of gravity or evolution in that its a very, very strong theory.

By attempting to replicate brain function in machines, AI researchers and neuroscientists are hunting down the trail of consciousness. Our only lead right now is the organic brain. If we can figure out how real brains work, we may be able to accurately simulate cognitive function, chaos, and organic memory.

Under current research paradigms, simulating a brain is about as close to impossible as a task can get. We dont know enough about how the brain works and, chances are, classical computers will never emulate the mind because they just run algorithms and make calculations. Binary computers, to date, cant approximate thought.

Quantum systems, however, have the potential to simulate naturally occurring processes that classical ones cannot. For example, theoretically,both the human brain and a quantum computer can time-travel to solve problems, classical computers cannot.

Its not beyond the realm of possibility that huge swaths of missing information on the nature of consciousness will be gleaned in the quest to simulate and, ultimately, synthesize organic brains.

This, of course, doesnt indicate that machines will ever have consciousness, but itd be arrogant to assume that technology has nothing to teach us about ourselves. Especially when you consider how little we currently know.

Read next:Study: Darwin may have gotten the origin of life wrong

Read next: Three weird streaming services you should check out once your Netflix trial is over

See more here:
Opinion: It's arrogant to assume humans will never imbue AI with consciousness - The Next Web

The founders of the Montage luxury hotel chain intend to crack the high-end residential market in West Hollywood with the companys hipper Pendry brand condominiums under construction on the famed Sunset Strip.

The Pendry Residences West Hollywood, which just hit the market, are part of a more than $500-million complex being built on the former site of the House of Blues on Sunset Boulevard that will include a splashy Pendry hotel intended to pamper a showbiz clientele.

Pendrys expansion is just one of several large-scale real estate developments in recent years that are transforming the Strip into an even more upscale enclave than before with the addition of hundreds of pricey new hotel rooms, apartments, restaurants and clubs.

The evolution of the Pendry site is emblematic of the change, having entered public awareness as the home of actor John Barrymore, then becoming a popular restaurant location for decades before giving way to the House of Blues nightclub in the 1990s. The club known to passersby for its tin shack facade closed in 2015 to make way for the Pendry project.

Montages goal is to create a buzzing, Strip-worthy hotel facing the boulevard with 40 relatively secluded residences in separate buildings behind it stretching south to Fountain Avenue, where residents will have their own entrance. The complex is set to open next summer.

People who live at the Pendry can dine and play at the hotel, which will have a 200-seat music venue, or retreat to their own small neighborhood where some units will have sprawling landscaped terraces, private swimming pools and outdoor kitchens, Montage Hotels & Resorts founder Alan J. Fuerstman said.

Its like having a Hollywood Hills-style home right on Sunset, he said.

An artists rendering shows the Pendry Residences by Montage Hotels & Resorts, being built with the Pendry hotel in West Hollywood.

(Hayes Davidson)

Laguna Beach-based Montage Hotels is banking on the type of reception its Montage residences got in Beverly Hills, where there is a waiting list for resales of the 20 units completed in 2008.

The last two properties sold there commanded nearly $4,000 a square foot, a top-level price for Los Angeles-area condos, said Tina Necrason, who is in charge of Montages residential arm. We know there is demand.

At the Pendry, prices will start at $3 million, or more than $1,000 a square foot, for a 2,900-square-foot unit. The biggest residences hit 6,000 square feet and have 3,400-square-foot terraces, but the developers declined to reveal their prices.

The growth of hotel-connected residences is an international phenomenon, according to a report last month by London real estate services company Savills. A record number of hotel-branded complexes have opened so far this year, delivering more than 9,000 units in 21 countries, with even more expected in 2020.

Globally mobile, brand-conscious, wealthy individuals are attracted by quality design, security and the level of service branded residences offer, Savills said.

Los Angeles has trailed other international cities in building hotel-connected residences, but others are in the works besides Pendry.

The Four Seasons Private Residences complex is nearing completion across 3rd Street from the Four Seasons Los Angeles at Beverly Hills. In Century City, Fairmont-branded units will be included in the renovated Fairmont Century Plaza Hotel set to open next year.

The $2.5-billion Century Plaza project involves renovating the 19-story crescent-shaped hotel, adding 63 private residences in the hotel, building two 44-story condo towers and adding 100,000 square feet of retail space.

(DBOX)

There is a big gap in branded living in L.A. compared to other markets, said Warren Wachsberger, managing director of Aecom Capital, a partner in the development of Montages $3.2-billion real estate portfolio. Beverly Hills real estate services company Combined Properties is also a partner in the Pendry project designed by Ehrlich Yanai Rhee Chaney Architects.

Common amenities for residents of branded condominiums include optional hotel perks such as maid visits and room service. Food at the Pendry will be provided by Los Angeles chef Wolfgang Puck, who broke out on the Sunset Strip with the opening of his Spago restaurant there in 1982.

About 80% or more of the Pendry buyers are expected to be people who already live within a six-mile radius, perhaps with careers in music or other entertainment fields.

People are recognizing that the kids have moved out and Ive got this huge home in the hills, Wachsberger said. They may enjoy hotel services and find a condo more convenient to leave behind when they travel.

The 149-room hotel will be the third Pendry in a growing chain intended to attract a young-thinking clientele by melding elements of traditional luxury hotels with elements of boutique lifestyle hotels that are unique to their neighborhoods.

An artists depiction of a private terrace attached to a luxury residence at the Pendry hotel, being built on the Sunset Strip.

(Hayes Davidson)

In addition to the live entertainment venue, the Pendry will have Puck restaurants, a rooftop bar, a screening room, a bowling alley, a spa and a private membership club called the Britely for people in creative fields. Suites at the hotel will be wired to accommodate Hollywood press junkets, where media members interview stars of upcoming movie and television releases.

The Sunset Strip area is seeing an influx of hotels including 1 Hotel West Hollywood, Kimpton La Peer Hotel and West Hollywood Edition, part of a Marriott International brand conceived by lifestyle hotelier Ian Schrager that opened last month. The new competition will push up vacancy rates, hotel consultant Bruce Baltin said, but overall the market is doing well absorbing it.

Travelers in the fields of entertainment, design and advertising all tend to like West Hollywood as a market, said Baltin of CBRE. Its upscale but very active.

The average room rate in West Hollywood is expected to top $300 a night this year, up from less than $265 in 2014, according to CBRE.

The billions of dollars worth of real estate development in recent years and in the pipeline is changing the character of the street long associated with a raw music scene at such venues as the Roxy Theatre and Whiskey a Go Go. Tower Records, a longtime mecca for fans and artists, closed in 2006. Velvet ropes and bottle service in clubs have damped the egalitarian vibe the Strip was known for over the decades starting in the 1960s.

A Netflix show is advertised along the Sunset Strip in West Hollywood in October 2018.

(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

Los Angeles historian Alison Martino, who grew up near the Sunset Strip and traveled it often with her father, singer Al Martino, said she is troubled by the scale of recent development, which she compared to Las Vegas, compounded by the shift in advertising from painted billboards to bright digital displays.

Once they knock down the smaller structures, no one is going to have anywhere to walk except to another hotel, she said.

But to developers such as Montage and other supporters of growth, new properties are enhancing the Sunset Strip by bringing more people and activity.

A two-block residential, retail and hotel complex at Sunset and La Cienega Boulevard that was completed in 2017 was a game changer, Wachsberger said, that gave the Strip a walkability that didnt exist in the past.

Residents and visitors can stroll the bright boulevard or dip down a block south into a comparatively quiet residential neighborhood, he said. You get the best of both worlds.

Here is the original post:
Montage Hotels rolls out luxury residences with its new Pendry hotel on the Sunset Strip - Los Angeles Times

A language is a system of relations; relations between signs and meanings assigned to them which are governed by grammatical rules of combination. When two people know and believe in the same system, that is, in the same meanings assigned to relevant signs, they can effectively communicate through transmitting relevant sequences of signs.

Language is thought to have originated when early hominids brain size increased in volume. This cognitive evolution took place in the Home Sapiens during the Upper Paleolithic Period less than 100,000 years ago. The gene associated with this evolution is FOXP2 that makes language processing possible in humans. Since human language is relational, this progression must have been sudden and must have followed an ascent in consciousness. The ability to draw relations between things is an innate ability of the human mind which allows it to make sense of the world.

Communication systems used by other animals happen to be single tiered, that is, there is a sound that corresponds to a single meaning. This means that the possibilities of expression are finite. Human language, on the other hand, is multi-tiered. It has a finite number of primary elements (alphabets) which can be joined to form a vast number of secondary elements (words) which in turn can be organized using the rules of grammar into an infinite number of tertiary meanings (sentences).

However, the biggest difference lies, not in the nature of the communication system itself, but in the cognitive difference that allows humans to create fictions and project thought into the past and future, whereas animals inhabit a continuous present. This means that humans are uniquely capable of discussing abstract concepts and events that happened in the past or the possibility of which lies in the future. This adds a fifth tier to the human language that is concept. A concept is an abstract entity that allows a human being to make sense of the phenomenological world. These concepts add up to form a world view. A world view is a reservoir of concepts and perceptual data associated with it collected by the senses. This makes humans historical animals. Concepts are drawn from this reservoir at will and compared and contrasted with situations resulting in the negation, affirmation or evolution of that concept.

A human being is a creature that has its existence in language. Human consciousness is embedded in language. An I and you relationship forms the basis of human existence. Thus, there can be no Philosophy without language. This does not only mean that language is the medium through which a philosophical concept is communicated, but also that the philosophical process as it unfolds in the human mind itself is embedded in language. This means that language exists prior to the speech. A human childs consciousness is already embedded in the language before it can learn to say the first word. Language is also the phenomenon that embeds us in time and makes us temporal creatures. An animal is not a temporal creature. Yes, all animals die, but they never experience death, for death is simply a flip between the process of dying and the state of being dead. Death in-itself has no existence. You cannot experience death since while you are alive, death is not, and when death is you are not. Animals only cease to exist as moving creatures. They do not experience death. Only humans experience death, that is, the concept of death, the conception of which becomes possible in language.

Scientists have not been able to find the link between the processing of language by the brain, the consciousness that gives rise to it, and the consciousness that it gives rise to. They can only identify the part of the brain which becomes active when language is processed and the speech impairment that happens as a result of damaged parts of the brain. This is the limit beyond which neuroscience cannot progress. So let us look at the problem of consciousness and language through the lens of quantum physics.

David Bohm (1917-1992) proposed that the phenomenological universe (explicate order) as we perceive it arises from an underlying substratum which he called the implicate order. He arrived at this conclusion because at the Quantum level, explicate order is nothing but disturbances in the Implicate Order. That is, form and matter are mere disturbances in an otherwise still field. This is the case with subatomic particles that do not have a mass of their own; whatever mass they have is because of the speed with which they oscillate. If they were to stop spinning, they would go out of existence, that is, if all the subatomic particles making up our body were to stop oscillating at the same time, we will not drop dead, instead, we will go out of existence instantaneously. We will disappear. Poof! Image a bedsheet with wrinkles.

The wrinkles do not have an existence distinct from the bedsheet. If we were to stretch the bedsheet, the wrinkles will not fall to the floor, they will simply disappear. Bohm extended his hypothesis to explain consciousness as well. He proposed that consciousness was simply the flow between the two orders.

If consciousness is the flow between the implicate and explicate order, then language is the medium through which this flow happens, and creativity is the effect of this flow onto the explicate order. This flow is the collective consciousness of nature and this medium is the meta-language of nature.

For a human being, that is an individual consciousness, creativity means tapping into this river of collective consciousness and drinking from it. But for this exchange to happen, the individual human being has to step into language. This happens as soon as the human fetus becomes conscious. We have already established that language precedes speech, therefore, it is not required for the fetus to have learned a particular speech to have an existence embedded in the language since grammar, that is the ability to draw connections, is hard-wired into his/her DNA. But once the child starts learning a mother tongue (a process which starts in the womb), he/she learns to communicate this outpouring of creativity through signs. Thus we have a sequence of interfaces which makes a relational 8 existence of human being possible: the interchange between the collective consciousness and individual consciousness through language which is built-in, followed by an interchange between the built-in language and a language that is a system of signs which the human fetus learns as a mother tongue. This connection, once established, is permanent. If at any stage the child learns another language, it simply adds another level of interchange, from consciousness to built-in language to mother tongue to the secondary language. This means that expression in ones mother tongue is easier and more profound than when done in a secondary language.

However, there is an aspect of the phenomenological experience that cannot be communicated through language. This is the emotional aspect. One can describe the experience in which interaction with a tree was involved, but one cannot completely communicate how that interaction made one feel. Poetry can come very close to communicating that experience, but not entirely. This is one limitation of language.

But this very shortcoming of language makes a relational existence possible. If I can communicate my experience of being alive to another human being in its entirety, the distinction between I and him/her will disappear. There will be no difference left between one and the other. Opposite poles of a magnet attract because they are two separate entities. If they become one, the attraction between them will disappear. The Sun and Earth attract each other through the gravitational pull. If they were to become one, their attraction for each other will disappear. This also establishes the relationship between man and God as dialogical. Man can only aspire but never become one with God. This makes God the ultimate signified. Between Him and the man lies an infinite chain of signifiers.

Language separates us. Language connects us. We can connect because we are separate. But this separation makes man the loneliest creature in the universe. Man is utterly alone within his experience of being alive which is noncommunicable. Out of this loneliness is born the longing for the Other. That is why man is a stretched creature whose center of existence is displaced. As I am sitting, writing this essay, I find myself stretched towards all my lost loves, my family, my ex-wife, my son.

Language connects us. It does so, firstly, by bestowing us with an identity. When a child can say I am a Muslim or I am a Pakistani, he/she is already the speaker of the language he/she uses to say these words. The phrase I am a Muslim, before being a concept, is already an act of speech. Before the child belongs to a religion or nation, he/she already belongs to a language. This makes the mother tongue our first identity as a relational being. Two things cannot connect until their distinction is not established. Punjabis and Sindhis (for example) cannot connect until they first become Punjabis and Sindhis. This is a true democracy. Democracy takes into account peoples differences.

Coexistence means respecting differences, not eliminating them. Elimination of differences in the way of the tyrant and the oppressor. This understanding of respecting differences to form a stronger unity is the way 9 forward for Pakistan, a country suffering from the paradox of being a nation-state as well as a culturally, linguistically and religiously diverse land. We have to accept that unique circumstances in history led us to a point where we have a country with multiple cultures, religions and languages. We have to make the best of it and recognise and respect others differences.

The writer currently teaches at the Institute for Art and Culture, Lahore as an Assistant Professor.

See the original post here:
Language, Consciousness and Identity - Daily Times

The Bachelor host Chris Harrison talked to an audience of more than 200 students in Wallis Annenberg Hall about the shows efforts to improve diversity, including having its first Black bachelorette Rachel Lindsay in 2017. (Toms Mier | Daily Trojan)

Chris Harrison, host of The Bachelor and other shows in the franchise, discussed diversity and the behind-the-scenes of the reality television series to an audience of more than 200 in Wallis Annenberg Hall Monday.

Two minutes before Harrison was set to arrive in a Wallis Annenberg Hall classroom to speak about his career and experience with the ABC reality television show, the event was relocated to the auditorium to accommodate the influx of audience members. The event was hosted by Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism associate professor of professional practice Mary Murphy for her journalism class titled Entertainment, Business and Media in Todays Society.

One audience member said that despite loving the show, she has noticed a lack of people of color on it. She said she roots for the people who look like her just so she can see them on television more. She asked if the producers are conscious of this and if more representation can be expected in the future.

Harrison said the show casts people from across the country and focuses on their potential storylines, but he admitted that it did not do a good job at assembling a diverse cast when it first started in 2002. He claimed that representation has improved in the franchise.

It was incumbent on us to change that narrative, and we have done that, Harrison said. Over the last several years, we have taken great strides in trying to make you feel more represented. While I would love to only make great social statements and really change the world, I cant just do that because we have to stay on the air or Im not making a social statement to anyone.

Harrison also explained that many of the people behind the cameras are of different races and sexual orientations.

Representation in the franchise came up again when another student asked about the likelihood of casting a gay bachelor. Harrison ultimately said that he does not know if or when it would happen.

Harrison said he doesnt believe The Bachelor changes culture but that the show has evolved as culture has changed. He brought up Rachel Lindsay, the first African American bachelorette in the shows 13th season, and Demi Burnett, the first contestant to have a same-sex relationship on the franchise in the fifth season of Bachelor in Paradise as examples of the shows evolution.

You have to take it as it comes because then its organic and then it feels right, Harrison said. When you try to force things is when it backfires on you We took that step in that we had our first African American, but I didnt look at her and go, So happy shes Black. Im happy that shes a badass woman, and oh by the way she also happens to be African American.

When discussing the line between actual reality and reality made for television, Harrison emphasized that the contestants are real people who he and the producers care about, drawing parallels to his experience as a father of two teenagers.

You kind of have to take your hand off the wheel and let stuff happen, Harrison said, explaining the true reality aspect of The Bachelor.

None of what the contestants say, he said, is ever scripted. However, the producers create environments and moments that force contestants to deal with each other.

Throughout the entire event, which went overtime because of the large number of audience questions, Harrison made inside-jokes that referenced the most recent seasons of The Bachelor franchise and joked with the audience.

It was really cool to see him, because were so used to seeing him on camera, said Maggie Morris, a junior majoring in journalism. And for him to be in person so down to earth, it was great.

Go here to see the original:
'The Bachelor' host talks diversity in the franchise - Daily Trojan Online

Our sense of the world and our place in it expands by the hour. This 21st-century jungle is incomprehensible in its complexity and fullness; the Earth is saturated with people and information. Just think about how much stuff is out there, from scientific and medical discoveries, books written, works of art created, the 500 recordings of Elgars Cello Concerto the inordinate documentations of our collective pasts, and the continuous stream of current inventions is overwhelming.

We also have so many things in every shape, size, colour and form conceivable, and for every purpose imaginable. And many of these things are designed not to last. Mobile phones are downgraded through a process called upgrading the companies that do it have admitted it!

But what about a thing that does last and is intended to? Do we understand the weight or value of a timeless thing? Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge, where is the knowledge we have lost in information? wrote TS Eliot in 1934. If he felt that then, I wonder what he would be saying about us now.

Classical music is a grand and beautiful dialogue between instinct and intelligence

I believe that people still want to feel, and to be moved. They want to communicate with loved ones better and we all want to feel we are not alone in the world. Even though more and more young people seem content in the worlds of their phones adults, too I meet plenty more still committed to community and to the enriching experience of creating something collectively. Yes its an effort, but that effort is the sacrifice that seals lasting bonds and allows for deeper, more profound and lasting experience.

But I am not bemoaning the present and lusting after the past. The amassed insights, information and resources at our disposal now give us phenomenal potential for a conscious and deliberate shaping of the directions we wish to go in. I believe we have a better opportunity than ever before to reacquaint ourselves with all the most enlightened areas of our past and develop a deeper relationship with the profound intelligence of our intuition. Classical music sits in a very interesting place in this evolution of humankind: it is a grand and beautiful dialogue between instinct and intelligence.

Music comes from so deep inside that its able to speak ancient truths in our modern language. Like learning how to deal with heartbreak, or how to trust things that are not going to be discovered more truthfully through an equation or formula or data. Music can tell facts of our humanity that may seem imprecise, but are actually as precise as its possible to be because they can only be what they are. This of course is old wisdom, but old never means its less.

The teaching and sharing of music is important because, put simply, music is important. Before it was notated, codified, refined, studied and given names, it was a gift from the depth of one persons soul to another, or the capturing of a moments emotion, or a lifetimes devotion to a god, or simply improvised expression and a means of communication.

It is the art of all the things we cant see or touch. It is feelings and thoughts, offerings of generosity, vulnerability and openness. It addresses us, communicates and passes invisible things from people creating sound to people receiving sound. It has the power to capture us, to make us feel many complex things. It can lift us high into optimism and accompany us during feelings of hurt and pain. The making of music can be described as healing, invigorating, exhausting and all-consuming. It brings millions together through the basic act of listening and thousands together through the act of making melody, rhythm and harmony in the practice and service of collective expression.

So what about education? My duo partner Alexei Grynyuk studied in Kyiv with a strict teacher who was the ultimate authority what she said was how it was going to go. He then came to study at the Royal Academy [of Music] and was shocked to discover there could be dialogue in learning, and that he could determine the answers to questions himself. Watching Alexei teach now is basically an entire series of questions. He is uninterested in forcing an idea on a student, unless that idea is that they must think for themselves.

For Socrates, the role of a teacher was akin to that of a midwife, implying that you have something within you that only requires bringing forth. French philosopher Emmanuel Levinas said that teaching is the presence of infinity breaking the closed circle of totality. In other words, through education, are we trying to open windows into worlds you would never dream of yourself? Interacting with, and ultimately embracing, the other or that which is radically different to you.

Is education preparing us to become units of production taking up our place in the workforce? Or is education simply, as we often experience now, a process of giving systematic instruction? The Matthew Arnold notion of passing on the best of whats been thought and written in our culture.

Music and education can be a tricky combination. Music, so unquantifiable and very difficult to test. So reliant on creativity, individuality, freedom and expression, and the untidy messiness of life. Education is so often experienced as something more structured, controlled and systematic.

We are all accustomed to hearing that music teaches empathy, coordination, concentration, cooperation, how to listen while expressing something, how to express ourselves more confidently, how to be definitive while staying flexible, how to communicate and relate. We hear that it improves confidence and personal satisfaction, it boosts all-round academic attainment and lifts morale, our physical and spiritual wellbeing are affected, our sense of achievement and ownership over something is nurtured.

We hear about the opening up of our creativity creativity in problem-solving, in thought, in how to make it through a day that bit better or that bit more easily it addresses the releasing of blocked channels in our minds and our hearts, our ability to trust and stay resilient and positive, even when things dont go our way, even when nothing goes our way. We know it can also give us early exposure to the idea of professionalism, in our attempt to make it through a difficult piece in front of our friends and teachers (and keep a straight face when something goes wrong), or in how to set up the hall, and try to make sure the Christmas concert lasts two hours instead of four!

I have learnt more about the pieces Im playing from critiques of sp,e four-year-olds than from years studying with learned professors

Learning an instrument demands learning how to practise. Practice itself can teach us uncommon discipline, persistence and patience. We know that caring for our instrument teaches us responsibility. That technical work and accuracy, playing in tune, coming in on time, paying attention to accents, dots, crescendos and sound production all while trying to express something collectively teaches us loud and clear about balancing opposites and staying afloat.

Music can teach us about meaning. Music fires the imagination in young minds. On some occasions, I have learnt more about the pieces Im playing from critiques of four-year-olds than from years of studying with learned professors.

Musics power is born out of its social practice and the art of creation and interaction. It is conversation.

Music teaches us about our connections to the thoughts, feelings and voices of those from other countries and eras. It puts us in the mind and space of those who seem to experience lives very far from our own. It allows us to strip away all that separates us and urges us to see and feel what unites us. Ultimately our biggest challenge on this planet is to understand, empathise and elevate one another in pursuit of our common humanity. There is no greater challenge or reward.

This is an edited extract from a speech Nicola Benedetti gave to the Royal Philharmonic Society on 5 November. Watch her full speech here.

The rest is here:
Nicola Benedetti: 'Music is the art of all the things we can't see or touch. We need it in our lives' - The Guardian