Off-Topic Place

30 martie 2011 de 2.316 comentarii

Dragi forumisti

S-a simţit nevoia unui spaţiu dedicat, unde discuţiile off-topic, destul de numeroase în ultima perioadă, să îşi găsească un loc al lor.

Datorită faptului că forumurile emisiunilor tindeau să fie deturnate de la tema principală de discuţie, devenind un fel de chat greu de urmărit, unele comentarii vor fi mutate pe acest forum, astfel incat aceia care dispun de timp liber/teme de discutie/inspiratie sa isi poata manifesta talentul pe indelete şi, în acelaşi timp, să se ofere posibilitatea de discutii şi dezbateri pentru cei interesaţi de prezentarile video.

Postarile off-topic (se pot include aici, după cum ne-au obişnuit unii: preferinţele muzicale, declaraţiile de dragoste, deversările de emoticoane, informările cu privire la dieta sau somnul personal, creaţiile artistice, repetările obsesive de idei, cererile de „rugaciune” etc… ) sunt aşadar binevenite în spaţiul pe care tocmai îl inaugurăm.

Evident, mesajele ce conţin înjurături, obscenităţi, dezvăluiri de identitate…vor fi şterse.

Mulţumesc 🙂

Înregistrat sub Editorial

2.316 Responses to Off-Topic Place

← Older Comments
Newer Comments →
  1. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 06:11

    monica,

    eu nu am spus decat ca totul e minciuna.
    pace ?
    e o iluzie !
    am vrut sa spun ca pasajul scos din context din Foucalt asta arata ca nu-i citit.
    asta in mod sigur.
    iar ca ce a spus Edi nu-i chiar atat de grav.
    si de aici toata povestea.
    chiar mi-a facut bine sa constat ca cineva incearca sa faca ceva in biserica.
    dupa parerea mea, e un castig ce se incearca
    insa solutii nu or sa fie niciodata pentru ca sistemul e corupt din toate punctele de vedere
    asta si nimic mai mult
    cand m-am gandit la sentimente mai gandit la cu totul altceva
    in mod sigur nu o sa mai fac greseala asta
    nu exista, iubire, fericire,etc.etc
    viata e o lupta de unul singur
    trebuie sa redevin o fiinta in care nu pot exista emotii si sentimente
    eu chiar imi petrec mult timp citind
    si nu-i mare lucru cand ai asemenea provocari sa stai noaptea sa citesti
    eu nu cred ca trebuie sa fie cineva licentiat in aflarea cat mai multor lucruri
    licentiat in bunul simt , da
    mai ales cand esti la inceput de drum si cand trebuie sa capeti experienta pentru a da sfaturi academice
    dar nu-i o problema, nici asta
    am inteles gresit totul
    am interpretat totul gresit
    e numai vina mea
    bine ca am aflat la timp cum sta treaba cu sansa oferita cuiva
    e o prostie , si cred ca mi-am facut un rau
    eu singura, nu condamn pe nimeni.

  2. Avatarul lui monica monica says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 07:14

    Maria…ma gandesc ca pacea nu e neaparat o iluzie…Cred ca pacea se face in numele a ceva…de dragul acelui ceva la care nu trebuie renuntat.
    Cred ca ce incearca Edi sa mai faca in biserici sau oriunde nu e rau…insa suntem faramitati nu in numele a ce incearca el sa uneasca ci a ceea ce doreste sa elimine.
    Sistemul e corupt demult insa merita sa incerci.Nu sa darami un sistem cu intregul sau arsenal..E o treaba sisifica.Ci sa unesti oameni in numele iubirii si a fericirii ce te inunda ori de cate ori nu te-ai lasat doborat de nimitnicia sistemului .Sa te unesti cu ei fie numai virtual intr-o postura mai „taciturna” insa cu-n volum impresionant de viata cara sa intretina sau sa aprinda viata in cei care si-o mai doresc.
    Viata pare o lupta de unul singur.. suntem insa legati imaginar in stranse legaturi de suflet chiar daca nu vrem s-o recunoastem.Chiar si cartile pe care le parcurgi sunt de fapt conceptii ,idei sau franturi ale vietii traite sau experimentate de altii .Nu poti sa „redevii” o fiinta in care sa nu existe sentimente emotii…nu se poate asa ceva.Insasi faptul ca le constientizezi denota ca ai nevoie de ele.Le poti reprima…le poti nega in relatii interumane insa asta nu te transforma in robot. Nevoia de emotii ..sentimente ..te impinge sa citesti…mai mult..din ce in ce mai mult. Dupa mine nu esti persoana care sa isi poata opri nevoia de-a trai.Citind,ai degraba o accentuezi .
    „Bine ca am aflat la timp cum sta treaba cu sansa oferita cuiva”…Cand oferi sanse daruiesti..Daca celalalt nu a apreciat indeajuns nu inseamna ca ai gresit.Poate nu te-a inteles…Iar daca te-a inteles dar isi bate joc si o face si constient…atunci nu mai merita alta sansa.Pe cine sa fii suparata in cazul asta?!…zic ca nu merita. Nu ca il imit pe Beni in aprcieri fata de tine insa esti o persoana draguta sensibila autentica in care nevoia de viata penetreaza orice foaie virtuala ce-o folosesti.De ce sa iti doresti sa fii altfel?!..in numele a ce?…
    Mersi ca ti-ai deschis inima.M-a ajutat enorm.

  3. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 07:46

    monica,

    nu , mi-am facut prea mult rau.
    am fost vulnerabila, iar asta m-a costat.
    viata e o lupta, dar de una singura.
    mie nu mi-a oferit nimeni nici o sansa, totul a fost o amagire.
    totul a fost in mintea mea.
    sunt f. suparata pe mine.
    sansa e oferita altcuiva, cu siguranta.
    nici nu avea cum, era evident.
    regret aceasta vulnerabilitate, regret autoamagirea, regret totul.
    am facut o mare greseala.
    iar acest lucru nu mi-l iert.
    am fost atat de penibila, incat nici nu stiu daca mai ma pot privi in ochii.
    nu vreau aprecieri, nu am nevoie.
    sunt ceea ce sunt, cea mai mare fraiera posibila.
    nu e vorba de sansa, e cum nu se poate mai penibil.
    cu siguranta, mi-am batut joc de mine.
    cu siguranta, a fost o greseala si nu o sa mai fac asa ceva .
    o sa-mi reprim orice emotii, trebuie sa fiu asa cum am fost inainte.
    si nu vreau sa traiesc ,chiar e o povara.
    asta, in mod sigur

  4. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 08:00

    monica,

    ai dreptate, cand oferi o sansa daruiesti
    asta ma face sa vad cat de mult am gresit si cum mi-a jucat mintea feste
    era ceva sigur dar am avut ochii inchisi
    era normal ca ideile, tineretea, modernitatea, sa fie ceva demn de iubit
    nici nu vreau sa stiu sau sa ma gandesc ce am facut
    eu am fost propria mea bataie de joc
    cum a fost posibil asa ceva ?
    nu ma recunosc

  5. Avatarul lui monica monica says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 08:41

    „era normal ca ideile, tineretea, modernitatea, sa fie ceva demn de iubit”
    Maria..stii prea bine ca nu e neaparat sa fie asa.Ai confruntat fata in fata? Sau doar deduci?Aprecierile le-am facut sincer…fara motiv anume.
    Ti-apreciez capacitate insa mai mult umanitatea de care dai dovada in ultimul timp.Umanitate langa care simti caldura si odihna si careia i-ai dat frau liber sa te posede. Am avut mii de momente in care mi-am spus exact ca tine…”imi sunt propria bataie de joc”…si inca le am .Durerea e de nemasurat insa…am facut-o in numele prieteniilor…in numele unei recunostinte sincere si coplesitoare pe care n-o regret.Daca nu actionam astfel n-as fi fost eu.Ma prefer vulnerabila decat insensibila .Prefer sa simt durere decat nimic. Spuneai recent …comunicarea joaca un rol primordial….Confruntati temerile Maria, cu cei care te-au dezamagit.Abia apoi ia decizii si da verdicte.Mi se pare mai drept fata de tine insuti si fata de ceilalti sa procedezi asa. Maria…daca ai fi singura asa cum te simti oare de ce ti-as mai scrie ..plangand ..regretand ca suntem atat de imprastiati unii de altii si totusi asa de apropiati in ceea ce ne dorim?De ce mi-as deschide peste masura inima fata de tine daca vulnerabilitatea ta nu mi-ar impune respect nicidecum altceva?! Gandeste-te un pic…

  6. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 09:51

    monica,

    tu nu-ti dai seama cat de penibila am fost.
    De-abia acum cand am vazut cererea si sansa de a fi impreuna acordata cui trebuie, mi-am dat seama de prostia mea.
    tu nu-ti dai seama ca mi-am batut joc de mine, cu sentimentaliste, cu cantece de tot plansu ?
    nu-ti dai seama cat s-o fi glumit pe chestia asta, si ce jos am putut sa ajung ?
    vreau sa uit evenimente, fapte, replici, oameni, vreau sa uit.
    imi pare bine ca l-am cunoscut pe Edi si nu e deloc asa cum se vorbeste.
    e un om bun , de treaba si sper sa reuseasca in tot ce face.
    ii multumesc lui nicole, ca asa cum eram framantata de constiinta si de ideea binelui, nu reuseam sa vad minciuna din viata mea.
    ii multumesc lui leli si tie ca v-ati oferit sa vorbim , poate mi-e mai usor sa trec peste acest an.
    in rest, vreau sa uit totul.
    comunicarea nu ajuta la nimic, m-am dat in spectacol absurd si inutil.
    asa-zisa comunicare, m-a facut sa am sentimente si sa-mi bat joc de mine.
    e absurd totul, vulnerabilitate da, e ceva
    insa , prostie ?
    si poate as fi continuat daca nu as fi privit dovada in fata
    iti dai seama ce-am facut ?
    cum de m-am destainuit, cum de am inteles ceva atat de gresit ?
    destainuiri, nu trebuia sa fac asa ceva.
    o sa-mi ia timp sa inteleg cum de-a fost posibil sa gandesc ceva ce era impotriva oricarei ratiuni.
    am nevoie de uitare, si nu am ce sa confrunt.
    prostia ?
    e cel mai mare defect.
    trebuia sa-mi scrie in fata ca eu sa pricep nebunia in care traiam?
    nu e firesc, si cred ca nimic din ce-am facut nu are sens.
    nu pot comunica cu cineva spunandu-i ca am gandit o minciuna.
    ma condamn prea mult pentru acest lucru, abia daca ma pot uita in oglinda.
    e un cosmar tot ce s-a intamplat, ca atatea din viata mea.
    si trebuie sa uit totul.
    sper sa-i acorde sansa sa fie impreuna, chiar merita.
    iar eu trebuie sa uit prostia, sa uit bataia de joc in care m-am complacut, sa uit totul.
    ce mama naibii ma apucase cu muzici si cu destainuiri.
    cat s-o fi ras pe chestia asta.
    e bine totusi ca s-a terminat cosmarul.
    ramane uitarea.
    o sa lucrez si la asa ceva, neaparat.

  7. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 10:58

    monica,

    cred ca ai dreptate.
    abia acum am analizat ce-ai spus.
    e posibil sa fi gresit, sa fi inteles gresit, insa e un lucru bun in tot ceea ce s-a intamplat.
    poate niciodata nu m-am gandit la sentimente, poate niciodata nu am lasat sa se intample asa ceva.
    cred ca e un castig.
    pentru mine e un castig, abia acum realizez.
    e ceva curios totusi,vedeam viata cu totul altfel.
    mi-e greu sa recunosc dar chiar ma simt bine.
    cred ca reusesc sa inteleg ca nu a fost totul pierdut si am castigat ceva.
    nu credeam ca pot fi vulnerabila, dar trebuia deschisa calea catre sansa de a fi mai sensibila fata de anumite lucruri.
    poate ca asta-i adevarata sansa.
    poate, nu stiu.
    ramane de vazut.
    iti multumesc, monica !
    ca ai avut rabdare atat de mult si nici nu ma asteptam sa gasesc in inima mea asa ceva

  8. Avatarul lui lelitza lelitza says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 12:07

    Project Gutenberg offers over 36,000 free ebooks to download to your PC, Kindle, Android, iOS or other portable device. Choose between ePub, Kindle, HTML and simple text formats.

    http://www.gutenberg.org

  9. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 12:40

    Monica, nu intelegi „limitele limbajului” (cu dublu inteles si confuz) al Emmei…
    Ea are (acum) o problema cu mine, in principal (mai mult sau mai putin indirect – nu inteleg de ce nu spune in fata exact care este problema din punctul ei de vedere, atunci cand se iveste; o da mereu ocolita, cu subtrat). O problema de dezamagire, de spulberare a unor false sperante (si emotii) construite (doar) in mintea ei. Sometimes our brain see things that aren’t really there. Wishful thinking & rationalization – pretending the reality is the way we want (we wish to be).
    Yup, I’m practically considered „the bad guy” here (in this pathetic and overreacted melodrama). It’s always easier to blame others for our own mistakes… playing the victim.

    So… excuse me for not being „sensitive” (making appeal to emotions) about this. 😐

  10. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 13:05

    CJ

    nu joc rolul victimei, ai inteles gresit.
    s-a pus punctul pe „i” , javrele trebuie sa paraseasca terenul.
    stai linistit, nu esti baiatul ‘rau”. numai tii hainele celui care arunca cu pietre.
    nu-i nimic rau in asta.
    ai inceput sa devii crestin.
    e de apreciat .

  11. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 14:37

    ● What Earth Will Look Like 100 Million Years from Now
                Earth As It Might Be In The Future

    ● Relativist Apologetics: The Future of Creationism? :yes: [articol scris in 1997!]
    Relativism, then, can help creationists. It can be adopted to give creationism intellectual respectability, but it also creates a climate where evolutionist arguments for an educational monopoly ring hollow. Of course, no one can say if creationists will ever develop a full-blown relativist apologetic strategy.
    [nu de prost incearca Aiurel Ionica sa ii manipuleze (sa se alieze) pe (cu) fundamentalistii religiosi – nu ca i-ar pasa cu adevarat de religie/biblie]

    ● Was Bertrand Russell an Atheist or an Agnostic?
    Actually, many of us are atheists and agnostics.

    As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one prove that there is not a God.
    On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.

    ● An interview with John Caputo – Postmodernism and Religion

    Luke: Let’s back up a bit. I wonder if you could explain for us what the project of deconstruction is and post-modern philosophy in general. What’s going on there? I think a lot of people, especially in America, are not going to be familiar with that.
    John: Deconstruction is one of several modes of post-modern thinking. Post-modernism is a catchword that has caught on. I use the word “post-modernism” when I want to draw a crowd. So when I run a conference, I always say it’s about post-modernism.
    […]
    Post-modern theory generally, but I think deconstruction in particular, has been getting a hearing among religious people, Interestingly, evangelical Christians who are turning an ear toward post-modern theory and hearing something there which helps them reinvent the Gospel and reinvent their religious tradition. Then they come in conflict with the more conservative set. It, I think, has a salutary effect in a lot of evangelical thinkers, somewhat more so than Catholic thinking.
    That’s a curious thing because Catholic thinking has tended to become more and more analytic. Because when you look at the great medieval masters, they were very technical, precise, and analytic thinkers. So there’s an argument out that that says, well, look, the true successors to Catholic theology are the analytic philosophers, not the Continentalists. […]
    Right after the Second Vatican Council back in the 60s, Catholic universities opened their doors to Continental philosophy. But then I would say in the last 20 years, they were happy with hermeneutics, existentialism, and phenomenology, but they’ve become very cautious about post-structuralism, about Derrida and Foucault and those guys. Much more suspicious of them. And they sort of closed the doors a little bit and have become much more analytic. But a lot of evangelical Christians, whose background figure is not the high Middle Ages but Saint Augustine, they’ve actually become more interested in post-modernism.
    […]
    Luke: Well, John, let’s get back to religion. Derrida had an approach to religion called “religion without religion.” What was that about?
    John: The “without religion” part is easy, and that is Derrida’s an atheist. What’s more interesting is what’s the sense in which there’s still a religion after all of that. Well that’s because he’s got what you might call a secular, or a phenomenological, or an experiential conception of the religious structure of experience. He tends to put that into Jewish terms. I like to call him an atheistic quasi-Augustinian Jewish Messianism. He’ll use this notion of the Messianic. He says, “Well, the Messianic is the very structure of hope itself, the very structure of faith itself.” Where those are human experiences, those are structures of human experiences; they’re not confessional ideas.
    We should not let the theologians have the word faith. We should not give it to them. We should not give them the word hope, or other words like grace or even prayer. They don’t belong to the theologians; they belong to us. They are part of the furniture of human existence, part of the structure of human existence.
    No legal system, no national constitution, no institution can function without hope, and without a faith if there’s any future, without a structure of expectation, and without an attempt to keep the future open. Those are what I’d say are religious structures but without religion, without the dogmas of Christianity or Islam.
    When you put it in academic terms, I would say religion needs to be taught in the humanities program. Studying religion is like studying literature or studying history. You’re studying something basic about the nature of human experience, rather than studying some dogmatic confessional system.
    The predecessor figure in theology itself would be somebody like Tillich. What he says is, “Religion is a matter of the ultimate concern, whether or not you believe in God or not.” That would be the closest thing I can think of, among the Greek theologians the closest thing to this sort of argument that Derrida is making.
    You find the passion of life in many places, under many headings in different situations, with or without what we call religion. Sometimes the most irreligious people of the world are the officials of religion.

    John Caputo – What Would Jesus Deconstruct? The Good News of Postmodernism for the Church (pdf download)

    ● an interesting website – biblioklept [„We review books and discuss the books we’re reading. We also like to interview authors, publishers, and other book-type people.”]

    ● movies about religious crap: The Ledge & Parrot

  12. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 17:28

    Pentru cine-i interesat, parerea dr.Victor Stenger , specialist in fizica particulelor despre experimentul de la CERN.
    Descoperirea neutrinului nu va clatina teoria lui Einstein ci va rasturna distinctia intre cauza si efect.

    http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/09/28/victor-stenger-on-speedy-neutrinos-did-we-cause-god/

  13. Avatarul lui Frosa Frosa says:
    2 octombrie 2011 la 20:27

    Fetelor, învățați să fiți mai indulgente cu voi înșivă, că vă chinuiți singure degeaba, stricați bunătate de adrenalină pe prostii și pierdeți vremea auto-torturându-vă, în loc să vă distrați. Toți facem greșeli. Ei, și? Bine că n-a murit nimeni din greșelile astea sau n-a rămas handicapat ori paralizat. În rest, noi să fim sănătoși, că belelele curg! Cât o să mai trăim o să greșim și o s-o luăm în bot, fiți pe pace, nu s-a terminat. Important e să știi cum să ieși cât mai repede din rău de mare sufletesc. E simplist tot ce zic și înțelepciunea asta am dobândit-o după ani de analize complicate, în care am gândit prea mult și m-am chinuit singură (deși nu m-a obligat nimeni) în loc să mă bucur de tot ce pot.

    Maria, tot te scot io odată la Satul de Vacanță!
    Pup!

  14. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 03:26

    Frosa,

    Imi pare bine ca te aud.
    Ai mare dreptate. Stiu ca am gresit mult, de aceea incerc sa ma detasez si nu ma mai intereseaza nimic. Mai intru pe la off topic atat.
    Problema e ca nu suport minciuna si mandria si o iau razna de tot cand vad asa ceva.
    Te astept sau va astept la Satul de vacanta !

  15. Avatarul lui maria maria says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 04:01

    ediorgu

    @alexa – felicitari pentru curaj. Cred ca i-ai facut un mare bine Mariei. O2 a fost si este un fel de terapie pentru multi (ma includ), dar terapia are si parti neplacute, cand ti se arata probleme pe care altii nu ti le spun ca sa nu te simti jignit, sau daca unii ti le spun direct o pui pe faptul ca au ceva personal cu tine (vezi CJ vs Maria). Daca Frosa si Anubis au inceput o treaba buna cu Maria, tu ai terminat-o, facand ”the dirty job”.

    Din punctul meu de vedere e f.grav ceea ce spui.
    In primul rand minimalizezi acel ‘eu” existential pe care-l are fiecare, acea farama de constiinta pe care nu ti-o poate schimba nimeni.
    Ca altul sa te „educe” inseamna ca este acea constiinta perfecta, cu notiuni bine definite si in masura sa te modifice structural.
    „Terapia” de grup e buna, in cazul in care fiecare avem de invatat cate ceva.
    Ceea ce m-a deranjat pe mine e faptul ca s-a speculat pe un text care nu justifica nimic,si ca a „certifica” un fapt cum ar fi sifilisul lui Eminescu e deja prea mult, denota cu totul altceva.
    Nu neg faptul ca deranjez si nu o sa o mai fac niciodata, insa e pur si simplu atentat la dreptul cuiva de a fi el insusi.
    Anubis si Nicole nu m-au modificat structural, cum faci cu o papusa pe care o asezi asa cum vrei tu.
    Dupa ani de studiu, si experiente cu pacienti , iti poti „permite” sa faci tabloul psihologic al unei persoane.
    E o logica de bun simt si nimeni nu se poate erija in cunoscatorul deplin al personalitatii cuiva.
    Chiar Freud a spus-o.
    Cred ca toti avem partile nostre bune si rele, insa nimeni nu este atat de perfect incat sa-si permita sa fie constiinta altuia.
    A face o astfel de treaba asa cum ai spus tu, inseamna ca cel care o face e model de integritate comportamentala , morala si educationala si cel asupra caruia se lucreza e un material de studiu pe care se pot face experimente.
    E prea mult ce am auzit.

  16. Avatarul lui S M Popilian - colectionar de opinii S M Popilian - colectionar de opinii says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 06:27

    Maria,

    Orice supărare,

    E atât de mare,

    Cât ș-o dorește

    Cel ce o are.

    Ești o femeie cu multe lecturi. Te întreb, vorba lui A. Pleșu, la ce mai este bună cultura ? Oare din ce cauză această cultură nu te ajută să ieși din criză ? Crize are orice om indiferent că o recunoaște sau nu.

    Alexa, după părerea mea, este o persoană care face dovada, în ce te privește, unei lipse elementare de finețe și tact chiar și în plan profesional. Cu alte cuvinte, dacă viața mi-ar oferi neșansa, nu m-aș duce la o astfel de ”profesionistă” să-i cer părerea. Crezi că mai are timp să se șlefuiască ? Dar dacă a scris așa zisul portret tocmai când era în criza ce o au femeile odată pe lună ?

  17. Avatarul lui ediorgu ediorgu says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 07:04

    @ maria
    Ceea ce a urmat dupa mesajul Alexei arata ca nu ati inteles ce a vrut sa spuna, deci si comentariul meu l-ati ratat. Nu sunt psiholog, dar exibitionismul emotional pe care-l practicati pe O2 arata ca aveti niste probleme (toti avem, nici unul mu suntem normali, mai ales cei care vin din mediul religios) care va impiedica sa intelegeti corect mesajele care vi se adreseaza.
    Daca nu puteti accepta ideea ca nu va pricepeti la scris (faptul ca mai nimeriti ceva la subiect are de-a face cu teoria probabilitatilor – cu cat scrieti mai mult, cu atat aveti sanse mai mari sa numeriti ceva interesant on-topic), macar acceptati ca nu e normal sa petreceti atata timp online in acelasi loc si sa abuzati de spatiul virtual public. Multe din conversatii isi au locul pe email sau alte canale private (ca sa intelegeti ce am vrut sa zic cu exibitionismul emotional). Nu am nimic personal cu dumneavoastra, probabil ca v-as aprecia ca persoana daca v-as cunoaste, si stiu ca nu am nici un drept sa va fac morala. Cred doar ca sunteti o persoana valoroasa care nu reuseste sa-si puna in valoare calitatile pentru ca nu are simtul masurii si astfel cade usor in ridicol.
    Puteti sa ma considerati un nesimtit si un bagacios, dar nu ma deranjeaza. Ce m-ar intrista ar fi ca si de data asta sa ma intelegeti gresit.

    Toate cele bune!

  18. Avatarul lui lelitza lelitza says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 09:02

    apropro de ultimele evenimente in lumea stiintei

    „…We don’t allow faster-than-light neutrinos in here,” says the barman.
    A neutrino walks into a bar… :-))

  19. Avatarul lui Ed&Edd&Eddie Ed&Edd&Eddie says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 09:38

    Lelitza:

    1. Neutrinos ala nu are nevoie de permisiune ca sa se bage oriunde doreste. :no:
    2. Barmanul era o blonda? :chic:
    3. Chiar daca neutrinos ala e rapid ordinea glumei nu trebuie inversata! :loser:
    4. Farmecul glumei nu trebuie sa fie complicat aici pe Oxigen fiindca ii lasa pe dinafara pe cei care sunt versati intru mantuire, gen Benica si altii asemenea lui! :pain:

  20. Avatarul lui lelitza lelitza says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 11:45

    Ed&Edd&Eddie,

    ma bucur ca ai gustat bancul.

    1. pai o fi fost un left-handed neutrino care a confundat barul cu o gaura neagra in cautarea unui right-handed neutrino. :-))

    2. nu stiu daca era blonda insa se pare ca e antineutrin(a) 🙂

    3. nuuuu, nu trebuie inversata ca altminteri te trezesti ca razi cu pofta INAINTE de a pricepe gluma.

    4. nu-i nimeni pe dinafara. fiecare sare coarda in ce dimensiune doreste.

    Le&Leli&Lelitza

  21. Avatarul lui danut danut says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 11:47

    Maria trebuie sa ramana activa pe forum si sa treaca peste eoarea comisa de Alexa de a o analiza in public pt firea ei mai sensibila, boema si poate usor incoerenta, dar, f lucida si cu o cultura de invidiat la varsta ei (banunid ca e tanara). deci maria, lasa in urma frustarile si tristetea si ramai pe aici mai departe, pt ca e nevoie de tine! Alexa greste capital cand iti cere sa iti dezvalui profesia, ocupatia si pregatirea academica. asta nu a are nimic de a face cu a posta idei si opinii pe acest forum. Ar insemna ca edi sa nu aiba autoritate in ceea ce spune, el fiind pastor, nu filozof sau savant. Alexa esti o tipa isteata, dar ai gresit capital cum ai procedat cu Maria…

  22. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 12:26

    Alexa esti o tipa isteata, dar ai gresit capital cum ai procedat cu Maria…

    You’ve got to be kidding me! :smug:

  23. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 13:37

    ► An interview with philosopher and theologian John Caputo – Postmodernism and Religion

            Post-modern theory generally, but I think deconstruction in particular, has been getting a hearing among religious people. Interestingly, evangelical Christians who are turning an ear toward post-modern theory and hearing something there which helps them reinvent the Gospel and reinvent their religious tradition. Then they come in conflict with the more conservative set. It, I think, has a salutary effect in a lot of evangelical thinkers, somewhat more so than Catholic thinking.
            That’s a curious thing because Catholic thinking has tended to become more and more analytic. Because when you look at the great medieval masters, they were very technical, precise, and analytic thinkers. So there’s an argument out that that says, well, look, the true successors to Catholic theology are the analytic philosophers, not the Continentalists. Because Continentalists were too wild-eyed. That’s a curious reversal because kind of once we first hit the shores of the United States, it was through Catholic universities. And also English departments in the secular universities. But Catholic universities, they didn’t have an Anglo-Saxon tradition. The Anglo-Saxon tradition was Protestant. The Catholic tradition was Continental.
            Right after the Second Vatican Council back in the 60s, Catholic universities opened their doors to Continental philosophy. But then I would say in the last 20 years, they were happy with hermeneutics, existentialism, and phenomenology, but they’ve become very cautious about post-structuralism, about Derrida and Foucault and those guys. Much more suspicious of them. And they sort of closed the doors a little bit and have become much more analytic. But a lot of evangelical Christians, whose background figure is not the high Middle Ages but Saint Augustine, they’ve actually become more interested in post-modernism.
    […]
            Analytic philosophers say that continental philosophers are people who can’t understand logic. Continental philosophers say the analytic philosophers are people who can’t understand foreign languages. But philosophically it’s a much more fertile region for dialogue than the politics of this.
            I think that it’s a shame that in most continental programs they don’t get to study symbolic logic. And they don’t see what a formal system is, which is a real severe handicap for continental philosophers, because the post-structuralism has a lot in common with Godel. It’s arguing that formal assistance can’t be both complete and consistent.
            That’s an exaggeration, but it’s not totally an exaggeration. There really is something to it. Continental philosophers really don’t see what the formal system looks like, and they have to learn something about axiomatizability and formalized ability. But, they don’t, because they don’t study the logic.
    […]
            Luke: Well, John, let’s get back to religion. Derrida had an approach to religion called “religion without religion.” What was that about?

            John: The “without religion” part is easy, and that is Derrida’s an atheist. What’s more interesting is what’s the sense in which there’s still a religion after all of that. Well that’s because he’s got what you might call a secular, or a phenomenological, or an experiential conception of the religious structure of experience. He tends to put that into Jewish terms. I like to call him an atheistic quasi-Augustinian Jewish Messianism. He’ll use this notion of the Messianic. He says, “Well, the Messianic is the very structure of hope itself, the very structure of faith itself.” Where those are human experiences, those are structures of human experiences; they’re not confessional ideas.
            We should not let the theologians have the word faith. We should not give it to them. We should not give them the word hope, or other words like grace or even prayer. They don’t belong to the theologians; they belong to us. They are part of the furniture of human existence, part of the structure of human existence.
            No legal system, no national constitution, no institution can function without hope, and without a faith if there’s any future, without a structure of expectation, and without an attempt to keep the future open. Those are what I’d say are religious structures but without religion, without the dogmas of Christianity or Islam.
            When you put it in academic terms, I would say religion needs to be taught in the humanities program. Studying religion is like studying literature or studying history. You’re studying something basic about the nature of human experience, rather than studying some dogmatic confessional system.
            The predecessor figure in theology itself would be somebody like Tillich. What he says is, “Religion is a matter of the ultimate concern, whether or not you believe in God or not.” That would be the closest thing I can think of, among the Greek theologians the closest thing to this sort of argument that Derrida is making.
            You find the passion of life in many places, under many headings in different situations, with or without what we call religion. Sometimes the most irreligious people of the world are the officials of religion.

    What Would Jesus Deconstruct? The Good News of Postmodernism for the Church (download the ebook)

    ► The Postmodernism Generator (thanks ibrian!)
    The essay you have just seen is completely meaningless and was randomly generated by the Postmodernism Generator.

    ► Speaking of postmodernism. Relativist Apologetics: The Future of Creationism?
    Relativism, then, can help creationists. It can be adopted to give creationism intellectual respectability, but it also creates a climate where evolutionist arguments for an educational monopoly ring hollow. Of course, no one can say if creationists will ever develop a full-blown relativist apologetic strategy.

  24. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 14:51

    "I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think." - Socrates
    _________________________________________________________________

    # Was Bertrand Russell an Atheist or an Agnostic?

    As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one prove that there is not a God.
    On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.

    # “Carl Sagan wasn’t even an atheist!” Setting the record straight, once and for all. Carl Sagan and Atheism/Agnosticism [via milkywaymusings.com]

    # Why I Believed: Reflections of a Former Missionary (read the book online)

    Chapter 2: My Journey from Missionary Bible Translator to Humanist
    I’ll take the opportunity up front to clear up any uncertainty as to my present position. I have donned in succession various labels since my deconversion: deist, agnostic, and atheist-leaning agnostic (meaning that I suspect there is no god, while leaving open the possibility that God does exist). For all practical purposes, however, I am an atheist, though I prefer the more positive terms naturalist or humanist: I consider it likely that nature is all that exists, and I believe that the most important aspect of our lives is how we relate to other humans in an effort to make society a better place.
    […]
    Chapter 9: Purpose and Meaning
    One of the most common questions I am asked is, „If you don’t believe in God, what reason do you have to get up in the morning and carry on with life?” One correspondent even suggested it was immoral for me to have brought children into the world if there is nothing more to this life than living and dying, as the popular Christian musician Steven Curtiss Chapman put it. Amy Grant sings, „I refuse to believe that we’re only here to live and die.” Theologian and pastor Greg Boyd captures our fear of insignificance in these terms:
    „We strive to infuse our lives with some sort of significance, some sort of meaning. But if our cosmos is ultimately indifferent and purposeless, all we are, all we do, all we believe in, all we strive for is „dust in the wind.” After we exist, it matters not whether anyone has ever, or ever will again, exist. Everything is ultimately meaningless.”
    Amy Grant’s refusal to believe notwithstanding, if nothing does in fact lie beyond the grave, then nothing does in fact lie beyond the grave. Reality does not bend to suit our desires. We may hold out hope that there is more to life than this, in the same way that a mother whose son has been missing in action for twenty years may hope he is alive and will return, but our hope does not change reality if there is nothing beyond the grave, any more than the mother’s hope can bring her son back to life if in fact he is dead.
    […]
    A legitimate criticism often leveled against us unbelievers is that our stance tends to be entirely negative. In decrying religion we offer no positive replacement. As long as there is nothing to replace the role of religion for personal meaning, morality, community, and financial security, few will consider it worthwhile to make the transition out of religion, even in the face of its many flaws. This is the argument of humanist Paul Kurtz, who calls unbelievers to stop simply debunking religion and to move on to building social structures and movements that benefit humanity at large. We can find meaning and satisfaction in making the world a freer and better place in which to live, carrying on the tradition that our Enlightenment forefathers like Thomas Jefferson and John Adams began in our country. This is the essence of humanism: to improve the lives of humans. It is not merely, as antihumanist fundamentalists suggest, to make us as humans the center of our own life, the captain of our own ship. The focus of humanism is to improve the lot of all, knowing that if we are to make life better for our fellow human, we cannot rely on any unseen power to make it happen; we must make it happen ourselves. It is for these reasons that I generally prefer to apply to myself the positive term humanist rather than the more negative term atheist, even if technically I could be considered an atheist.

    # What Earth Will Look Like 100 Million Years from Now
    & Earth As It Might Be In The Future

    # An interesting website – Biblioklept. Check it out.
    „We review books and discuss the books we’re reading. We also like to interview authors, publishers, and other book-type people. Occasionally, we’ll review movies and even TV programs.”

    # The Feynman Series: Beauty & Curiosity :yes:

    Enjoy! 😉

  25. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 17:31

    Hey, what time is it? :clock: :idk:
    It’s time to go back to school! Yay! :victory:

    double u double u double u aurel ionica dot com
    :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

    Are you ready to laugh… or to be completely bored by Aiurel? Get ready! :dance: :clap:

    _________________________
    verificati spam-ul pt. comentarii.

  26. Avatarul lui ediorgu ediorgu says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 19:31

    LOOOOL, nice work! Ionica are deja layout pentru site acum.
    Bai, acum imi dau seama, C.J. e fratele lui Aurel, parca asa zicea, ca frati-su o sa-i faca saitul… What a strange square world!
    Ai uitat sa faci sectiunea SPAM – Mesaje de la Edi si javrele lui.

  27. Avatarul lui Ed&Edd&Eddie Ed&Edd&Eddie says:
    3 octombrie 2011 la 22:18

    „A Scots boy came home from school and told his mother he had been given a part in the school play. „Wonderful,” says the mother, „What part is it?” The boy says „I play the part of the Scottish husband!” The mother scowls and says: „Go back and tell your teacher you want a speaking part.”

  28. Avatarul lui lelitza lelitza says:
    4 octombrie 2011 la 07:59

    Ed&Edd&Eddie,

    loool. acu’ pricep eu de ce la ocazii speciale barbatii scotieni se imbraca fustite. Ca sa aiba si ei, macar din cand in cand, dreptul sa vorbeasca.

  29. Avatarul lui NorthLite study_nature says:
    5 octombrie 2011 la 11:50

    Premiul Nobel pentru Chimie anuntat azi este inca un exemplu al modului in care un om de stiinta perseverent si care are de partea sa adevarul poate schimba status quo-ul intregii comunitati a oamenilor de stiinta.

    Declaratia de presa:

    In quasicrystals, we find the fascinating mosaics of the Arabic world reproduced at the level of atoms: regular patterns that never repeat themselves. However, the configuration found in quasicrystals was considered impossible, and Daniel Shechtman had to fight a fierce battle against established science. The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2011 has fundamentally altered how chemists conceive of solid matter.

    On the morning of 8 April 1982, an image counter to the laws of nature appeared in Daniel Shechtman’s electron microscope. In all solid matter, atoms were believed to be packed inside crystals in symmetrical patterns that were repeated periodically over and over again. For scientists, this repetition was required in order to obtain a crystal.

    Shechtman’s image, however, showed that the atoms in his crystal were packed in a pattern that could not be repeated. Such a pattern was considered just as impossible as creating a football using only six-cornered polygons, when a sphere needs both five- and six-cornered polygons. His discovery was extremely controversial. In the course of defending his findings, he was asked to leave his research group. However, his battle eventually forced scientists to reconsider their conception of the very nature of matter.

    Aperiodic mosaics, such as those found in the medieval Islamic mosaics of the Alhambra Palace in Spain and the Darb-i Imam Shrine in Iran, have helped scientists understand what quasicrystals look like at the atomic level. In those mosaics, as in quasicrystals, the patterns are regular – they follow mathematical rules – but they never repeat themselves.

    When scientists describe Shechtman’s quasicrystals, they use a concept that comes from mathematics and art: the golden ratio. This number had already caught the interest of mathematicians in Ancient Greece, as it often appeared in geometry. In quasicrystals, for instance, the ratio of various distances between atoms is related to the golden mean.

    Following Shechtman’s discovery, scientists have produced other kinds of quasicrystals in the lab and discovered naturally occurring quasicrystals in mineral samples from a Russian river. A Swedish company has also found quasicrystals in a certain form of steel, where the crystals reinforce the material like armor. Scientists are currently experimenting with using quasicrystals in different products such as frying pans and diesel engines.

  30. Avatarul lui Anubis Anubis says:
    5 octombrie 2011 la 23:16

    Cu drag pt. Frosa si restul de animale necredincioase de pe O2 incl. pt. Edi:

  31. Avatarul lui emma emma says:
    7 octombrie 2011 la 16:05

    monica,

    Daca vrei sa vorbim in particular, ti-as multumi !

  33. Avatarul lui CameliaZ CameliaZ says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 15:57

    buna la toata lumea

    Am nevoie de ajutorul vostru. La scoala am clasa de sociologie si trebuie sa scriu un research paper de 10 pagini cu privire la religie in conceptia theoristilor functionalisti, de conflict si integrare symbolica. Ma poate ajuta cineva? Idei?
    Cam asta m-i se cere:

    In your paper address the following elements:
    1. How does each theory apply to the selected sociological institution? What are the similarities? What are the differences?
    2. How does each theory affect the views of the individual who is part of the institution?
    3. How does each theory affect the approach to social change within the selected institution?
    4. Within the Sociological institution selected, how does each theory affect the views of society?

  34. Avatarul lui emma emma says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 16:55

    CameliaZ

    Pot sa-ti dau referinte:

    Ioan Bunea „Fenomenologia constiintei sociale” pag.56-68
    ernest bernea „trilogie sociologica” pag.17,163-181
    Carmen Cornelia balan „Sociologie aplicata ” pag.22, 84

    Dar tu vrei sa scrii despre religie ?
    Si aici trebuie sa scrii despre o anume institutie religioasa (ortodoxa, catolica etc).

  35. Avatarul lui emma emma says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 21:14

    Camelia nu trebuie sa scrii decat despre Emile Durkheim (reprezentantul sociologismului care a elaborat o teorie generala a tuturor religiilor), karl marx (viziunea integralista a religiei) si Max Weber (conceptia de idealtip, intemeietorul sociologiei crestine).
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/41596141/Emil-Durkheim-Forme-Element-Are-Ale-Vietii-Religioase-Recenzie (gasesti tot ce trebuie dar poti sa citesti si „Sinuciderea” scrisa de E.D.in 1897 )
    Durkheim defineste religia in termenii unei distinctii intre sacru si profane. El considera ca nu sacrul, in sine, este cel care denota religia, ci opozitia sa fata de profan, opozitie pe care o considera structurala. El sustine ca obiectele sacre si simbolurile trebuie tratate in mod diferit decat aspectele de rutina ale existentei, domeniul profanului. Durkheim considera ca totemul este sacru, deoarece el este simbolul grupului insusi, reprezentand totodata valorile centrale ale respectivului grup sau comunitati. Deoarece religia este nedespartita de experienta comunitatii, ea creeaza grupuri, fiind colectiva.
    Pentru Marx religia nu este decat o iluzie legata de alienarea omului in regimul capitalist. Marx sustine ca religia are adesea implicatii ideologice, care servesc a justifica interesele grupurilor conducatoare pe seama celorlalte. Marx considera ca religia in forma ei traditionala trebuie sa dispara si va disparea, deoarece toatevalorile pozitive intruchipate in religie vor deveni idealuri care vor duce la imbunatatirea soartei umanitatii in lume, nu pentru ca aceste idealuri si valori ar fi eronate. Marx considera ca religia este ‘’opiul, drogul poporului’’ , ea promite fericirea si rasplata oamenilor in viata de apoi, obligandu-i sa accepte conditiile existente din viata aceasta.
    Max weber „Etica protestantă şi spiritul capitalismului“.

    Am crezut ca poti scrie despre o anumita institutie, insa tema se referea la teorii, scuza-ma.

    ca sa-ti pot spune pe puncte imi ia mult din acest spatiu

  37. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 21:45

    Doamna Emma, CameliaZ va multumeste pentru copy&paste.
    Cica daca voia cu adevarat, putea sa dea si ea search pe Google. Nu avea nevoie de o roboata, care minte cu nerusinare ca l-a citit pe Foucault (si altii), cu fraze furate din recenzii de pe scribd. Ah, scuza-ma, am uitat ca tu cu asta te ocupai.

    CameliaZ, ce dracu doamna, n-ati auzit de GoogleGoogle si de online research? Fir-ar mama ei a dracu’ de tehnologie cu Jesus cu tot!

    http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Introduction_to_Sociology/Sociological_Theory#References

  38. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 21:51

    Din ciclul „copy&paste” (fara nicio treaba cu robotii sau hienele anti-eddieconst), dar la categoria „lucruri interesante pe care ar fi bine sa aruncam un ochi”:

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/George-Orwell/117663405816
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Bertrand-Russell/86711477873
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rationality/70784829441
    http://www.youtube.com/education

  40. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 22:09

    Hai ca acuma mi-e somn. Poate altadata „construim un dialog”. Fir-am ai dracu’ sa fim de javre cu totii!

    About postmodernism
    http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=9750#comment-66537

    http://www.openculture.com/2011/10/chomsky-foucault_debate_1971.html
    http://www.chomsky.info/debates/1971xxxx.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_nature#Brief_history_of_the_concept
    Still more recent scientific perspectives such as behaviorism, determinism, and the chemical model within modern psychiatry and psychology, claim to be neutral regarding human nature. (As in all modern science they seek to explain without recourse to metaphysical causation.) They can be offered to explain its origins and underlying mechanisms, or to demonstrate capacities for change and diversity which would arguably violate the concept of a fixed human nature.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_nature#Spiritual_versus_natural

    Carl Sagan’s transhumanist vision

    http://joelfirenze.posterous.com/the-frontier-is-everywhere-transcript
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posthuman (chiar as dori sa se initieze o discutie despre chestia asta)
    http://kruel.co/

    http://www.universetoday.com/89490/video-nobel-prize-winner-explains-the-expanding-universe/

    http://www.youtube.com/education

  41. Avatarul lui NorthLite study_nature says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 23:20

    am scos numele de familie si link-ul prin care CJ specula cu privire la identitatea emmei; am ciuntit adjectivul folosit de el in dreptul site-ului Being Human in asa fel incat sa poata fi reperat doar de cunoscatori.
    am procedat asa pentru ca respectivele comentarii contineau si lucruri potential utile si deoarece CJ si-a exprimat anterior dorinta ca moderarea comentariilor ce includ cuvinte obscene sau speculatii despre identitatea vreunui utilizator sa nu fie doar de tip „totul sau nimic”, ci sa se materializeze si prin inlaturarea portiunilor ofensatoare.

  42. Avatarul lui emma emma says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 23:36

    CJ

    Nu-ti permit , minti cu nerusinare.
    Camelia ia de buna, ce-ti spun. Ti-am dat ce-am gasit pe Google pentru ca nu aveam ce sa-ti trimit altfel.
    Nu e vorba de alta , pe Google nu ai tot, uita-te si la autorii romani pe care ti i-am dat.
    Si mai e ceva , uita-te pe „Psihologia conceptelor ” de Theodule Ribot.

    CJ

    De ce nu incerci o expunere de idei sa luam de ex. o carte a lui F. care nu-i pe net.
    Mi-e greata de cei care dau numai pentru a apara pe cineva.
    Nu v-am facut nimic, inainte de a ma acuza.

  43. Avatarul lui emma emma says:
    8 octombrie 2011 la 23:41

    study_nature

    despre ce vorbesti ?
    cred ca ar trebui sa stiu si eu.

  44. Avatarul lui emma emma says:
    9 octombrie 2011 la 00:21

    Am gasit pe net o carte de care stiam, si care merita citita :”Psihologia sociala sau masina de fabricat zei” de Serge Moscovici.

    CJ,
    Chiar imi pare rau de cele intamplate, eu imi cer iertare.
    Nu se ajungea aici daca nu eram acuzata pe nedrept. Stiu ca am reactionat gresit, insa m-am cam saturat de aceleasi stereotipii.

  45. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    9 octombrie 2011 la 09:41

    ‘Coming Out in America‘ is a new film about atheists coming out
    http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-las-vegas/coming-out-america-is-a-new-film-about-atheists-coming-out

    This documentary seeks to shed light on the bullying, discrimination and overall ill-regard many atheists face in modern society.
    The general goal of this film is to showcase the goodness that can exist within anyone, no matter what his or her religious or philosophical worldview may be.

    Bill O’Reilly vs. Richard Dawkins on ‘The Magic of Reality’
    [a.k.a. colectionarul fundamentalist-adventist de opnii vs. eddieconst on ‘abordare anarho-teologica, conversationala, a temelor traditionale ale crestinismului, in contextul gandirii moderne’]

    Think about it. :-/ It’s the same thing here, in principle… the same damn bigotry and prejudice (the arrogance of ignorance).

  46. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    9 octombrie 2011 la 10:03

    * Skeptic’s Science Symposium Q&A

    n June 2011, five leading skeptics (Bill Nye, James Randi, Don Prothero, Brian Dalton, and Michael Shermer) met at Caltech during the Skeptics Society’s Science Symposium to discuss their experiences communicating with the public. Young audience members took advantage of these experts to ask excellent questions. This video includes one of the hottest topics in the skeptical community today: What is the most effective approach for educating the public and promoting skepticism, science, and critical thinking skills—confrontation, or a more gentle and respectful approach?

    * Critically Evaluating the Logic and Validity of Information :yes:
    http://academic.cuesta.edu/acasupp/as/403.htm

    * Just published – Adverse Effects of Vaccines – Evidence and Causality – National Academy of Sciences – free to download PDF (pentru pampalii creationisti, gen fisrtmonkey – si pt. sustinatorii teoriilor conspiratiei anti-science)

    Just published – Adverse Effects of Vaccines – Evidence and Causality – National Academy of Sciences – free to download PDF
    byu/TheManFromInternet inscience

    http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13164

    * Resources for New Members of the A-Team
    http://www.heavingdeadcats.com/2011/10/08/resources-for-new-members-of-the-a-team/

    * http://www.skeptical-science.com/ :yes:

  47. Avatarul lui CJ CJ says:
    9 octombrie 2011 la 10:15

    Against eddieconst’s views.
    Against accommodationism/concordism (‘progressive’ christianity & others) crap (theological sophisticated nonsense), in general.
    Against doublethink.

    http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/10/06/andrew-sullivan-is-a-mush-brained-metaphorizer/
    http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/10/07/andrew-sullivan-is-butthurt-responds/
    http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/rosenhouse-on-andrew-sullivan%E2%80%94again/

    _____________________
    Hey, zilele astea am tot ascultat melodia asta a celor de la Queen.

    Super melodie!

  48. Avatarul lui Ovidiu Ovidiu says:
    9 octombrie 2011 la 12:57

    Am urcat aici
    http://www.megaupload.com/?d=TJQ7IDGJ
    un articol pe care l-am scanat din revista STIINTA SI TEHNICA de luna aceasta, privind EVOLUTIA, BIG-BANG-ul si MULTIVERSURILE. Interesant.

  49. Avatarul lui NorthLite study_nature says:
    9 octombrie 2011 la 13:14

    CJ,
    multumesc pentru melodia de Queen pe care-ai recomandat-o, n-o stiam.
    Dar voi o stiti pe cea numita Innuendo? Este lunga, dar are o melodie complexa si versuri care merita urmarite, mai ales in ultima parte.

    emma,
    am sa-ti scriu pe email

  50. Avatarul lui ediorgu ediorgu says:
    9 octombrie 2011 la 17:07

    hey guys – this is my Queen favorite – Who wants to live forever?
    hehe… Forever is our today – cine citeste sa inteleaga…

← Older Comments
Newer Comments →

Lasă un răspuns:

Acest site folosește Akismet pentru a reduce spamul. Află cum sunt procesate datele comentariilor tale.