همیشه حرف های مفت فراوانی در اطراف ما وجود داشته است و هم اکنون نیز وجود دارد

بیست(سی) سال پیش یک فیلسوف دانشگاه ییل سخنانی ایراد کرد که علیرغم عنوان غیرمعمولش چندان مورد توجه قرار نگرفت، سخنرانی ای با عنوان «درباره حرف مفت» . سال گذشته این سخنرانی در قالب کتابی ۶۷ صفحه ای با همین نام انتشار یافت و اما این بار اقبال فراوانی به آن شد در رده یکی از پرفروش کتاب های فلسفی در دنیای انگلیسی زبان قرار گرفت و همچنان نیز پرفروش باقی مانده است و نویسنده ۷۵ ساله آن «هری فرانکفورت» - استاد فلسفه دانشگاه- در حد یک مرشد معنوی مورد استقبال قرار گرفته است. اما چرا چنین شد؟
تصاویر ناسازگاری وجود دارند که بعضی از مردم نمی توانند در برابر گیرایی آن مقاومت کنند. مثلاً دیدن راهبه ای که در جامه رسمی اش دارد می رقصد آنچنان که در فیلم «خواهر اکت» با نقش آفرینی ووپی گلدبرگ می بینیم.
ما به خاطر آن که چنین رخدادهایی به طور معمول رخ نمی دهند به سوی آنها جذب نمی شویم، بلکه آنها به این خاطر توجه ما را جلب می کنند، که «نباید رخ بدهند».
بنابر این هنگامی که یک استاد هفتاد و هشت ساله فلسفه کتابی منتشر کند با نام «درباره حرف مفت» و کتاب در عرض تنها چند ماه به چاپ دهم برسد، شاید نباید خیلی هم تعجب کنیم.
هری فرانکفورت استاد ممتاز بازنشسته دانشگاه پرینستون نویسنده کتاب می گوید: «مردم از تصور این که یک استاد دانشگاه های نخبه آمریکا از چنین زبانی استفاده کند کیف می کنند... نمی توانم بگویم که استقبال شدید از کتاب غافلگیرم نکرد... واقعاً شگفت زده شدم.»
فرانکفورت ۷۵ ساله حق دارد که شگفت زده باشد. هر چقدر هم که اکنون رفتارهای ما بچگانه و بی معنی باشد، خیلی بی معنی تر از بیست (سی) سال پیش نیست که این متن برای اولین بار برای ایراد به عنوان سخنرانی نوشته شد.

http://www.bashgah.net/fa/content/show/20469

👇🏿👇🏿👇🏿👇🏿👇🏿

THERE WAS ALWAYS A LOT OF BULLSHIT AROUND.
THERE ALWAYS IS.

Twenty (thirty) years ago a Yale philosopher gave a little-noticed lecture on the improbable subject of bullshit. Now, republished as a 67-page pamphlet, it has become a publishing sensation and its author is being feted as a guru.
How did that happen?
There are some dissonant images that the public can't resist. Such as the sight of a nun breakdancing in her habit in the film Sister Act, or elderly rural women casually remarking on which locals "like a bit of cock" in Little Britain's village shop. Their incongruity holds a particular appeal. We like them not just because they don't happen but because they shouldn't happen and secretly we wish that they would.
So when a septuagenarian philosophy professor brings out a book called On Bullshit and it goes into its 10th reprint in just a few months, maybe we shouldn't be too surprised.
"People are delighted by the idea of an Ivy League professor using this kind of language," says Harry Frankfurt philosopher emeritus at Princeton University. "I can't say I'm surprised by the response it has got ... I'm amazed."
Frankfurt, 75, has a right to be. For however puerile we are now, we are presumably not a whole lot more so than when the essay was first written to be delivered at a lecture 20 years ago.
Back then Frankfurt was a fellow at the Whitney Humanity centre at Yale. One of the obligations that came with membership of the centre was to give a lecture every so often. Frankfurt gave one entitled "On Bullshit".
"I can't remember exactly what prompted it," says Frankfurt. "But there was always a lot of bullshit around. There always is."

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2005/may/12/internationaleducationnews.highereducation

BULLSHIT IS A GREATER ENEMY THAN LIES
From Trump’s phoney claims to the Brexit ‘£350m a week for the NHS’ promise, we have become mired in a sea of bogus truths. But what can we do about it?

Bullshit is having a moment. A spate of new books, including Newsnight presenter Evan Davis’s Post-Truth: Why We Have Reached Peak Bullshit and What We Can Do About It, Buzzfeed correspondent James Ball’s Post-Truth: How Bullshit Conquered the World, and political journalist Matthew d’Ancona’s Post Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back are all premised on the notion that we are in a new era.
What is that era? Thanks to – among other things – the democratizing effect of the internet, the resultant decline in deference to experts, rising scorn for the political establishment, the tendency of social media to lock us in our echo chambers where OUR ILL-FOUNDED OPINIONS ARE CONFIRMED RATHER THAN CHALLENGED, the blurring of fact and fiction online (a problem recognized in 1995 by the late journalist John Diamond who wrote: “The problem with the internet is everything is true”), we live in a post-truth era.

https://t.me/MkNotes/539

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/22/post-truth-era-trump-brexit-lies-book

A little girl was talking to her teacher about whales.
The teacher said it was physically impossible for a whale to swallow a human because even though it was a very large mammal its throat was very small.
The little girl stated that Jonah was swallowed by a whale.
Irritated, the teacher reiterated that a whale could not swallow a human; it was physically impossible.
The little girl said, 'When I get to heaven I will ask Jonah'.
The teacher asked, 'What if Jonah went to hell?'
The little girl replied, 'Then you ask him'

Man Suing Woman for Sexual Harassment
Disclosure (1994)
A computer specialist is sued for sexual harassment by a former lover turned boss who initiated the act forcefully, which threatens both his career and his personal life.
Director: Barry Levinson
Writers: Michael Crichton (novel), Paul Attanasio (screenplay)
Stars: Michael Douglas, Demi Moore, Donald Sutherland

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109635/

https://t.me/MkNotes/541

Order of Operations
Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally, PEMDAS.
P Parentheses first
E Exponents (ie Powers and Square Roots, etc.)
MD Multiplication and Division (left-to-right)
AS Addition and Subtraction (left-to-right)


Divide and Multiply rank equally (and go left to right).
Add and Subtract rank equally (and go left to right)
After you have done "P" and "E", just go from left to right doing any "M" or "D" as you find them.

Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally
Pudgy Elves May Demand A Snack
Popcorn Every Monday Donuts Always Sunday
Please Eat Mom's Delicious Apple Strudels
People Everywhere Made Decisions About Sums
https://www.mathsisfun.com/operation-order-pemdas.html

Phill Collins, All of My Life
https://t.me/MKClips/124

Hinder, Should Have Known Better
https://t.me/MKClips/126

25 Etiquette Rules
https://t.me/MkNotes/546

IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS MADNESS
WE WILL STAND
I KNOW THERE IS A BETTER WORLD
TAKE YOUR SISTERS & YOUR BROTHERS BY THE HAND
REACH OUT TO EVERY WOMAN & GIRL

WE ARE MOTHERS, WE ARE TEACHERS
WE ARE BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL CREATURES
I dance cause I love
Dance cause I dream
Dance cause I've had enough
Dance to stop the screams
Dance to break the rules
Dance to stop the pain
Dance to turn it upside down
It’s time to break the chain

https://t.me/MkNotes/547

The Great Dictator-Charlie Chaplin
https://t.me/MkNotes/548

I Have a Dream, Martin Luther King
https://t.me/MkNotes/549

Puerto Ricans are still dying almost six months after Hurricane Maria

Lourdes Rodriguez heard the scream early on the morning of January 6, before the sun rose and before the frogs began their chorus.

➖ @cnnbrk ➖

When we share laughter, there's twice the fun;
When we share success, we've surpassed what we've done.
When we share problems, there's half the pain.
When we share tears, a rainbow follows rain.
If we share a smile, that's when our love shows.
If we share a hug, that's when our love grows.
If we share with someone, on whom we depend,
that person is always family or friend.
And what draws us closer, and makes us all care,
Is not what we have, but the things we share
~~~~~~~~~By Jill Wolf~~~~~~~~~
https://t.me/MkNotes/555

Order of Adjectives
https://t.me/MkNotes/558

Discourse Markers
https://t.me/MkNotes/559

The eventual goal of science is to provide a single theory that describes the whole universe. However, the approach most scientists actually follow is to separate the problem into two parts. First, there are the laws that tell us how the universe changes with time. (If we know what the universe is like at any one time, these physical laws tell us how it will look at any later time.)

Second, there is the question of the initial state of the universe. Some people feel that science should be concerned with only the first part; they regard the question of the initial situation as a matter for metaphysics or religion. They would say that God, being omnipotent, could have started the universe off any way he wanted. That may be so, but in that case he also could have made it develop in a completely arbitrary way. Yet it appears that he chose to make it evolve in a very regular way according to certain laws. It therefore seems equally reasonable to suppose that there are also laws governing the initial state.

It turns out to be very difficult to devise a theory to describe the universe all in one go. Instead, we break the problem up into bits and invent a number of partial theories. Each of these partial
theories describes and predicts a certain limited class of observations, neglecting the effects of other quantities, or representing them by simple sets of numbers. It may be that this approach is completely wrong. If every-thing in the universe depends on everything else in a fundamental way, it might be impossible to get close to a full solution by investigating parts of the problem in isolation.

Nevertheless, it is certainly the way that we have made progress in the past. The classic example again is the Newtonian theory of gravity, which tells us that the gravitational force between two bodies depends only on one number associated with each body, its mass, but is otherwise independent of what the bodies are made of. Thus one does not need to have a theory of the structure and constitution of the sun and the planets in order to calculate their orbits.

Today scientists describe the universe in terms of two basic partial theories - the general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics. They are the great intellectual achievements of the first half of this century. The general theory of relativity describes the force of gravity and the large-scale structure of the universe, that is, the structure on scales from only a few miles to as large as a million million million million (1 with twenty-four zeros after it) miles, the size of the observable universe. Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, deals with phenomena on extremely small scales, such as a millionth of a millionth of an inch. Unfortunately, however, these two theories are known to be inconsistent with each other - they cannot both be correct. One of the major endeavors in physics today, and the major theme of this book, is the search for a new theory that will incorporate them both - a quantum theory of gravity. We do not yet have such a theory, and we may still be a long way from having one, but we do already know many of the properties that it must have. And we shall see, in later chapters, that we already know a fair amount about the predications a quantum theory of gravity must make.

Now, if you believe that the universe is not arbitrary, but is governed by definite laws, you ultimately have to combine the partial theories into a complete unified theory that will describe everything in the universe. But there is a fundamental paradox in the search for such a complete unified theory. The ideas about scientific theories outlined above assume we are rational beings who are free to observe the universe as we want and to draw logical deductions from what we see.

In such a scheme it is reasonable to suppose that we might progress ever closer toward the laws that govern our universe. Yet if there really is a complete unified theory, it would also presumably determine our actions. And so the theory itself would determine the outcome of our search for it! And why should it determine that we come to the right conclusions from the evidence? Might it not equally well determine that we draw the wrong conclusion.? Or no conclusion at all?

Trump