Inclusion On Purpose Quotes

For the purposes of science, information had to mean something special. Three centuries earlier, the new discipline of physics could not proceed until Isaac Newton appropriated words that were ancient and vague—force, mass, motion, and even time—and gave them new meanings. Newton made these terms into quantities, suitable for use in mathematical formulas. Until then, motion (for example) had been just as soft and inclusive a term as information. For Aristotelians, motion covered a far-flung family of phenomena: a peach ripening, a stone falling, a child growing, a body decaying. That was too rich. Most varieties of motion had to be tossed out before Newton’s laws could apply and the Scientific Revolution could succeed. In the nineteenth century, energy began to undergo a similar transformation: natural philosophers adapted a word meaning vigor or intensity. They mathematicized it, giving energy its fundamental place in the physicists’ view of nature. It was the same with information. A rite of purification became necessary. And then, when it was made simple, distilled, counted in bits, information was found to be everywhere.

Believers can search the Scriptures on their own, and allow the Word of God, coinciding with the Holy Spirit, to enlighten their understanding, and open their spiritual eyes.

All believers need to become teachers, shepherds, ministers, and good-news-bearers.

The only way we will solve the problems that we face is if we can find a way to balance the power of the market with the power of inclusive institutions, and purpose-driven businesses committed to the health of the society could play an important role in making this happen.

You shouldn’t live for yourself alone but you must also learn to live the Christian life

there is no all-purpose definition of introversion or extroversion; these are not unitary categories, like “curly-haired” or “sixteen-year-old,” in which everyone can agree on who qualifies for inclusion.

and over the centuries, we clawed out access to the ballot for people of color through the Fifteenth Amendment, women in the Nineteenth Amendment, and young voters in the Twenty-Sixth Amendment. But each of those amendments contained a loophole for suppression: leaving implementation to the states, particularly the ones most hostile to inclusion.

Self-invention has its questionable side in any event. Fluidity of identity mostly benefits those adept at varying their self-presentation for their own purposes and getting others to accept the result, in other words, the manipulative and delusional. In a free-floating, postmodern world, the con man and psychopath accordingly become major social types.

Victory must begin to mean more than winning a single election. Our obligation, in Georgia and across the nation, is to seize the high road by changing how we campaign and to whom. Demography is not destiny; it’s opportunity. We have to expand our vision of who belongs in the big tent of progress, invest in their inclusion, and talk to them about what’s at stake.

If we want to create something significant in our lives, we need highly focused attention. The focus gathers the energy, enlarges it, and births ideas, experiences, and manifestations. The energy makes the creation. Spiritual seekers have inclusive and well-intentioned desires from which to create. Their creations do not have a downside and are harmful to neither their maker nor anyone else.

Any lasting solutions come solely from the U.S. Constitution, the highest legal bar imaginable; and over the centuries, we clawed out access to the ballot for people of color through the Fifteenth Amendment, women in the Nineteenth Amendment, and young voters in the Twenty-Sixth Amendment. But each of those amendments contained a loophole for suppression: leaving implementation to the states, particularly the ones most hostile to inclusion.

Journalists usually treat anything as true if someone in a position of ostensible authority is willing to say it, even anonymously (and if no one is going to sue over it). The accuracy of anyone’s statement, particularly if that person is a public official, is often deemed irrelevant. If no evidence is available for an argument a journalist wishes to include in a story, then up pop weasel words such as “it seems” or “some claim” to enable inclusion of the argument, no matter how shaky its foundation in reality. What’s more, too many journalists believe that their job description does not require them to adjudicate between competing claims of truth. Sure, there are “two sides”—and only two sides—to every story, according to the rules of objectivity. But if both sides wish to deploy lies and other forms of deliberate deception for their own purposes, well, that’s somebody else’s problem.

We were brought together by God to serve the Plan of Awakening, to treat each other with dignity, respect, kindness, and holiness, and to Awaken to our Divine Love. We approach our Purpose for coming together with great reverence and devotion. It is the core of our Life in God. Our relationship is our Relationship with everything and everyone, for we live and love as God lives and loves, unconditionally, all-inclusively, and free of specialness.

Diversity is what happens when you have representation of various groups in one place. Representation is what happens when groups that haven’t previously been included, are included. Intersectionality is what happens when we do everything through the lens of making sure that no one is left behind. More than surface-level inclusion, or merely making sure everyone is represented, intersectionality is the practice of interrogating the power dynamics and rationales of how we can be together.

It is one of the strangest of historical paradoxes that the King James Bible, whose whole purpose had been nation-building in the service of a ceremonial and episcopal state church, should become the guiding text of Puritan America. But the translation’s lifeblood had been inclusiveness, it was drenched with the splendour of a divinely sanctioned authority, and by the end of the seventeenth century it had come to be treasured by Americans as much as by the British as one of their national texts.

I live, at all times, for imaginative fiction; for ambivalence, not instruction. When language serves dogma, then literature is lost. I live also, and only, for excellence. My care is not for the cult of egalitarian mediocrity that is sweeping the world today, wherein even the critics are no longer qualified to differentiate, but for literature, which you may notice I have not defined. I would say that, because of its essential ambivalence, 'literature' is: words that provoke a response; that invite the reader or listener to partake of the creative act. There can be no one meaning for a text. Even that of the writer is a but an option. "Literature exists at every level of experience. It is inclusive, not exclusive. It embraces; it does not reduce, however simply it is expressed. The purpose of the storyteller is to relate the truth in a manner that is simple: to integrate without reduction; for it is rarely possible to declare the truth as it is, because the universe presents itself as a Mystery. We have to find parables; we have to tell stories to unriddle the world. "It is a paradox: yet one so important I must restate it. The job of a storyteller is to speak the truth; but what we feel most deeply cannot be spoken in words. At this level only images connect. And so story becomes symbol; and symbol is myth." "It is one of the main errors of historical and rational analysis to suppose that the 'original form' of myth can be separated from its miraculous elements. 'Wonder is only the first glimpse of the start of philosophy,' says Plato. Aristotle is more explicit: 'The lover of myths, which are a compound of wonders, is, by his being in that very state, a lover of wisdom.' Myth encapsulates the nearest approach to absolute that words can speak.

We join with all in experiencing the all-inclusiveness of the family of God, where no brother or sister is seen as separate or apart from the Whole of God. Our hearts are filled with Love and gratitude for our Relationship in God. We are glad that this joy is not dependent on where bodies seem to be or whether or not they seem to be together. We are created by a Pure Idea, and we are like our Source. We are Spirit as God is Spirit, and we are overflowing with thankfulness that this truth is dawning as the Mind we share. Our walk together is for the Purpose of accepting our Divine Source and laying aside all thought of the world as the source of anything.

EAGLE The East direction is represented by eagle and condor, who bring vision, clarity, and foresight. Eagle perceives the entire panorama of life without becoming bogged down in its details. The energies of eagle assist us in finding the guiding vision of our lives. The eyes of condor see into the past and the future, helping to know where we come from, and who we are becoming. When I work with a client who is stuck in the traumas of the past, I help her to connect with the spirit of eagle or condor. As this energy infuses the healing space, my client is often able to attain new clarity and insight into her life. This is not an intellectual insight, but rather a call, faint at first, hardly consciously heard. Her possibilities beckon to her and propel her out of her grief and into her destiny. I believe that while everyone has a future, only certain people have a destiny. Having a destiny means living to your fullest human potential. You don’t need to become a famous politician or poet, but your destiny has to be endowed with meaning and purpose. You could be a street sweeper and be living a destiny. You could be the president of a large corporation and be living a life bereft of meaning. One can make oneself available to destiny, but it requires a great deal of courage to do so. Otherwise our destiny bypasses us, leaving us deprived of a fulfillment known by those who choose to take the road less traveled. Eagle allows us to rise above the mundane battles that occupy our lives and consume our energy and attention. Eagle gives us wings to soar above trivial day-to-day struggles into the high peaks close to Heaven. Eagle and condor represent the self-transcending principle in nature. Biologists have identified the self-transcending principle as one of the prime agendas of evolution. Living molecules seek to transcend their selfhood to become cells, then simple organisms, which then form tissues, then organs, and then evolve into complex beings such as humans and whales. Every transcending jump is inclusive of all of the levels beneath it. Cells are inclusive of molecules, yet transcend them; organs are inclusive of cells, yet go far beyond them; whales are inclusive of organs yet cannot be described by them, as the whole transcends the sum of its parts. The transcending principle represented by eagle states that problems at a certain level are best solved by going up one step. The problems of cells are best resolved by organs, while the needs of organs are best addressed by an organism such as a butterfly or a human. The same principle operates in our lives. Think of nested Russian dolls. Material needs are the tiny doll in the center. The larger emotional doll encompasses them, and both are contained within the outermost spiritual doll. In this way, we cannot satisfy emotional needs with material things, but we can satisfy them spiritually. When we go one step up, our emotional needs are addressed in the solution. We rise above our life dilemmas on the wings of eagle and see our lives in perspective.

Genesis 1 sits in stark contrast to that dark mythological polytheism. The biblical account has as its chief purpose to glorify the one Creator God who is the sole God of all reality. The water at creation (1:2) is certainly no deity, and it is not God’s foe that needs to be vanquished. It is mere putty in the hands of the Creator. There is no war between Yahweh and the gods of chaos in order to bring about creation. Yahweh is sovereign, and all the elements of creation are at his beck and call. Again, Genesis 1–2 is ardently zealous for monotheism. Not only does this literature not allow the inclusion of other gods; it stridently argues against them with clear polemics.

Human intellects make sense of things and, if anything, err on the side of coherence. Geniuses of my acquaintance, who almost seem clever enough to make sense of the world if they so wished, are more likely to accept it as a muddle than the common man who invests it with a transcendent character of its own or recognizes it as filled with divine purpose in which nothing is out of place. Pluralism and chaos are harder to grasp – harder, perhaps, to understand and certainly to accept – than monism and order. For a whole society to accept an agreed world-picture as senseless, random and intractable, people seem to need a lot of collective disillusionment, accumulated and transmitted over many generations (see here). Moral and cognitive ambiguities are luxuries we allow ourselves which most of our forebears eschewed. Whether from an historical angle of approach, along which reconstruction is attempted of the thought of the earliest sages we know about, or from an anthropological direction, lined with examples from primitive societies which survived long enough to be scrutinized, early world-pictures seem remarkably systematic, like the ‘dreamtime’ of Australian aboriginals, in which the inseparable tissue of all the universe was spun. The ambitions these images embody betray the inclusive and comprehensive minds which made them. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries ethnographers’ fieldwork seemed ever to be stumbling on confusedly atomized world-pictures, shared by people who reached for understanding with frenzied clutchings but no overall grasp. This was because anthropologists of the time had a progressive model of human development in mind: animism preceded polytheism, which preceded monotheism; magic preceded religion, which preceded science. Confusion came first and categories, schemes and systems came later. People of the forest saw trees before they inferred wood. Coherence, it was assumed, is constructed late in human history. It now seems that the opposite is true. Coherence-seeking is one of those innate characteristics that make human thought human. No people known to modern anthropology is without it. ‘One of the deepest human desires’, Isaiah Berlin has said, ‘is to find a unitary pattern in which the whole of experience is symmetrically ordered.’ Two kinds of coherence seem to come easily to primitive cosmogonists: they can be called, for convenience, binarism and monism. (For binarism, ‘dualism’ is a traditional name, but this word is now used with so many mutually incompatible meanings that it is less confusing to coin a new term.) Binarism envisages a cosmos regulated by the flow or balance between two conflicting or complementary principles. Monism imagines an indivisibly cohesive universe; the first a twofold, the second an unfolded cosmos. Equilibrium and cohesion are the characteristics of the world in what we take to be its oldest descriptions: equilibrium is the nature of a binarist description, cohesion of a monist one. Truth, for societies which rely on these characterizations for their understanding of the world, is what contributes to equilibrium or participates in cohesion. They

People are innately prepared to act as members of tribes, but culture tells us how to recognize who belongs to our tribes, what schedules of aid, praise, and punishment are due to tribal fellows, and how the tribe is to deal with other tribes — allies, enemies, and clients. […] Contemporary human societies differ drastically from the societies in which our social instincts evolved. Pleistocene hunter-gatherer societies were likely comparatively small, egalitarian, and lacking in powerful institutionalized leadership. […] To evolve largescale, complex social systems, cultural evolutionary processes, driven by cultural group selection, takes advantage of whatever support these instincts offer. […] cultural evolution must cope with a psychology evolved for life in quite different sorts of societies. Appropriate larger scale institutions must regulate the constant pressure from smaller-groups (coalitions, cabals, cliques), to subvert the large-group favoring rules. To do this cultural evolution often makes use of “work arounds” — mobilizing tribal instincts for new purposes. For example, large national and international (e.g. great religions) institutions develop ideologies of symbolically marked inclusion that often fairly successfully engage the tribal instincts on a much larger scale. Military and religious organizations (e.g., Catholic Church), for example, dress recruits in identical clothing (and haircuts) loaded with symbolic markings, and then subdivide them into small groups with whom they eat and engage in long-term repeated interaction. Such work-arounds are often awkward compromises […] Complex societies are, in effect, grand natural social-psychological experiments that stringently test the limits of our innate dispositions to cooperate.

Social inclusiveness which deals with                           how you function in, and respond to your   environment.

I have used the word “technology” in its widest and most inclusive sense, meaning the deliberate modification of any natural object or substance with forethought to achieve a specific end or serve a specific purpose.

Thus, anthropologists have defined technology—in its widest and most inclusive sense—as the deliberate modification of any natural object or substance with forethought to achieve a specific end or serve a specific purpose.

Now I know for sure that the imposter syndrome I felt then wasn’t my fault. Jodi-Ann Burey and I explored how imposter syndrome has less to do with individual women’s failures and more to do with experiencing institutional bias:

I’ve learned that there’s a lot of good intention out there when we say “diversity and inclusion,” but our societies and workplaces often operate on the principle that if we mean well, then even the worst of behaviors can be excused. It’s why most well-meaning people get so defensive when you call them discriminatory. There are few phrases that would get someone more angry than if you called their behavior racist or misogynist. Many people will retort with some version of, “But I don’t see color” or “I didn’t say that because you’re a woman.

This book is a compilation of interesting ideas that have strongly influenced my thoughts and I want to share them in a compressed form. That ideas can change your worldview and bring inspiration and the excitement of discovering something new. The emphasis is not on the technology because it is constantly changing. It is much more difficult to change the accompanying circumstances that affect the way technological solutions are realized. The chef did not invent salt, pepper and other spices. He just chooses good ingredients and uses them skilfully, so others can enjoy his art. If I’ve been successful, the book creates a new perspective for which the selection of ingredients is important, as well as the way they are smoothly and efficiently arranged together. In the first part of the book, we follow the natural flow needed to create the stimulating environment necessary for the survival of a modern company. It begins with challenges that corporations are facing, changes they are, more or less successfully, trying to make, and the culture they are trying to establish. After that, we discuss how to be creative, as well as what to look for in the innovation process. The book continues with a chapter that talks about importance of inclusion and purpose. This idea of inclusion – across ages, genders, geographies, cultures, sexual orientation, and all the other areas in which new ways of thinking can manifest – is essential for solving new problems as well as integral in finding new solutions to old problems. Purpose motivates people for reaching their full potential. This is The second and third parts of the book describes the areas that are important to support what is expressed in the first part. A flexible organization is based on IT alignment with business strategy. As a result of acceleration in the rate of innovation and technological changes, markets evolve rapidly, products’ life cycles get shorter and innovation becomes the main source of competitive advantage. Business Process Management (BPM) goes from task-based automation, to process-based automation, so automating a number of tasks in a process, and then to functional automation across multiple processes andeven moves towards automation at the business ecosystem level. Analytics brought us information and insight; AI turns that insight into superhuman knowledge and real-time action, unleashing new business models, new ways to build, dream, and experience the world, and new geniuses to advance humanity faster than ever before. Companies and industries are transforming our everyday experiences and the services we depend upon, from self-driving cars, to healthcare, to personal assistants. It is a central tenet for the disruptive changes of the 4th Industrial Revolution; a revolution that will likely challenge our ideas about what it means to be a human and just might be more transformative than any other industrial revolution we have seen yet. Another important disruptor is the blockchain - a distributed decentralized digital ledger of transactions with the promise of liberating information and making the economy more democratic. You no longer need to trust anyone but an algorithm. It brings reliability, transparency, and security to all manner of data exchanges: financial transactions, contractual and legal agreements, changes of ownership, and certifications. A quantum computer can simulate efficiently any physical process that occurs in Nature. Potential (long-term) applications include pharmaceuticals, solar power collection, efficient power transmission, catalysts for nitrogen fixation, carbon capture, etc. Perhaps we can build quantum algorithms for improving computational tasks within artificial intelligence, including sub-fields like machine learning. Perhaps a quantum deep learning network can be trained more efficiently, e.g. using a smaller training set. This is still in conceptual research domain.

None of this is to say that one set of norms is inherently better than the other. Both have their purposes. The key is that they are different. One promotes homogeneity, the other heterogeneity. The personality traits people adopt, in short, help them cope with the uncertainty of the world around them. This has clear ramifications for politics. People who perceive a lot of danger in the world will gravitate toward leaders and policies that mitigate the threat: leaders who project unwavering strength, and policies that emphasize security first. For people who see the world as less dangerous, on the other hand, the real danger is discrimination. Their worldview will point them toward leaders who celebrate diversity and policies that focus on inclusivity.

I believed in every form of religion that I personally deemed inclusive and befitting, while rejecting and ignoring the ones I didn’t like.

This Higher Power was the least offensive and most inclusive belief system I could find. I liked the fact that people found it agreeable because that meant they would also likely find me agreeable. My world was still about me, everything still revolved around me, what I thought about myself, and what I could get others to think about me. I was always changing in order to fit in, and after a while, I realized that my Higher Power was doing the same thing.

Does history give us any hope for this kind of pragmatic and pluralistic perspective? . . .Today, amid our latest addiction epidemics, we are faced with another precious and rare opportunity for synthesis, and I have hope that we can unite around an inclusive definition of recovery as being any kind of positive change. But in order to do so, we will need to turn to the pain of our shared past, because, as in the case of individual addictions, pain and purpose are so often intertwined, and our despair comes from somewhere. The suffering of addiction is not an individual malady—it also comes from deep, ancestral wounds. We need to face that fact too, in order to fully recover, together.

The problem isn’t men, it’s patriarchy. The problem isn’t white people, it’s white supremacy. The problem isn’t straight people, it’s homophobia. Recognize systems of oppression before letting individual defensiveness stop you from dismantling them.

Leadership has an electrifying edge when it comes to shaping culture. Trailblazing leaders carve out the vision, values, and behaviors that guide a group. With unwavering integrity, they ignite trust and foster collaboration, forging a culture that pushes boundaries. These audacious leaders infuse purpose, propelling individuals and cultivating a culture of relentless innovation and unquenchable curiosity.

Happiness is the successful state of life, pain is an agent of death. Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one’s values. A morality that dares to tell you to find happiness in the renunciation of your happiness—to value the failure of your values—is an insolent negation of morality. A doctrine that gives you, as an ideal, the role of a sacrificial animal seeking slaughter on the altars of others, is giving you death as your standard. By the grace of reality and the nature of life, man—every man—is an end in himself, he exists for his own sake, and the achievement of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose. “But neither life nor happiness can be achieved by the pursuit of irrational whims. Just as man is free to attempt to survive in any random manner, but will perish unless he lives as his nature requires, so he is free to seek his happiness in any mindless fraud, but the torture of frustration is all he will find, unless he seeks the happiness proper to man. The purpose of morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live. “Sweep aside those parasites of subsidized classrooms, who live on the profits of the mind of others and proclaim that man needs no morality, no values, no code of behavior. They, who pose as scientists and claim that man is only an animal, do not grant him inclusion in the law of existence they have granted to the lowest of insects. They recognize that every living species has a way of survival demanded by its nature, they do not claim that a fish can live out of water or that a dog can live without its sense of smell—but man, they claim, the most complex of beings, man can survive in any way whatever, man has no identity, no nature, and there’s no practical reason why he cannot live with his means of survival destroyed, with his mind throttled and placed at the disposal of any orders they might care to issue.

When Calls A Promise: I made a promise to someone that I would protect humankind with my life - that I would let no savagery, no prejudice, no sectarianism tear my people apart - that I would spend every breath of my life in uniting my people - the people of earth. And my very existence is the living manifestation of that promise. Don't make promises that you know not whether you will be able to keep, but once you do make a promise, keep it at all cost, even at the cost of your life, which is exactly the kind of promise I made - to give my life in the unification of humankind. Initially I thought I would achieve that by erasing the religious barriers amongst people. Hence, in the beginning I wrote ceaselessly on religion, but as I kept studying the tenets of the society, I came to realize that the barriers amongst people have invaded every aspect of life and society, much beyond the mere traditional bounds of religion - they have invaded the very lifeblood of society and have been tearing the society apart from inside out. I came to realize that the religion of the future is not going to be christianity, islam, judaism or any such traditional system, rather, the religion of the future is going to be social justice. And the best way to shape the future is to envision it early on and start manufacturing it today. Thus, though initially the primary premise of my work was religion, eventually it acquired much wider and diverse societal roots. My purpose remains the same, that is, to unite you all, to unite my seven billion sisters and brothers of earth, but I had to make a few changes to my approach based on the need of the time as I kept evolving with my work. I started off as a scientist, but the needs of the society turned me into a reformer. Society needed not yet another scientist, it needed a reformer scientist, so I became one. All my life my need has been to serve the need of the society - need mark you, not desire. There is a difference between what the society desires and what it really needs. Society may desire for more bigotry, more segregation, more rigidity, more separatism, but that's not what the society needs - a civilized society needs humility, not bigotry - it needs inclusion, not segregation - it needs reason, not rigidity - it needs assimilation, not separatism.

List of Human Needs* Subsistence Physical sustenance Air, Food, Water Shelter Health, Medicine Physical Safety Rest /Sleep Movement Security Consistency Stability Order/Structure Safety (emotional) Trust Freedom Autonomy Choice Ease Independence Power Space Spontaneity Leisure/Relaxation Adventure Humor Joy Play Pleasure Connection Affection Appreciation Attention Companionship Harmony Intimacy Love Sexual Expression Support Tenderness Warmth Touch To Matter Acceptance Care Compassion Consideration Empathy Kindness Mutual Recognition Respect To be seen or heard To be understood To be trusted Community Belonging Celebration Cooperation Equality Inclusion Mutuality Participation Self-expression Sharing Meaning Sense of Self Authenticity Competence Confidence Creativity Dignity Growth Healing Honesty Integrity Self-acceptance Self-care Self-connection Self-knowledge Self-realization Understanding Awareness Clarity Discovery Learning Making sense of life Meaning Aliveness Challenge Contribution Creativity Effectiveness Exploration Integration Purpose Transcendence Beauty Communion Faith Hope Inspiration Mourning Peace (inner) Presence

From Ape to Human (The Sonnet) To label a spirit is to cripple a spirit, What we call cultural imprints are prison. Society of such culture is no human society, but merely an overglorified animal kingdom. Sure, the culture we're born in are part of us, But it must never take over human identity. That's how heritage facilitates bias-n-hate, And culture becomes excuse for inhumanity. Call it advaita, nirvana or humanity, the purpose is to surpass all divide. Anything that distances mind from mind, must never be defended as cultural pride. Mission is, not to remove cultural imprints, But to be civilized enough to surpass them. Only then can we be the bridge of benevolence, Only then the glorified ape shall emerge as human.

single or index variables. As an example, consider the dependent variable “high school violence,” discussed in Chapter 2. We ask: “What are the most important, distinct factors affecting or causing high school violence?” Some plausible factors are (1) student access to weapons, (2) student isolation from others, (3) peer groups that are prone to violence, (4) lack of enforcement of school nonviolence policies, (5) participation in anger management programs, and (6) familiarity with warning signals (among teachers and staff). Perhaps you can think of other factors. Then, following the strategies discussed in Chapter 3—conceptualization, operationalization, and index variable construction—we use either single variables or index measures as independent variables to measure each of these factors. This approach provides for the inclusion of programs or policies as independent variables, as well as variables that measure salient rival hypotheses. The strategy of full model specification requires that analysts not overlook important factors. Thus, analysts do well to carefully justify their model and to consult past studies and interview those who have direct experience with, or other opinions about, the research subject. Doing so might lead analysts to include additional variables, such as the socioeconomic status of students’ parents. Then, after a fully specified model has been identified, analysts often include additional variables of interest. These may be variables of lesser relevance, speculative consequences, or variables that analysts want to test for their lack of impact, such as rival hypotheses. Demographic variables, such as the age of students, might be added. When additional variables are included, analysts should identify which independent variables constitute the nomothetic explanation, and which serve some other purpose. Remember, all variables included in models must be theoretically justified. Analysts must argue how each variable could plausibly affect their dependent variable. The second part of “all of the variables that affect the dependent variable” acknowledges all of the other variables that are not identified (or included) in the model. They are omitted; these variables are not among “the most important factors” that affect the dependent variable. The cumulative effect of these other variables is, by definition, contained in the error term, described later in this chapter. The assumption of full model specification is that these other variables are justifiably omitted only when their cumulative effect on the dependent variable is zero. This approach is plausible because each of these many unknown variables may have a different magnitude, thus making it possible that their effects cancel each other out. The argument, quite clearly, is not that each of these other factors has no impact on the dependent variable—but only that their cumulative effect is zero. The validity of multiple regression models centers on examining the behavior of the error term in this regard. If the cumulative effect of all the other variables is not zero, then additional independent variables may have to be considered. The specification of the multiple regression model is as follows:

10:12; 14:17). ‹‹    DAY 5    ›› II. The purpose of God’s calling is fully revealed in the New Testament: A. God’s calling is according to His predestination (Eph. 1:4-5), His purpose (2 Tim. 1:9; Rom. 8:28), and His grace (2 Tim. 1:9-10). B. God’s calling is in Christ (1 Pet. 5:10) and through the gospel (2 Thes. 2:14). C. The New Testament reveals various aspects of the purpose of God’s calling: 1. God has called us out of darkness into His marvelous light (1 Pet. 2:9): a. Darkness is a sign of sin and death; it is the expression and sphere of Satan in death. b. When God calls us, He opens our eyes and turns us from darkness to light and from the authority of Satan to Himself; to be turned to God means to be turned to the authority of God, which is God’s kingdom of light (Acts 26:18). 2. God’s calling is that His chosen ones may be separated and made holy unto God, to be the holy ones, the saints (Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:2). ‹‹    DAY 6    ›› 3. God has called us so that we may enter into the fellowship of His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, to partake of and enjoy His all-inclusive riches (vv. 9, 30). 4. God has called us into the sufferings of Christ (1 Pet. 2:20-21). 5. For the Body of Christ, God has called us into the peace of Christ (Col. 3:15). 6. God has called us for the purpose of obtaining the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ; He has called His chosen ones unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth so that they might obtain the glory of the Lord Jesus Christ (2 Thes. 2:13-14). 7. God’s calling is by His own glory and with the goal of our entering into the eternal glory of God (2 Pet. 1:3; 1 Pet. 5:10): a. God has called us not only by His glory but also to His glory. b. In order that we might enter into His eternal glory, the God of all grace is ministering to us the riches of the bountiful supply of the divine life in many aspects and in many steps of the divine operation on and in us in God’s economy (v. 10; 2 Pet. 1:3). 8. God has called us into His kingdom (1 Thes. 2:12): a. The kingdom of God is an organism constituted with God’s life as a realm of life for His ruling, in which He reigns by the divine life and expresses Himself in the divine life (John 3:3, 5-6; Matt. 6:10, 13). b. Today we, the called ones, should live in the church as the kingdom of God so that we may grow and develop in the life of God unto full maturity; through this growth and development, the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be richly supplied to us (Rom. 14:17; 2 Pet. 1:5-11).

CAMPERS is a seven-step process you can use to improve your ability to provide inclusive, nonjudgmental care when you are planning, engaging in, and reflecting on a patient interaction. The letters in the mnemonic device stand for: clear purpose, attitudes and beliefs, mitigation plan, patient, emotions, reactions, and strategy.

But it seems to me that Hedy, her history, and her creation may have even greater symbolic importance. The manner in which her contribution to this world-changing device was largely lost—or ignored—for decades reflects the pervasive marginalization of women’s contributions, a problem that is both historical and modern. Whether Hedy’s work in spread-spectrum technology was purposefully disregarded or unconsciously forgotten, it appears that imbedded in that oversight were misconceptions about her abilities—about all women, really. Faulty assumptions about women’s capabilities, stemming in part from the conscripted roles into which they’d been slotted, has caused many to think more narrowly about the manner in which the past has been shaped. But unless we begin to view historical women through a broader, more inclusive lens—and rewrite them back into the narrative—we will continue to view the past more restrictively than it likely was, and we risk carrying those perspectives over into the present. Perhaps if Hedy’s society had viewed her not simply as a blindingly beautiful creature, but as a human being with a sharp mind capable of significant contributions, they might have learned that her interior life was more interesting and fruitful than her exterior. Her invention might have been accepted by the navy when she offered it, and who knows what impact that might have had on the war? If only people had been willing to look behind “the only woman in the room” to examine the person she was beneath, they might have seen a woman capable of greatness, and not only on the screen.

Youth are not just the leaders of tomorrow; they are the catalysts for change today." "True justice lies in creating spaces where every voice, no matter how quiet, can be heard." "Inclusive development begins with acknowledging the power of diversity in every corner of society." "Advocacy is not a profession; it is a responsibility we owe to the generations that come after us." "Empowering young minds is the key to unlocking a future built on innovation, compassion, and resilience." "Laws shape society, but it is the values of fairness and equality that breathe life into them." "A sustainable future is crafted when policy, people, and purpose align." "Strengthening civic engagement is not just about building informed citizens; it’s about nurturing empowered communities." "In every challenge lies an opportunity for growth, and in every voice, a spark for change." "Human rights are not negotiable; they are the foundation upon which we build a just society.

Living a long life is not really the ultimate purpose of human existence. Neither is happiness. It is in aligning to your dharma and duty that you can live the greatest life you are meant to have. Your soul prolongs your life as required. Usefulness, functionality and your highest possible contribution to the bigger whole, with more inclusive purpose, will empower and stretch your life’s continuity.

The terrorist is a radical, so is the reformer. The difference is in their motive - the terrorist wants to build an exclusive society, whereas the reformer wants to build an inclusive society.

The court ruled that the ADA does in fact cover internet-based businesses. Deciding otherwise would lead to absurd results, like excluding services provided door-to-door or over the phone. Many companies provided services over the phone or door-to-door in 1990 when Congress passed the ADA, and Congress expected the statue to cover these "places." The court affirmed that Congress intended for the ADA to be a broad statute that evolves with technology. "Now that the Internet plays such a critical role in the personal and professional lives of Americans, excluding disabled persons from access to covered entities that use it as their principal means of reaching the public would defeat the purpose of this important civil rights legislation.

We may have to make some sacrifices to be a part of a community, and that's good. Giving and serving others doesn't just strengthen our communities; it enriches our lives and strengthens our own bonds to the community and our sense of value and purpose. It protects us against loneliness. But in order to come together, we shouldn't have to deny or hide the parts of us that make us who we are. As To Tait proved in Anaheim, kindness can play a vital role in this balancing act, which makes it an essential element of third-bowl cultures. Kindness can bridge the divides between us, healing our society even as it relieves our personal loneliness and brings us together.

This isn’t necessarily the fault of the cast of shows like Sister Wives or Polyamory: Married and Dating. The producers of these kinds of shows bear some level of responsibility for putting sensationalism ahead of realism for ratings. Although I’m sure that’s the exact parameters of their job. Just like the intentionality of a reality show designed as a ratings grab, if you want to create inclusive representation you have to make it part of your purpose.

World is My Family (The Sonnet) Family is the world to everybody, But to me the world is my family. In the life of a true human, Raising a wall is but blasphemy. If the world is Juliet, I'm her Romeo, If the world is Romeo, I'm his Juliet. Amidst the storms of hate and hurt, I am but an anchor of love and lenience. I'll hide the world in my heart if necessary, To provide sanctuary is the heart's purpose. The struggle of this human will continue, Till all drives of hate are memories of the past. So I say again, my world is my responsibility. Beware my dear bigots, I'm injurious to inhumanity!

Tenet Beyond Tongue (The Sonnet) Kalbin olduğu her yerde kader var, Aşkın olduğu her yerde umut var. Mücadelenin olduğu her yerde mucize var, İnsanlığın olduğu her yerde ilahiyat var. Donde hay corazón, hay destino, Esperanza es el niño del amor. Donde hay lucha por la vida hay milagro, Divinidad es el reflejo del humano. No matter how many tongues we say it in, The fact still remains all the same. Where there is heart there is everything, Without heart divinity, intellect all are lame. Biz kimiz? İnsanız. ¿Quienes somos? Humanos. Who are we? Humanity. Our purpose? Ayudar a los humanos.

As famous showrunner Shonda Rhimes writes in her book Year of Yes, when you are the first, only, or different in any environment, “you are saddled with that burden of extra responsibility—whether you want it or not” to represent your whole community in every interaction.

Tracy Chou, a Taiwanese American software engineer who has two technology degrees from Stanford University (including a master’s in computer science), noticed a surprising pattern when she started mentoring other Asian women computer engineering college students. Many like her were steered by mentors to pursue nontechnical jobs in technology companies rather than lucrative engineering jobs. It wasn’t enough to be technically qualified to fit the industry; she encountered bias because she was expected to fit the personality type of a socially awkward software engineer, usually a white or Asian man.

A confession on behalf of all generations: Future generations, accept our apology! We messed up. We permitted wars to occur and sanctioned climate parameters to drift away. We reaped the cream of the world and left behind barren desolation for you. We compelled you to suffer the trauma of our bloated egos. We failed you as a generation. We have had our troubles, we realized the facts late, however, here is a promise to be responsible from here on. We will voice out, step up action and choose fearless empathy.

In practice, it’s about innovating and offering new products and services that improve lives and heal the planet. Or about helping employees find their purpose and improve their health and well-being, while building a diverse, inclusive company. Or helping suppliers make their businesses more efficient and sustainable, which builds tighter relationships and spurs joint innovation. Or helping communities thrive, going beyond the old argument that companies do enough by providing jobs and paying taxes (global communities may need much more than that, including support for local schools or building water and energy infrastructure).

Before he could start writing Kilby’s application, though, Mosher had to resolve a fundamental tactical question. Anyone who applies for a patent has to decide whether he needs it for offensive or for defensive purposes—whether, to use lawyers’ favorite metaphor, he wants his patent to be a sword or a shield. The decision usually turns on the novelty of the invention. If somebody has a genuinely revolutionary idea, a breakthrough that his competitors are almost sure to copy, his lawyers will write a patent application they can use as a sword; they will describe the invention in such broad and encompassing terms that they can take it into court for an injunction against any competitor who tries to sell a product that is even remotely related. In contrast, an inventor whose idea is basically an extension of or an improvement on an earlier idea needs a patent application that will work as a shield—a defense against legal action by the sword wielders. Such a defensive patent is usually written in much narrower terms, emphasizing a specific improvement or a particular application of the idea that is not covered clearly in earlier patents. Probably the most famous sword in the history of the patent system was the sweeping application filed on February 14, 1876, by a teacher and part-time inventor named Alexander Graham Bell. That first telephone patent (No. 174,465) was so broad and inclusive that it became the cornerstone—after Bell and his partners had fought some 600 lawsuits against scores of competitors—of the largest corporate family in the world. In the nature of things, though, few inventions are so completely new that they don’t build on something from the past. The majority of patent applications, therefore, are written as shields—as improvements on some earlier invention. Some of the most important patents in American history fall into this category, including No. 586,193, “New and Useful Improvements in Transmitting Electrical Impulses,” granted to Guglielmo Marconi in 1898; No. 621,195, “Improvements in and Relating to Navigable Balloons,” granted to Ferdinand Zeppelin in 1899; No. 686,046, “New and Useful Improvements in Motor Carriages,” granted to Henry Ford in 1901; and No. 821,393, “New and Useful Improvements in Flying Machines,” granted to Orville and Wilbur Wright in 1906.

In these meetings, far away from my home office in a dusty room, with 30 or so people gathered from various local, regional, and corporate vantages, the benefits of inclusion became starkly apparent. We were all in.

Exercise: What Are Your Needs? Look through the following list of basic human needs. This list isn’t exhaustive, just a starting point to help build self-awareness and see what might need more attention in your life. Remember, when you live a life that includes taking care of yourself, your child learns from your example. In your Raising Good Humans journal, write down which of your needs requires more attention. affection air appreciation beauty choice communication community companionship ease empathy equality food freedom growth harmony humor inclusion independence intimacy joy learning love mourning movement/exercise order purpose respect/self-respect rest/sleep safety self-expression sexual expression shelter space stability stimulation support touch trust warmth water Now, think about how you can better meet the needs that have been neglected. What is one concrete action you can take—like scheduling a coffee date or booking childcare—this week? Write down your intention in your Raising Good Humans journal, then take action!

When used thoughtfully and purposefully, technology can amplify the impact of teaching and learning, making education more engaging, accessible, and inclusive for all students.

Knowing and understanding your organization’s purpose is essential to making important organizational decisions. It’s also a fundamental tool to use when asking for money, recruiting additional board members, hiring and motivating staff, and publicizing your activities. Also, remember that your governing board’s input in developing the mission statement is not an option. Buy-in begins with inclusion!

In 2017, I was invited on the trip of a lifetime to Israel. The Friday of our trip we ate lunch at the Jerusalem market. Rows and rows of booths sold their fresh veggies, spices, and meats. Energy pulsated through packed crowds gathering supplies for the next twenty-four hours as they were preparing for their weekly Friday night Shabbat dinner that kicks off Sabbath. Our group was blessed to be invited into a local home for Shabbat dinner. A few things stood out to me: one was the extreme hospitality and the preparation and care in hosting twenty people with a multicourse meal. I also noted the inclusion of their children in the experience. They weren’t told to “leave the adults alone.” They wandered in and out of the room, witnessing the tradition and participating when able. And at one point during the meal, the father of the home said a blessing over each child and spoke a blessing over his wife. My current small group at church has decided to adopt a version of this Jewish tradition. Once a month we gather in one of our homes for Shabbat dinner. During our time we intentionally call the kids together. We remind them how God created each of us uniquely and for His good purposes. Then the parents speak a blessing over each child. The hope is they will hold on to these words when the world tells them otherwise. And that they rest in who God made them to be instead of having to prove their worth through their work. Maybe

This is why I write. To understand. To make people feel seen. I type away, hoping some lonely reader out there, left on a curb, will pick up one of my books. And in so doing learn that even if there is no place for them elsewhere, I will make one for them between these pages.

thinking about the future ways that someone might use a solution. And it’s successful only when the recipient of a design confirms it has achieved its purpose.

Political correctness exhorts us to be as ‘inclusive’ as we can, to discriminate neither in thought, word nor deed against ethnic, sexual, religious or behavioural minorities. And in order to be inclusive we are encouraged to denigrate what is felt to be most especially ours. The Director-General of the BBC recently condemned his organization and its programmes as obnoxiously white and middle-class. Academics sneer at the curriculum established by ‘Dead White European Males’. A British race-relations charity has condemned the affirmation of a ‘British’ national identity as racist. All such abusive utterances express the code of political correctness. For although they involve the deliberate condemnation of people on grounds of class, race, sex or colour, the purpose is not to exclude the Other but to condemn Ourselves. The gentle advocacy of inclusion masks the far from gentle desire to exclude the old excluder: in other words, to repudiate the cultural inheritance that defines us.

In the church, everyone gives and everyone receives. Everyone serves and everyone is served. This is the Gospel sense of inclusion. Everyone acts not to show what they can accomplish but to show what God does in using them for his purposes.

the size and functions of the state matter profoundly to the performance of capitalist economies. In orthodox economic commentary it is frequently asserted that the role of the public sector should be minimised in order to free private enterprise from the ‘dead hand’ of regulation and the perverse impact of ‘crowding out’. In fact, successful economies have almost ​all had states actively committed to their development.54 This is not just about the role of the state in providing or co-investing in infrastructure (as is sometimes conceded even by those otherwise sceptical of public investment), though this is indeed important. Its role in innovation is also key, as we have seen. At the same time, the development of a skilled and adaptive labour force requires deep investment in education, training, health, childcare and social care. These functions cannot simply be outsourced or privatised—as Crouch shows, when this is done the goal of greater competition almost always degenerates into private oligopoly, where public purpose is lost, and corporate political influence increases. We need to acknowledge, rather, the interdependence of private enterprise and the public sector; of market and non-market activities.

Take a glass of water, now tell me, is it Christian water, or Jewish water, or Islamic water or Atheist water. It's just water. A human ought to be like that water, whose purpose is to quench the thirst of humans, not of any specific religion, culture or gender, but all humans.

When the heartbeat of the church is something other than being a praying and inclusive church (whether it be missional, organic, seeker-sensitive, purpose-driven, or any number of good things), it arouses Jesus’ ire.

The joy matters as a measure of otherwise neglected desires, desires for public life and civil society, for inclusion, purpose, and power.

Hamilton's original contribution was to realize that indirect fitness effects impact upon the purpose of adaptation. The basic condition for natural selection to favor any trait is that the individuals who carry genes for this trait are, on average, fitter than those who do not. However, the adaptations that subsequently evolve are not designed for maximizing the individual's personal fitness, but rather her inclusive fitness, i.e., the sum of all the fitness effects that she has on all of her genetic relatives, each increment or decrement being weighted by the corresponding coefficient of genetic relatedness (Hamilton 1964). In other words, the adaptive agent remains the same as in the traditional Darwinian view (i.e., the individual organism), but the adaptive agenda is changed. This idea has subsequently been formalized by Grafen (2006), who has shown the mathematical connection between the dynamics of natural selection and an optimization program in whih the individual strives to maximize her inclusive fitness, for a wide class of models, including those that allow for social interaction between relatives. Grafen A. 2006. Optimization of inclusive fitness. J Theor Biol 238: 541-563. Hamilton WD. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behaviour I & II. J Theor Biol 7: 1-52.

When children are brought into the world with an extra chromosome—with Down syndrome, that is—the first words parents often hear are, 'I’m sorry,' as if Down syndrome itself is something to be down about. It’s not. I want to say, 'Congratulations.' I want to say, 'What a beautiful gift you’ve brought into the world, one more being here for a reason, here with purpose.' I want to say, 'Oh, mama,' or 'Oh, dad—this new little being is going to lift you up.

see B&P or my name on an event, they know there will be at least 10 black people there. It encourages black people to come out. Even when we throw an event, it’s fully inclusive and we’ll still only make up a small percentage of the attendees, but [black people)] know they will have people there.” The idea that these groups are unnecessary or that they further divide a small community furthers the notion that white experiences are universal experiences. As I’ve stated earlier, on more occasions than I can count, I’ve found myself as the sole person of color at an event for polyamorous people. Although we all had polyamory in common, once the conversations moved to unrelated territory, I’ve found myself struggling to stay engaged with others…or others struggling to stay engaged with me. It’s not an intentional or malicious disconnect, but it’s something that should be acknowledged, discussed, and understood. If spending time in spaces that cater to our cultural similarities can help us find comfort when we’re in the spaces that do not, both spaces have a valid purpose and right to exist.

The answer to the question - why is there something instead of nothing? - is that something and nothing is Self. Self is undivided awareness. Self is undivided Consciousness. Consciousness perceives itSelf* as variegated for the reason not to feel alone, to experience Companionship. So yes, even though the Wor(l)d is Self; Self is Love. Love is the only way Self can define itself for it is the existential purpose. The purpose why Self perceives itself as itself in all its splendor is Love. Love is the purpose of Self. There is no other purpose but Love. In conclusion: Self is Love. (* Self is reality in its totality). As usual; I is impartial (there is no division) and All-Inclusive. As such the following statement is equally valid. The answer to the question - why is there something instead of nothing? - is that something and nothing is God. God is undivided awareness. God is undivided Consciousness. God perceives itSelf as variegated for the reason not to feel alone, to experience Companionship. So yes, even though the Wor(l)d is God; God is Love. Love is the only way God can define itself for it is the existential purpose. The purpose why God perceives itself as itself in all its splendor is Love. Love is the purpose of God. There is no other purpose but Love. In conclusion: God is Love. None of the above matters for all that matters is Love. It must be remembered that division is a non-event. All there is is the perception of diversity which serves the purpose not to feel alone, to experience Companionship, to Love and Be Loved in return. As it is said: 'Love one an other, there is no an other, truth is Self, Self Itself Is'. Self now remembers: There is no division.

I don't have a college degree, I don't come from money or from an academic family, I didn't have any resourceful acquaintance to speak of, yet today I am at the forefront of humankind's struggle for inclusion, justice and equality. All I had was a vision and an unending persistence. Each failure made me even more stubborn towards my vision - each failure gave me an inexplicable bliss that carried me further.

The loathing tells us the narrative purpose of Wormtail’s inclusion in this scene. It is a replay of a pivotal moment in Snape’s past, something he must and can change on his second chance. Snape and Wormtail were the two people who betrayed the Potters to Voldemort. Now they are faced with a similar situation. A woman is frantic to protect her son from Voldemort. Her older sister has her own twisted ideas about what should become of this son. Snape can choose to protect the child this time. Wormtail feels no regret and neither wants nor gets a second chance. He is banished from the room.

The purpose of life is hidden in the reasons of our unconditional choices

The purpose of life is hidden in the reasons of our unconditional choices.

It is said that the end of the RNA world hypothesis is near. Perhaps this is an abstraction. Now I Am, as a scientist and biologist, certain that INA is the origin of Life on Earth. The Origin-of-Life study points to INA, not RNA. Why? INA is the origin of DNA and RNA. The INA world hypothesis states that all Life verily is INA. The INA world hypothesis states that biology is undivided and that all variegation is INA perceiving variegation for the purpose not to feel alone, to experience companionship, to Love and Be Loved in return. The INA world hypothesis suggests that INA is the source of all Life on Earth including but not limited to DNA/RNA. The previous RNA theory suggests that life on Earth began with a simple RNA molecule that could copy itself without help from other molecules. DNA, RNA, and proteins are central to life on Earth. DNA stores the instructions for building living things—from bacteria to bumble bees. INA theory is not limited to the Earth but to the Universe for it is all-inclusive. As such INA is not a theory but a scientific law. The kernel of INA-Law is Love. The aforementioned being based on the fact that the meaning of the name DNA is DNA is Deus Non Alligator (its meaning derived from 'Deus non alligator sacramentis' — 'God is not Bound to the sacraments'). RNA was based on the DNA principle. RNA stands for Ram Non Alligator (its meaning derived from 'Rama non alligator sacramentis' — 'Rama is not Bound to the sacraments'). Rama naturally Rama or Ram (Sanskrit: राम, Rāma, also known as Ramachandra, रामचन्द्र, Rāmacandra). As such INA-Law returns to the essence of beingness which is Self (I). The meaning of INA thus being 'I Non Alligator ('I non alligator sacramentis' — 'I is not Bound to the sacraments'). Perhaps the strongest evidence for the INA-Law is Self (I). Self Itself Is. Self Always Is. INA-Law states that Self perceives itself as itself but experiences itself as variegated not to feel alone, to experience Companionship. INA-Law states that Self is pure spirit perceiving itself as matter this although all matter is Self. Furthermore, INA-Law states that division does not exist for there is only Oneself perceiving itself as variegated for Companionship, for Love. Love is as such at the heart of INA-Law. The equation for INA-Law is 'I=Love'.

Self Perceives Itself as Quantized but all Quanta is Self. ॐ means I Is. I is Self. Self is One without an other. There are no others. Otherness is Self perceiving Otherness to experience Togetherness. Togetherness is synonymous for Companionship aka Love. It is said that The Earth is fixed. It is so. Earth is not Earth. Earth is Self. Self is ॐ. There is only 'I AM'. There is only ॐ. There is only Self. Self itself is. It is this what existence is. As such Earth is ॐ. Now. The answer to the question - who is ॐ - is Self-awareness. Self is awareness. Awareness is undivided. Division does not exist. It cannot be repeated enough that there is no division. Division being the cause of most suffering in this world. Self perceives itself as diverse not to be alone but Self is undivided. Regardless. Let's continue with Self being synonymous to Awareness for Awareness is most close to describing Self. As such it is applicable to call Self Awareness. To return to the subject of Earth being an immovable body. Let's remember there is only Self. Self is undivided awareness. Awareness perceives movement only by perceiving itself. There is after only One Self. Self perceives movement but all movement is Self. As there is only Self perceiving itself as itself it is thus correct that Self is the unmoved mover. In other words. Self is fixed or immovable. As such we can conclude the Earth is fixed or stationary for Earth is not Earth but Self perceiving itself as itself. Perhaps the following is understood better. There are no parts; there is only Self perceiving itself as Quantized this although all Quanta is Self. All plurality is but a singularity and this singularity is Self. None of it matters for all that matters is Love. Love is the meaning of Life for all diversity is Self perceiving itself as diverse, as variegated, not to be alone, for Companionship, for Love. Please note that I is completely impartial (there are no parts) and all-inclusive. The following statement is equally valid. God is One without an other. There are no others. Otherness is God perceiving Otherness to experience Togetherness. Togetherness is synonymous for Companionship aka Love. It is said that The Earth is fixed. It is so. Earth is not Earth. Earth is God. God itself is. There is only God. It is this what existence is. As such Earth is God. Now. The answer to the question - who is God- is Self-awareness. God is undivided awareness. Awareness is undivided. Division does not exist. It cannot be repeated enough that there is no division. Division being the cause of most suffering in this world. God perceives itself as diverse not to be alone but God if always undivided. Regardless. Let's continue with God being synonymous to Awareness for Awareness is most close to describing God. As such it is applicable to call God Awareness. To return to the subject of Earth being an immovable body. Let's remember there is only God. God is undivided awareness. Awareness perceives movement only by perceiving itself. There is after all only God. God perceives movement but all movement is God. As there is only God perceiving itself as itself it is thus correct that God is the unmoved mover. In other words. God is fixed or immovable. As such we can conclude the Earth is fixed or stationary for Earth is not Earth but God perceiving itself as itself. Perhaps the following is understood better. There are no parts; there is only God perceiving itself as Quantized this although all Quanta is God. All plurality is but a singularity and this singularity is God. None of it matters for all that matters is Love. Love is the meaning of Life for all diversity is God perceiving itself as diverse, as variegated, not to be alone, to experience Companionship, to experience Love.

[T]he education system in America is designed to keep wealth and resources for the privileged and to keep the poor and the crushed folks at the bottom, with rare exceptions usually amplified and promoted for PR purposes. If education’s primary purpose is to save people through knowledge and social mobility, then the millions of Americans, including many Black people, who don’t have access to good education as do the rich and privileged children getting prepped up early on for ivy league schools, is a clear indication that the American education is a huge failure.

In one point alone the heresies seem universally to have agreed,—in hatred to the Church. This might at that time be considered one of her surest and most obvious Notes. She was that body of which all sects, however divided among themselves, spoke ill; according to the prophecy, "If they have called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more them of His household." They disliked and they feared her; they did their charged matter to them, although they hold different doctrines, so long as they conspire together in their siege against the one thing, Truth." And even though active co-operation was impracticable, at least hard words cost nothing, and could express that common hatred at all seasons. Accordingly, by Montanists, Catholics were called "the carnal;" by Novatians, "the apostates;" by Valentinians, "the worldly;" by Manichees, "the simple;" by Aërians, "the ancient;" by Apollinarians, "the man-worshippers;" by Origenists, "the flesh-lovers," and "the slimy;" by the Nestorians, "Egyptians;" by Monophysites, the "Chalcedonians:" by Donatists, "the traitors," and "the sinners," and "servants of Antichrist;" and St. Peter's chair, "the seat of pestilence;" and by the Luciferians, the Church was called "a brothel," "the devil's harlot," and "synagogue of Satan:" so that it might be called a Note of the Church, as I have said, for the use of the most busy and the most ignorant, that she was on one side and all other bodies on the other. There was one title of the Church of a very different nature from those which have been enumerated,—a title of honour, which all men agreed to give her,—and one which furnished a still more simple direction than such epithets of abuse to aid the busy and the ignorant in finding her, and which was used by the Fathers for that purpose. It was one which the sects could neither claim for themselves, nor hinder being enjoyed by its rightful owner, though, since it was the characteristic designation of the Church in the Creed, it seemed to surrender the whole controversy between the two parties engaged in it. Balaam could not keep from blessing the ancient people of God; and the whole world, heresies inclusive, were irresistibly constrained to call God's second election by its prophetical title of the "Catholic" Church.

The purpose-oriented among us are the first to jump ship.

What good came of all this exploration? It was a question philosophes found irresistable. Progress was their almost irresistable answer. But Diderot, the secular pontiff of the Enlightenment, the editor of the Encyclopédie, did not agree. In 1773 he wrote a denunciation of explorers as agents of a new kind of barbarism. Base motives drove them: 'tyranny, crime, ambition, misery, curiousity, I know not what restlessness of spirit, the desire to know and the desire to see, boredom, the dislike of familiar pleasures' - all the baggage of the restless temperament. Lust for discovery was a new form of fanaticism on the part of men seeking 'islands to ravage, people to despoil, subjugate and massacre.' The explorers discovered people morally superior to themselves, because more natural or more civilized, while they, on their side, grew in savagery, far from the polite restraints that reined them in at home. 'All the long-range expeditions,' Diderot insisted, 'have reared a new generation of nomadic savages ... men who visit so many countries that they end by belonging to none ... amphibians who live on the surface of the waters,' deracinated, and, in the strictest sense of the word, demoralized. Certainly, the excesses explorers committed - of arrogance, of egotism, of exploitation - showed the folly of supposing that travel necessarily broadens the mind or improves the character. But Diderot exaggerated. Even as he wrote, the cases of disinterested exploration - for scientific or altruistic purposes - were multiplying. If the eighteenth century rediscovered the beauties of nature and the wonders of the picturesque, it was in part because explorers alerted domestic publics to the grandeurs of the world they discovered. If the conservation of species and landscape became, for the first time in Western history, an objective of imperial policy, it was because of what the historian Richard Grove has called 'green imperialism' - the awakened sense of stewardship inspired by the discovery of new Edens in remote oceans. If philosophers enlarged their view of human nature, and grappled earnestly and, on the whole, inclusively with questions about the admissability of formerly excluded humans - blacks, 'Hottentots,' Australian Aboriginals, and all other people estranged by their appearance or culture - to full membership of the moral community, it was because exploration made these brethren increasingly familiar. If critics of Western institutions were fortified in their strictures and encouraged in their advocacy of popular sovreignty, 'enlightened despotism,' 'free thinking,' civil liberties, and human 'rights,' it was, in part, because exploration acquainted them with challenging models from around the world of how society could be organized and life lived.

Clearly, when western cultures absorbed Christianity, they got an all-inclusive package: ancient Hebrew rituals and myths steeped in lost purpose, scantily recorded and broadly misinterpreted teachings of Jesus, revisions and distortions by Paul, twisted cosmology and superstitions supplied by priesthoods and bureaucratic/political distortions innate to man’s traditional endeavors.

Unlike egoic wanting, which creates opposition in direct proportion to the intensity of its wanting, enthusiasm never opposes. It is non-confrontational. Its activity does not create winners and losers. It is based on inclusion, not exclusion, of others.