text:
Season 36 Pre-emptions Thread
Season 36 Pre-emptions Thread Sept 27, 2018 18:06:49 GMT -5
Post by MarioGS on Sept 27, 2018 18:06:49 GMT -5
All three networks ended their coverage at 7:00. Wheel is good to go everywhere outside FOX.
Jeopardy!, however, was pre-empted everywhere where it airs on ABC/CBS/NBC earlier than 7:00 Eastern (which is nearly every market in the Central and Mountain Time Zones).
In case any affiliates decide to push back the rest of this week's episodes, tonight's proper J! episode is Evelyn/Michael/Katie.
Fair warning, some stations that pre-empted J! might decide to put it in Wheel's time slot on the fly.
This was a very rare case of J!'s more flexible scheduling (compared to Wheel) backfiring on them.
Last Edit: Sept 27, 2018 20:09:10 GMT -5 by MarioGS
Per Prizes , WPRI in Providence has moved Wheel (and presumably J!) to sister station/subchannel MyRITV at its regular time due to the Rhode Island Gubernatorial Debate tonight.
GameShow75
Made It and Played It
You really were the best, Alex. Rest In Peace.
SPIN ID: EY7532241
Season 36 Pre-emptions Thread Sept 28, 2018 3:05:14 GMT -5
Post by GameShow75 on Sept 28, 2018 3:05:14 GMT -5
Neither show aired around 2 or 3 in the morning my time.
After a long 29 years, my childhood dream finally came true! Thanks, Wheel Of Fortune! Proud to be the 5th highest scoring winner for the Denver games!
Post by MarioGS on Sept 28, 2018 7:51:59 GMT -5
^ So what did KDVR air, then? The game only pushed back late-night programming by about 10 minutes. Their schedule still has J! at 2:00AM MT and Wheel at 2:30.
(KDVR in Denver is one of only two stations that is pre-empting J! on Thursdays. The other is KVHP in Southwest Louisiana, which is moving it to 11:00PM CT. Wheel is pre-empted by six stations)
Last Edit: Sept 28, 2018 8:22:30 GMT -5 by MarioGS
Sept 27, 2018 18:06:49 GMT -5 MarioGS said:
Actually, it turns out ABC delayed its World News program to 7:00 ET because of the hearings. However, it was optional according to the affiliate. WABC in New York and WPVI in Philadelphia opted to show Jeopardy! at 7:00 as usual.
NBC did not air anything national after 7:00.
(Note the replies)
Post by GameShow75 on Sept 28, 2018 17:47:59 GMT -5
MarioGS Divorce Court was on last night on KDVR at 2 in the morning.
Last Edit: Sept 28, 2018 17:48:35 GMT -5 by GameShow75
Season 36 Pre-emptions Thread Oct 1, 2018 10:24:47 GMT -5
Post by MarioGS on Oct 1, 2018 10:24:47 GMT -5
Sept 28, 2018 17:47:59 GMT -5 GameShow75 said:
And that's what they usually schedule for that time slot.
I just checked KDVR's site and Wheel and Jeopardy! are no longer listed at all on Thursdays, so it seems they removed both from the schedule at the last minute. To my knowledge, they're the only station that is not doing makeup airings of the game shows at all when pre-empted by TNF. That's a shame.
Did KDVR show Thursday's episode on Friday, or did they show the proper Friday episode?
Post by GameShow75 on Oct 1, 2018 19:50:38 GMT -5
They aired Friday's games, but not Thursday's games.
SPIN ID: BY00329
Post by bevy on Oct 4, 2018 21:06:13 GMT -5
Looks like KDVR in Denver doesn't plan to air Wheel & Jeopardy on Thursdays, due to football. Not even during the night. I'm bummed. Trying to practice as much as possible since I got my letter in February....
According to spinthewheel123, last Tuesday's episode got pre-empted somewhere?
spinthewheel123
Please spin the wheel. Try to advoid Bankrupt or Lose a turn or you'll lose a turn
Post by spinthewheel123 on Oct 6, 2018 18:19:59 GMT -5
Oct 4, 2018 21:13:20 GMT -5 MarioGS said:
According to spinthewheel123 , last Tuesday's episode got pre-empted somewhere?
Yeah it was on WBRE because of weather. I dont check the foums as often but I saw this post. WBRE got to see part of J!
Spin the wheel again! Wheel Of fortune is the best game show ever.
Oh yes, that's right. Last Tuesday had very severe storms and even a few tornadoes in the mid-Atlantic. Should have realized there'd be extra weather coverage in some markets. Mine was fine, though.
Tonight, some CBS and NBC stations pre-empted 7:00PM ET programming with the swearing-in of Brett Kavanaugh. Both broadcasts were optional. Some markets opted to show the regular 7:00 programming.
CBS's coverage ended at 7:30. NBC's coverage of the event itself ended at 7:34, although it was announced during the sign-off that NBC would follow up with a delayed NBC Nightly News depending on the affiliate (WNBC New York and WVIT Harford both declined and joined Access in progress).
No ABC stations appear to have been involved. WABC New York aired Jeopardy! as normal. FOX was not involved.
Last Edit: Oct 8, 2018 18:38:12 GMT -5 by MarioGS
In Indianapolis, tonight's Wheel and Jeopardy! were moved to MeTV affiliate WALV due to WTHR showing the Indiana Senate Debate.
Among the stations that pre-empted Wheel tonight for Kavanaugh:
WBZ - Boston, MA (CBS)
WROC - Rochester, NY (CBS)
WRDW - Augusta, GA (CBS)
WLKY - Louisville, KY (CBS)
Last Edit: Oct 9, 2018 9:41:38 GMT -5 by MarioGS
Season 36 Pre-emptions Thread Oct 15, 2018 9:34:40 GMT -5
Post by MarioGS on Oct 15, 2018 9:34:40 GMT -5
Due to tonight's 49ers @ Packers game, Wheel will be pre-empted in both teams' markets.
KGO San Francisco (ABC) is not airing Wheel or Jeopardy! at all tonight.
WLUK Green Bay (FOX) is airing a pregame show at 6:30PM CT, so as usual, Wheel will be airing early at 5:30PM CT and J! remains as-is at 6:00.
Last Edit: Oct 15, 2018 9:35:42 GMT -5 by MarioGS
Season 36 Pre-emptions Thread Oct 16, 2018 11:34:01 GMT -5
Post by MarioGS on Oct 16, 2018 11:34:01 GMT -5
A couple of changes regarding Thursday Night Football pre-emptions beginning 10/18...
Baltimore viewers, bad news. WBFF no longer has Wheel on their schedule at all on Thursdays. They are now airing additional late-night news after the game in the 12:05AM ET time slot that Wheel had been bumped to previously.
Good news for Denver viewers. On KDVR, Wheel is back on the schedule at 2:30AM MT. Strangely however, Jeopardy! is not; 2:00AM is still given to Divorce Court.
Last Edit: Oct 16, 2018 15:04:32 GMT -5 by MarioGS
Post by GameShow75 on Oct 16, 2018 17:25:51 GMT -5
Unfortunately, both shows will be pre-empted for the rest of next week, excluding Monday, in Denver.
^ Yep...
World Series time is coming up on FOX. Just like with Thursday Night Football, there is a pregame show at 7:30PM ET, screwing Wheel over in several markets once again. The World Series will have games on the following Wheel days:
Saturday 10/27 (rerun of 01/09/18; Jason & Barbara/Dannielle & David/Amanda & Chris)
Tuesday 10/30 (if necessary)
Wednesday 10/31 (if necessary)
Here are how all the mainland FOX affiliates will be airing Wheel if at all. Note that some of the times are slightly different from Thursday times.
MARKET STATION WHEEL TIME
WEEKDAYS SATURDAY
Green Bay, WI WLUK 5:30PM CT 11:30PM CT
Syracuse, NY WSYT Not affected Not affected;
airs on MyTV
WBOC-DT2 Not affected None
Lake Charles, LA KVHP Not affected 10:00PM CT
Cincinnati, OH WXIX 1:00AM ET None
New Orleans, LA WVUE 11:05PM CT 11:00PM CT
Kansas City, MO WDAF 1:00AM CT 11:30PM CT
Denver, CO KDVR 3:30AM MT 2:30AM MT Sun.
Baltimore, MD WBFF None Not affected;
airs Sun. on CW
Mobile, AL WALA None
2:30AM CT 3:30AM CT Sun.
Combined with Thursday Night Football, Baltimore and Mobile will only be getting one new episode of Wheel next week.
Oct 16, 2018 11:34:01 GMT -5 MarioGS said:
According to jjman920, who watches on WBFF, Wheel still aired at 12:05 (and was promoted on a crawl during Jeopardy!) despite listings showing a two-hour news broadcast. WBFF viewers, you'll have to DVR that entire block in order to record Wheel, at least until they put it back in the listings.


Brothersoft Editor: This section of the site contains Tools for Export Table to Excel spreadsheet.
Export Table to Excel Utility allows you to export data rows from selected table to Excel spreadsheets. This tool supports all Modern versions of Microsoft SQL Server and all versions of Excel.
Built-in and online help system. you can free download Export Table to Excel 1.0 now.
Please be aware that Brothersoft do not supply any crack, patches, serial numbers or keygen for Export Table to Excel,and please consult directly with program authors for any problem with Export Table to Excel.


text:
Budget Committee pushes for more education on Pitt budget process
The University's budgeting process for the current fiscal year, which resulted in a 1.5 percent budget cut, has left the Senate Budget and Planning committee with questions, some of which could be answered at its first meeting of the academic year on Sept. 27 and some that will need further study.
Tyler Bickford, co-chair of the committee and an associate professor in the English department, peppered Thurman Wingrove, controller in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, and Steve Wisniewski, vice provost for Data and Information, with questions about how decisions were made to fund one new initiative — the Pitt Success Program — through the University's surplus, while a separate $12 million shortfall resulted in the budget cut.
While Bickford had specific questions about this year's budget, he also said he wants the administration officials to give the committee a primer on the budgeting process and how priorities are set.
Frank Wilson, immediate past president of the Senate Council, said, "This committee has been fixated on salaries and not much else. It's time to have that education process."
Wilson, who also sits on the University Planning and Budget Committee (UPBC), said that committee was given more detailed projections for this budget year than in the past. "It was the first time I felt we were participating in the budget," he said. "It was difficult, but I think that's how it should be going forward."
The UPBC — chaired by the provost with senior vice chancellors, deans, faculty, staff and students as members (see full list of positions below) — advises the chancellor on operational and long-range plans and budgets.
The 2019-20 budget
Wingrove said this fiscal year's budget presented several challenges. The budget had to accommodate $26 million in new spending on Pitt Success— the Pell Grant matching program — along with debt servicing, funds for the creation of the Office of the Senior Vice Chancellor for Research, and infrastructure projects, which led to the 1.5 percent budget cut.
Bickford quizzed Wingrove and Wisniewski on how the decisions were made on the budget cuts.
"If the University is going to have large budget cuts, then that raises questions about where the money comes from," Bickford said.
The Pitt Success funding mostly came from borrowing from the University's reserves, Wingrove said. Because the program is being offset by tuition increases, it had an immediate funding source that would allow $20 million of the $26 million to be paid back to the reserves in the first year.
The $12 million shortfall, on the other hand, comprises $4 million in debt servicing and $8 million for infrastructure and other projects. Because there was no dedicated funding stream to replace this money, the decision was made to cut the budget by 1.5 percent.
A half percent was pushed out to Pitt's schools and units, and the other 1 percent, "we're looking to try to do that as much as we can centrally," Wingrove said.
A group put together under the leadership of the CFO is looking at a variety of potential cost savings and revenue enhancement initiatives, he said. "That work is still in the early stages, so I don't have much to report from that. But the hope is that they will be able to find enough revenue enhancements and cost savings to make up for the remaining roughly $8 million."
The UPBC sets its budget in May before Pitt knows exactly how much it will be getting from the state in the coming year. Wingrove said the University budget committee then sets priorities for if the appropriation from the state is less or more than expected.
If the appropriation went up — which it did this year, by 2 percent — the UPBC's priorities were, in order, to increase the salary pool, reduce the 1.5 percent cut then reduce the tuition hike, he said. The Senate budget committee's priorities were to reduce the cut, then increase the salary pool and finally reduce the tuition hike.
Ultimately, the salary pool was increased by 0.5 percent and the in-state tuition increase was reduced by 0.25 percent. The budget cut remained the same, but with only the 0.5 percent imposed on the schools.
A budget primer
Committee member Elia Beniash, a professor of oral biology in the School of Dental Medicine, summed up the concerns of the committee about the budget process: "We're interested in how the decisions are made and how they impact our students, faculty and staff."
Wisniewski said he and Wingrove would be glad to answer specific questions and even give a primer on how the budget comes together, but, "I don't want to give vague answers, I want to give correct answers."
He asked that the committee let him know in advance the questions they have so he could prepare more completely.
Wisniewski will be filling the role on the committee most recently held by David DeJong, who moved from executive vice provost to vice chancellor of human resources this summer. Wisniewski said that DeJong would still like to play a role on the budget committee.
UNIVERSITY PLANNING AND BUDGET COMMITTEE
The University Planning and Budgeting Committee has 22 voting members:
Provost, chair
Senior Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences
Senior Vice Chancellor for Business and Operations
Senior Vice Chancellor and CFO
President of the University Senate
President of Staff Council
Chairs of the University Senate's Plant Utilization and Planning Committee, Budget Policies Committee and Senate Educational Policies Committee (or other elected member of the committees, designated by the chairs)
Four faculty members from the Pittsburgh campus, who will not also be serving as Senate officer or elected member of a standing Senate committee, jointly appointed by the president of the Senate and the chancellor, with regard for diversity of faculty perspective
Two regional campus Senate presidents or faculty designees jointly appointed by the regional campus Senate presidents and the chancellor
Four representatives of the Council of Deans, jointly appointed by the Council of Deans and the provost
One staff member selected by the Staff Council
One undergraduate student selected from all undergraduates on the Pittsburgh and regional campuses, agreed upon by the student government boards
One student selected by the Graduate and Professional Student Association.
In addition, the UPBC has three non-voting members: one staff member selected by the Staff Council and two regional campus Senate presidents or faculty designees jointly appointed by the regional campus Senate presidents and the chancellor.
Advanced Analytics Summit to offer forum for best practices
ASK THE UTIMES: Does Hillman have a sister?
Book drive aims to promote inclusion
CEC Homewood prepares for first anniversary celebration
Diversity and Inclusion restructures, will add new positions
Faculty Assembly gets chance to quiz HR's DeJong and new CIO Henderson
Fossil fuel divestment protestors confront Board of Trustees at Pitt-Johnstown
Get some help to improve your walking or biking around campus
Godzilla has roared through Japan's history
Green Speakeasy will examine Trump-era environmental policies over drinks
Input sought on future of Charles Anderson Bridge
Lecture spotlight: Nuclear test aftermath; clinical dismissal; border family separations
LIBRARY INSIDER: Romero's legacy cast a long shadow
Library ready to show off a few items from Romero collection
MyHealth@Work Center offering health coaching, prescription advice and TIAA sessions
New CIO Henderson looks at streamlining Pitt systems
Pennsylvania lawmakers to introduce student-athlete compensation bill
Pitt Day of Caring offers two-hour opportunity on campus
Pitt faculty and students can now use Gradescope
Pitt Green Office wants to boost sustainability efforts campus-wide
Pitt Law's Ron Brand honored with Sheth Award
Pitt Momentum offers large-scale funding for internal research projects
Pitt presses PLRB to uphold original graduate student election results
Possible Koch Foundation grant raises concerns at Faculty Assembly
Property watch: Keeping track of what's coming and going in Oakland
Provost's Office accepting new round of course incubator proposals
Publishing Clearinghouse: Transgender children; Hispanic-serving institutions
Safety crawl highlights hazards to walkers, bicyclists and vehicles
Science 2019 asks participants to 'Question'
Senior Leadership Academy gives participants 360-degree view of Pitt
Teaching heroes: School of Engineering's Jacobs inspires students to care more
TECH CORNER: Use Ask Cathy for fast-track access to Pitt services
Tree of Life tragedy to be remembered throughout campus, city
'Spooky Strides' walk to get faculty and staff moving
'Appointment stream faculty' suggested to replace non-tenure-stream

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Koko has a fun, relaxed approach to eating healthy and raw and believes that anyone can do it! She knows that everyone is at a different place in their healthy eating journey and she embraces that, and is happy to help along the way.
A tasty little burst of gingery goodness in bite-size to sustain you throughout the day. It doesn't get much simpler than this tasty and energy packed recipe by Koko Brill of Koko's Kitchen. Super kid-friendly too!
A layer of smooth, gooey caramel paired with silky raw chocolate mousse on a thick almond flour and coconut crust. Top with cacao nibs, goji berries, and extra shredded coconut! Simple. Gourmet. Decadent.
Take those fresh strawberries that you picked up from the farmers market, dip them in a decadent layer of raw chocolate, and roll them around in your favorite superfoods!! This recipe by Kokos Kitchen is absolutely bursting with nutrition and sweetness!


700c V 51mm Alloy Track/Wheel Set Sealed Bearing 32 Spoke 14gSS/Black 3/8 Axl White.
Handlebar 826A Alloy 22.2mm Blue.
Tire Duro 700 x 23c Green/Green Side Wall HF-156.
Wing Kickstand Center 10-1/2" Chrome.
Wing Rectangle Mirror Gold Right Amber Reflectors.


text:
San Antonio Spurs All-Time Lists
San Antonio Spurs: Best All-Star Game Performances
By Andrew Ites
NEW YORK, NY - FEBRUARY 15: Tim Duncan #21 of the Western Conference All-Star Team smiles during the 64th NBA All-Star Game presented by Kia as part of the 2015 NBA All-Star Weekend on February 15, 2015 at Madison Square Garden in New York, New York. NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and/or using this photograph, user is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. Mandatory Copyright Notice: Copyright 2015 NBAE (Photo by Nathaniel S. Butler/NBAE via Getty Images)
HOUSTON, TX – FEBRUARY 17: Tim Duncan #21 of the Western Conference All-Star Team dunks over Paul George #24 of the Eastern Conference All-Star Team during 2013 NBA All-Star Game on February 17, 2013 at the Toyota Center in Houston, Texas. (Photo by Nathaniel S. Butler/NBAE via Getty Images)
With the NBA All-Star Weekend just around the corner, it's time to look back at some of the San Antonio Spurs' greatest performances in the All-Star Game.
The San Antonio Spurs have always been well represented in the NBA All-Star Game, and LaMarcus Aldridge will be the organization's representative during this year's festivities for the second straight year.
For years, the big three of Tim Duncan (15 All-Star games), Tony Parker (6 All-Star games), and Manu Ginobili (2 All-Star games) were staples of All-Star Weekend with a combined 23 appearances among them.
Before the big three, Hall of Famer David Robinson wore Spurs colors to 10 All-Star games and the legendary George Gervin made 12 All-Star appearances during the early years of San Antonio basketball.
With so many legendary performances on All-Star weekend, it was hard to narrow down the list.
However, I've come up with the top three All-Star game performances in Spurs history ahead of this weekend's big game.
Next: George Gervin, 1980
LANDOVER,MD – FEBRUARY 4: The Eastern Conference All-Stars pose for a team photo, front row (L to R): Nate Archibald, Trainer John Lally, Assistant Coach Chuck Daly, Head Coach Billy Cunningham, Assistant Coach Jack McMahon, Eddie Johnson. Back Row: Larry Bird, Micheal Ray Richardson, John Drew, Dan Roundfield, Julius Erving, George Gervin, Elvin Hayes, Moses Malone & Bill Cartwright, prior to the 1980 NBA All-Star game at the Capital Centre on February 4, 1980 in Landover, Maryland. (Photo by NBAE/NBAE via Getty Images)
George Gervin, 1980
George Gervin was in the prime of his career in the 1979-80 season as he scored a league-leading 33.1 points per game and carried the Spurs to the playoffs.
Gervin was named to the 1980 Eastern Conference All-Star roster and scored a game-high 34 points on 14-of-26 shooting with 10 rebounds and 3 assists in a thrilling 144-136 overtime win for the East.
Related Story. 3 Reasons why Gregg Popovich is the GOAT
Gervin was named MVP of the game for his efforts, which was the first All-Star MVP award won by a San Antonio Spur.
Gervin made 12 straight All-Star teams after being sold to the Spurs for $228,000 during the All-Star weekend of 1974, and he would eventually cement himself as one of the greatest players in San Antonio history.
Next: Tim Duncan, 2000
OAKLAND, CA – FEBRUARY 13: San Antonio Spurs Tim Duncan
Tim Duncan, 2000
Tim Duncan took the league by storm making the All-Star game as a rookie in 1997-98, which has only been done 45 times in league history.
After being snubbed from the All-Star team in 1998-99, Duncan returned with a vengence for the 2000 festivities.
Duncan filled up the stat sheet with 24 points on 12-of-14 shooting with 14 rebounds and 4 assists, and was named co-MVP with Shaquille O'Neal.
15 best scorers in Spurs history. Related Story
Duncan clearly outplayed Shaq in every statistical category as the West won 137-126, but he was still forced to share the MVP trophy with one of his biggest rivals.
Duncan introduced himself as one of the league's most dominant forces in just his third NBA season with an incredible All-Star game performance.
NEW YORK, NY – FEBRUARY 15: (NEW YORK DAILIES OUT) Marc Gasol #33, Tim Duncan #21 and Chris Paul #3 of the Western Conference talk during a break against the Eastern Conference during the 2015 NBA All-Star Game at Madison Square Garden on February 15, 2015 in New York City. The Western Conference defeated the Eastern Conference Knicks 163-158. (Photo by Jim McIsaac/Getty Images)
More from Air Alamo
Spurs show remarkable poise against Bulls, unlike many fans
Devin Vassell is the latest in the Spurs' collection of silent assassins
San Antonio Spurs: 5 Players to avoid in any LaMarcus Aldridge deal
Is Gregg Popovich hiding Luka Samanic as a secret weapon?
San Antonio Spurs News: More DeRozan trade talk from Chris Haynes
The 2015 All-Star game was Tim Duncan's 15th and final appearance in basketball's most star-studded weekend.
While he didn't put up the same stats as he did when he won the MVP in the 2000 All-Star game, it was still a moment that Spurs fans will never forget.
Duncan only scored two points in the game, but his fourth quarter dunk brought the crowd to their feet as the West team claimed a 163-158 victory.
Duncan also participated in a pregame three-point contest with Dirk Nowitzki and Kevin Durant. Needless to say, Timmy D did not come out victorious competing against two all-time great shooters.
Duncan finished his All-Star game career at Madison Square Garden where he made his first All-Star appearance as a rookie in 1998.
Want your voice heard? Join the Air Alamo team!
Next. 15 greatest draft picks in Spurs history
That symetry put a cap on Duncan's all-time great career which ended the following season.


As the Alliance of American Football prepares to kick off its inaugural season this weekend, bookmakers around the globe are scrambling to set odds for the league unknown.
BetDSI has put together preliminary Week 1 odds, which are sure to move as the market and bettors react.
Also available are AAF Championship odds, regular season win totals and a few fun props. According to the oddsmakers, the Arizona Hotshots and Orlando Apollos appear to be the teams to beat.
Will any AAF player or team be investigated for match-fixing, wager-fixing, prop-fixing in 2019?


MLS stands for MULTI LISTING SERVICE. As a trade association we help agents B2B link and pool resources and listings into our platform.
Our central pool of shared property listings can be accessed by member 'sub' agents - and 'main' or 'master' agent members who are able to auto or manually add their their available shared property stock.
Local agent gained £400k more via MLS compared to previous sole agent.
1. exclusive rights to control a marketing programme.
2. Extended exposure to more buyers via more local (sub) agents, then throw in 'Open Days' to buffer momentum between interested parties.
What's interesting is the vendors featured achieved £400k more via Rick and Sandra as their main agents (£2.8m rather than £2.4m). The house had been on a sole agency for months - just weeks prior.
Using the above techniques they increase viewers by typically 3 times, allowing higher offers to be submitted. As such their fee was higher than the prior agent who didn't get the sale and would have only got 1%.
Make your estate agency more centric, locally.
An agent who offers clients greater exposure via other fellow agents can increase more applicants through a property door. The result is that a property can sell or let faster, at a better price as more offers can come in and an agent can advise on buyers or tenants who are in a better position to proceed. As going from just sole agency to main agency can achieve better results, then the main agent can often achieve 0.5% to 1% higher fees.
When agents work together in a local group many may be gaining similar enquiries for like properties from the same portals. £ 1,000's costs can be saved by passing over redundant leads. A property can only be sold or let once, so having 2-3 extra buyers or tenants means other agents listings may be ideal matches.
Having access to more 'other' sub agents MLS listings means you have more to sell and let. This means Google has more to find you from. But to get these 'other' properties in your website requires an idx enabled website - be it via live feed from your software or via an integrated iframe property search which can replace the search on your existing website. With more content, your site will be seen greater as a larger local property website. More search matches - means greater SEO and hits to your business.
IDX stands for information data exchange.
More softwares are now looking at making their software 'next generation' and enabling agents to back feed via 'idx' other agents property listings from the INEA hub.
Many other softwares who haven't yet taken this step are meeting us halfway by replacing their own property search code in the agents website property search with INEA mls idx coding. This creates an upgraded search that automatically means accepted sub properties add to your website as if your own.


King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, ( , born August 1, 1924) is the current King of the Saudi Arabia and Head of the House of Saud. He succeeded to the throne and assumed the title of King upon the death of his half-brother, King Fahd, on August 1, 2005. As Crown Prince since 1982, he had previously acted as de facto regent and thus ruler of Saudi Arabia since January 1, 1996, when Fahd was incapacitated by a major stroke. He was formally enthroned on August 3, 2005. One of his sons, Prince Mutaib, serves as a deputy commander in the Saudi National Guard. He is, after half-brother Bandar and Musa'id, the third eldest of the living sons of Abdul Aziz ibn Saud.
Abdullah also serves as Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia and Commander of the Saudi National Guard. He is Chairman of the Supreme Economic Council, President of the High Council for Petroleum and Minerals, President of the King Abdulaziz Centre for National Dialogue, Chairman of the Council of Civil Service and Head of the Military Service Council. Abdullah is the fifth son (out of 37 sons) of King Abdulaziz bin Abdulrahman Al Saud, the founder of modern Saudi Arabia, to ascend to the throne.
His wealth is estimated at over $21 billion.
King Abdullah Bin-Abd-al-Aziz Al Saud was born in Riyadh to Ibn Saud's eighth wife, Fahda bint Asi Al Shuraim of the Abde section of the Shammar tribe. She had earlier been married to the 10th Rashidi Emir, Saud, who was killed in 1920.
He was given the position of Commander of the Saudi Arabian National Guard in August 1962, the position of Second Deputy Prime Minister in March 1975 and the position of First Deputy Prime Minister in June 1982. Abdullah had taken multiple wives during his lifetime, among them Princess Tadi Bint Mashan Al-Jarba, Princess Hessa Al Shaalan, Princess Haifa Al Mohana, Princess Aida Fostok, Anud, Princess Malka Al Jarba, and al-Jauhara. He has 7 sons and 15 daughters.
Abdullah held a conference at Mecca in June 2008 to urge Muslim leaders to speak with one voice with Jewish and Christian leaders. He discussed and took approval of the Saudi Islamic scholars and the world's renowned Islamic scholars to hold the interfaith dialogue.
In June 2008, Saudi Arabia and Spain agreed to hold the interfaith dialogue in Spain. The historic conference finally took place in Madrid in July 2008 where religious leaders of different faiths participated.
Abdullah had never earlier made any overtures for dialogue with eastern religious leaders such as Hindus and Buddhists. The Mecca conference discussed an important paper on the dialogue with the followers of monotheistic religions highlighting the monotheistic religions of southeast Asia including Sikhism in the third axis of the fourth meeting titled "With Whom We Talk" presented by Sheikh Badrul hasan Alqasmi. The session was chaired by HE Dr. Ezz Eddin Ibrahim, Adviser to the President of the United Arab Emirates for Culture.
The session also discussed a paper presented on coordination among Islamic institutions on Dialogue by Dr. / Abdullah bin Omar Nassif, Secretary General of the World Islamic Council for Preaching and relief, and a paper on dialogue with divine messages, presented by Professor / Mohammad Sammak - Secretary General of the Islamic spiritual summit/ Lebanon. The session ended by Sheikh Al Fadel alzafzaaf - Under secretary-Azhar and Chairman of the Committee for dialogue among religions formerly / Cairo discussing the futuristics of dialogue in the light of repeated abuse to Islam.
King Abdullah and his government were responsible for the 'Peace of Culture' which took place on November 2008 at the United Nations General Assembly. It brought together Muslim and non-Muslim nations to eradicate the preconception of Islam and Terrorism. It brought together leaders including former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, Israeli President Shimon Peres, George W Bush and King Abdullah of Jordan.
Since May 12, 2003, Saudi Arabia has faced several serious attacks from organizations that Saudi Arabia officially has declared Terrorists, targeting primarily Western expatriates and also Saudi security forces. The attacks have included car and truck bombings as well as raids by gunmen against civilians.
Several international groups, such as al-Qaeda, have been linked to the attacks, with the common motivation being resentment of the perceived pro-Western stance of the King and royal family, and their encouragement of Westerners residing in Saudi Arabia. The militants believe that the Islamic prophet Muhammad commanded that non-Muslims should be expelled from the Arabian peninsula. The militants are especially outraged at the presence of the U.S. military in Saudi Arabia, which they see as sanctioned by the royal family.
The response of King Abdullah's administration to the insurgency has been a series of crackdowns including raids by security forces, arrests, torture and public beheadings. King Abdullah has vowed to fight terrorist ideologies within the country.
"God Almighty, in His wisdom, tests the faithful by allowing such calamities to happen. But He, in His mercy, also provides us with the will and determination, generated by faith, to enable us to transform such tragedies into great achievements, and crises that seem debilitating are transformed into opportunities for the advancement of humanity. I only hope that, with your cooperation and leadership, a new world will emerge out of the rubble of the World Trade Center : a world that is blessed by the virtues of freedom, peace, prosperity and harmony."
Abdullah paid for the surgery of a pair of Polish conjoined twins, which took place at the King Abd al-Aziz Medical City in Riyadh on January 3, 2005. He was given "honorary citizenship" by the Polish town of Janikowo , where the twins were born.
Abdullah has established two libraries, one in Riyadh (the King Abdulaziz Library) and another in Casablanca, Morocco .
Abdullah has donated $50 million in cash and $10 million worth of relief materials for the 2008 Sichuan earthquake in China.
Abdullah donated $10 billion to the endowment fund of the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in May 2008.
On January 24, 2007, Human Rights Watch sent an open letter to King Abdullah asking him to cease religious persecution of the Ahmadi faith in Saudi Arabia. Two letters were sent in November 2006 and February 2007 asking him to remove the travel ban on critics of the Saudi government. Human Rights Watch has not yet indicated whether they have received any response to these letters.
During a state visit to the United Kingdom on October 30, 2007, Abdullah was greeted by protesters accusing him of being a "murderer" and a "torturer." Concerns were raised in the UK about the treatment of women and homosexuals by the Saudi kingdom. Concerns were also raised over alleged bribes involving arms deals between Saudi Arabia and the UK.
In October 1976, as Prince Abdullah was being groomed for greater responsibility in Riyadh, he was sent to the United States to meet with President Gerald Ford. He again traveled to the United States as Crown Prince in October 1987, meeting Vice President George H. W. Bush. In September 1998, Crown Prince Abdullah made a state visit to the United States to meet in Washington, D.C. with President Bill Clinton. In September 2000, he attended millennium celebrations at the United Nations in New York City . In April 2002, Crown Prince Abdullah made a state visit to the United States with President George W. Bush and he returned again in April 2005 with Bush as well. Also, in June 2009, Abdullah hosted President Barack Obama in Saudi Arabia.
King Fahd of Saudi Arabia dies, BBC News, August 1, 2005. Accessed March 29, 2008.
"King Fahd ibn Abdel-Aziz Al Saud: The Times obituary", Times Online, August 1, 2005. Accessed March 29, 2008.
"The World's Richest Royals Forbes List".
The King's call for interfaith dialogue, Saudi Gazette.
Saudis launch Islamic unity drive, BBC News, June 4, 2008. Accessed June 10, 2008.
Inter-faith meet to be held in Spain, Saudi Gazette.
Let concord replace conflict – Abdullah, Saudi Gazette.
Brown, Colin. Shouts of 'murderers' and 'torturers' greet King Abdullah on Palace tour, The Independent, October 31, 2007. Accessed May 17, 2008.
Saudi king's royal meet draws fire, CNN, October 31, 2007. Accessed June 10, 2008.


text:
Q: Rails Error - "cannot load such file -- bcrypt_ext" on Windows 7, 64 I am on Windows 7 64 bit, and I am running Ruby 2.3.3 and Rails 5.1.2. I am coming across this error with my RoR project when attempting to create a new user on my website:

"LoadError in Devise::RegistrationsController#create" "cannot load
  such file -- bcrypt_ext"

I have come across this and similar solutions through Google searching:

"Firstly uninstall bcrypt and bcrypt-ruby by running these two
  commands: gem uninstall bcrypt and gem uninstall bcrypt-ruby Install
  it again with gem install bcrypt --platform=ruby In your Gemfile write
  gem 'bcrypt-ruby', '3.1.5', :require => 'bcrypt' Run bundle install"

However, when I attempt to run gem uninstall bcrypt in my console I receive this error message:

"$ gem uninstall bcrypt ERROR:  While executing gem ...
  (Gem::DependencyRemovalException)
      Uninstallation aborted due to dependent gem(s)"

I believe this is due to my Devise gem. When I run gem list bcrypt in console I receive this output:

"bcrypt (3.1.11 x86-mingw32)"
My rails app came with this line commented out in my gem file:
"# Use ActiveModel has_secure_password
gem 'bcrypt', '~> 3.1.11'"

I have tried uncommenting it back into the code, and when I do so the Rails Server fails to load and lists this error in console:
C:\Users\James\Desktop\rails_app>rails s
C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/activesupport-5.1.3/lib/act
ive_support/dependencies.rb:292:in `require': cannot load such file -- bcrypt_ex
t (LoadError)
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/activesupport-
5.1.3/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:292:in `block in require'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/activesupport-
5.1.3/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:258:in `load_dependency'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/activesupport-
5.1.3/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:292:in `require'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bcrypt-3.1.11-
x86-mingw32/lib/bcrypt.rb:16:in `rescue in <top (required)>'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bcrypt-3.1.11-
x86-mingw32/lib/bcrypt.rb:12:in `<top (required)>'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bundler-1.15.2
/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:82:in `require'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bundler-1.15.2
/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:82:in `block (2 levels) in require'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bundler-1.15.2
/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:77:in `each'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bundler-1.15.2
/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:77:in `block in require'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bundler-1.15.2
/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:66:in `each'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bundler-1.15.2
/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:66:in `require'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/bundler-1.15.2
/lib/bundler.rb:108:in `require'
        from C:/Users/James/Desktop/rails_app/config/application.rb:7:in `<top (
required)>'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/railties-5.1.3
/lib/rails/commands/server/server_command.rb:129:in `require'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/railties-5.1.3
/lib/rails/commands/server/server_command.rb:129:in `block in perform'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/railties-5.1.3
/lib/rails/commands/server/server_command.rb:126:in `tap'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/railties-5.1.3
/lib/rails/commands/server/server_command.rb:126:in `perform'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/thor-0.19.4/li
b/thor/command.rb:27:in `run'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/thor-0.19.4/li
b/thor/invocation.rb:126:in `invoke_command'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/thor-0.19.4/li
b/thor.rb:369:in `dispatch'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/railties-5.1.3
/lib/rails/command/base.rb:63:in `perform'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/railties-5.1.3
/lib/rails/command.rb:44:in `invoke'
        from C:/RailsInstaller/Ruby2.3.0/lib/ruby/gems/2.3.0/gems/railties-5.1.3
/lib/rails/commands.rb:16:in `<top (required)>'
        from bin/rails:4:in `require'
        from bin/rails:4:in `<main>'

At this point, I'm out of ideas. Please advise. Thank you.

A: You should uninstall bcrypt-ruby before uninstalling bcrypt, as this is the dependent gem.
This can be done as so:
gem uninstall bcrypt-ruby
gem uninstall bcrypt
gem install bcrypt --platform=ruby

A: try the following steps which worked for me:

*

*remove anything related to brypt from you Gemfile

*Enter the following information into your Gemfile

gem 'bcrypt', git: 'https://github.com/codahale/bcrypt-ruby.git', :require => 'bcrypt'

*Run 'bundle install' at the root of your project and it should work.

For some reason when you point it to the git page it worked for me.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
On Lauren Boebert, Nancy Pelosi, and Mike Pence
Joe Biden Joins Chuck Schumer in Attacking the Legitimacy of American Elections
New Amazon Lord of the Rings Series Gets Title, First Teaser
FedEx Offering 'Congestion Bypass Service' around L.A. Ports
President Biden, You're No Bill Clinton
Another Horror Story about the Long Waits for Health Care in Canada
By John McCormack
About John McCormack
Follow John McCormack on Twitter
Rep. Lauren Boebert (R., Colo.) and other members of Congress wait during a break as they convene to certify the 2020 election results in Washington, D.C., January 6, 2021. (J. Scott Applewhite/Reuters)
Lauren Boebert, a freshman U.S. House member from Colorado, is best known for having expressed support for the deranged QAnon conspiracy theory — a libel that did much to inspire the siege of the U.S. Capitol. On Wednesday, she tweeted: "Today is 1776." That tweet was reckless and incendiary: The QAnon nutjobs who stormed the Capitol on Wednesday were using "1776" as a rallying cry in the days leading up to the attack. They took that rallying cry seriously and literally.
But Boebert is facing calls for expulsion for a different tweet. A January 11 headline at Salon alleges that Boebert "live-tweeted Nancy Pelosi's location to rioters."
On January 6, Boebert tweeted her own location at 2:17 p.m.: "We were locked in the House Chambers."
Then she tweeted at 2:18 p.m. that Pelosi was no longer in the House chamber: "The Speaker has been removed from the chambers."
In other words, Boebert did not tweet where Pelosi was located; she tweeted where Pelosi was not located.
I'm not sure if the situation was different in the House than the Senate — where I was located at the time — but around the same time, several people tweeted that Mike Pence had left the Senate floor.
NPR tweeted that Pence had left the Senate chamber. A New York Times reporter tweeted Pence had left the Senate chamber. I tweeted that Pence had left the Senate. When I tweeted that, I did not know the Capitol building had been breached. An announcement over a loudspeaker that there was a "security threat inside the building" occurred a few minutes later.
It was apparent to anyone watching the C-SPAN livestream that Senator Chuck Grassley had taken Pence's post as the presiding officer, and a C-SPAN anchor later explicitly reported that Pence had left the Senate.
I am certain that neither NPR, the New York Times, C-SPAN, nor I believed we were endangering Mike Pence's life by tweeting he was no longer in the Senate.
Now, maybe the situation was somehow different in the House from the Senate in that moment. I don't know whether Boebert knew the building had been breached when she posted those tweets about her own location and the fact that Pelosi was no longer there. But the truth matters, including the facts about what was being reported about Pence and the Senate at around the same time.
return-icon Return to The Corner
John McCormack is the Washington correspondent for National Review and a fellow at the National Review Institute. @McCormackJohn
Patton Oswalt Turns Rat against Dave Chappelle
Oswalt betrayed a friend of 34 years because he was scared by the antics of a handful of crap-flinging baboons on the Internet.
Biden in Hidin'
Nikki Fried Is So, So Bad at This
Charles C. W. Cooke
Florida's Democratic agriculture commissioner is running to unseat Governor Ron DeSantis. She just doesn't seem to know why, or how.


text:
Instagram, Snapchat Rated 'Worst' Platforms for Young People
Instagram and Snapchat are the worst social media platform for young people's mental health, and YouTube is the most positive, a new study suggests.
The ranking comes in a report from the British Royal Society for Public Health, which ranked the sites' impact on young people.
"Social media has been described as more addictive than cigarettes and alcohol, and is now so entrenched in the lives of young people that it is no longer possible to ignore it when talking about young people's mental health issues," said Shirley Cramer, the chief executive of the RSPH.
"It's interesting to see Instagram and Snapchat ranking read more >>>
Source:: VOANews.Com


text:
THE HEIDEGGERIAN TRIAD OF ONTICAL, ONTOLOGICAL AND HERMENEUTICAL APPROACHES TO SEIN
Abdul Rahim Afaki
University of Karachi, Pakistan
This paper reviews Martin Heidegger's two major writings on hermeneutic phenomenology and time and defines his perspectives on the hermeneutic turn of metaphysics. Heidegger first draws a sharp distinction between what he conceives of hermeneutics and phenomenology, and then underpins to amalgamate them to expound the notion of hermeneutic phenomenology. His argument that he construes in his magnum opus, Sein und Zeit (Being and Time) appears hostile to all attempts made to define the notion of Being throughout the history of Western metaphysics, Heidegger actually asserts that this notion needs to be defined with a new methodology that is of phenomenology. He believes that in defining Being through the phenomenological method one finds it inevitable to conceive of Being qua time. And the overall project of defining Being qua time takes a triadic paradigm of ontical-ontological-hermeneutical approach to the issue concerned.
This paper focuses the complexity of Heidegger's notion of hermeneutic phenomenology in the nexus of the ontical-ontological-hermeneutical triad concerning the conception of sein (Being). Heidegger takes Being as phenomenon, as something that shows itself as it is in itself. Yet Being is always the Being of some entity, it is therefore necessary to choose the most appropriate entity to attain this task. The most appropriate entity in this regard is Dasein, the human self which can take the question of Being as an issue for it. It is the way of Dasein, the ontologico-ontically preferred entity, that Being shows itself as it is in itself, and this indirect showing of Being as it is appeals to the hermeneutic process of making Being aptly known to the human understanding. In order to establish the triadic complex of ontical-ontological-hermeneutical approach to the question of Being and its meaning, I have developed my argument in two parts.
The first part begins with how Heidegger, rejecting all of the traditional presuppositions regarding the concept of Being, restates the question of Being with new metaphysical foundations in the paradigm of hermeneutic phenomenology. In all of the traditional presuppositions, Being is taken to be an object like other entities, which is to say, it shows the what of every object. According to Heidegger, Being is to show "the how" rather "the what" of all entities. In this phenomenological inquiry into the question of Being, Being is not an entity rather it 'determines entities as entities, that on the basis of which [woraufhin] entities are already understood.' In this process that which is interrogated (ein Befragtes) is not Being rather entities. Since there is infinite number of entities in the world therefore in order to make the inquiry viable one has to give priority to one specific entity. And this entity is Dasein, the inquirer himself, as for him the question of Being is an issue. Dasein is prior an entity both ontologically and ontically; ontologically, as it is ontologically interrogated in the process of discerning the meaning of Being; and ontically, as it is an entity itself which has the determinate character of existence. Dasein is also ontico-ontologically prior in the sense that on the ground of understanding of its own, the Being of all other entities will be discerned. The most important aspect of this method inquiring into the question of Being it is that Heidegger takes both Being and Dasein as time or temporality. He does not take time as an entity or its character, that is, as something to be concerned with "the what" of the world rather he takes time as something to be concerned with "the how" of the world. This is the same way as he conceives Being.
The second part focuses the complexity of the ontical-ontological-hermeneutical triad of the Heideggerian approach to Being through the method of phenomenology. It describes how the etymological nature of the words phenomenon and logos determine their composite namely phenomenology to be open to the process of interpretation. He takes Being as phenomenon, and since Being as phenomenon is to be discerned through the way of Dasein therefore logos becomes such a discourse that it can make Being show itself to human understanding through the interpretation of Dasein.
I. THE RISE OF HEIDEGGER'S HERMENEUTIC PHENOMENLOGY
I.1. The Question of Being and the Conception of Phenomenology
Deviating from the traditional approaches toward the concept of Being, Heidegger lays new metaphysical foundation in order to develop his unique version of phenomenology. Owing to the problematic of considering the 'inquiry into Being' as 'unnecessary,' Heidegger, in the first step of the development of phenomenology, focuses on 'the necessity for explicitly restating the question of Being.' In the process of this restating, he rejects three traditional presuppositions attached with the concept of Being namely (i) Being is the most universal concept, (ii) Being is indefinable, and (iii) Being is the most self-evident concept.[1]
The old way of conceiving was concerned with the genus-species relationship, that is, an entity was supposed to be defined or conceived as a species related to a class or genus to be generalized as such through the process of abstraction. In this regard, in Heidegger's view, the concept of Being was not taken by the ancient and the medieval ontologists as a generalized or universalized genus to which every entity is related to be defined. Instead, it has been taken as something that transcends the genus-species relationship in the sense that no entity is conceived as species of it, which is to say, it is something transcendental-universal in the sense that '[t]he universality of Being 'transcends' any universality of genus.'[2] The transcendental-universality of Being is the characteristic which, according to Heidegger, makes it 'the darkest' rather than 'the clearest' of all concepts, and so it needs to be further discussed to be more clarified. Owing to its 'supreme universality' one can deduce that Being is indefinable, that is, one cannot define Being as an entity being 'derived from higher concepts by definition, nor can it be presented through lower ones.'[3] Heidegger does not accept the indefinability of Being rejecting the method of definition as given in traditional logic. In the face of it, he intends to explore a new method, which may be termed as the phenomenological method, in order to conceive Being appropriately. This is the main purpose of his project of Sein und Zeit (Being and Time). In the process of restructuring the question of Being, the third presupposition concerned with the concept of Being, which Heidegger rejects, is its being self-evident. If one 'comports' oneself toward something or even toward oneself or, in other words, if one makes an assertion of something or of oneself after an average intelligibility like "The sky is blue", "I am handsome" etc., one takes the 'isness' for granted. In this taking of 'isness' of entities for granted is, in Heidegger's view, 'an enigma a priori' which makes it justifiable to restructure the question of Being (isness) in order to make man free from this enigmatic situation wherein he thinks that he is living in an understanding of Being but 'the meaning of Being is still veiled in darkness.'[4]
Thanks to the perplexing nature of the concept of Being through the attachment of the three presuppositions as discussed above, Heidegger tends to formulate the question of the meaning of Being as the most fundamental question in a transparent way. Heidegger designs the structure of the question of Being as an 'inquiry' which, according to him, 'is a seeking (Suchen).' Attaining the transparency of the structure of the question of Being, Heidegger finds three constitutive factors of this inquiry as seeking namely 'that which is asked about (sein Gefragtes)', 'that which is interrogated (ein Befragtes)', and that which is to be found out by the asking (das Erfragte).'[5] When one inquires into Being, what one seeks, according to Heidegger, 'is not something entirely unfamiliar' to one rather an 'average understanding of Being.' This average understanding is vague in nature through which one cannot grasp Being at all in the first stance but out of it 'arise both the explicit question of the meaning of Being and the tendency that leads one towards its conception.' In this regard, the average understanding is to guide 'beforehand' the inquiry into Being as a kind of seeking. In this seeking, what is asked about is Being-'that which determines entities as entities, that on the basis of which [woraufhin] entities are already understood.'[6] So in the question of the meaning of Being, what is asked about is Being but what is interrogated is not Being rather entities, provided '[t]he Being of entities is not itself an entity.' As the number of entities in the world is infinite, one may find it unlikely to interrogate all of the entities, and so one should limit one's interrogation to make it viable. Working out the question of Being as a transparent inquiry, one should, in Heidegger's view, give priority to one particular entity in order that the meaning of Being is to be discerned. This prior entity is the inquirer himself who asks the question as his own mode of Being. Heidegger denotes that entity by the term "Dasein" 'which each of us is himself and which includes inquiring as one of the possibilities of its Being.'[7] The third constitutive factor of the structure of the question of Being is its meaning, the goal of the inquiry that the Dasein intends to attain as a result of its seeking. That is to say, what is to be found out by the asking lies in what is asked about to be discerned by the Dasein (that which is interrogated) as a goal of the inquiry.
Adhering to the question of Being, Heidegger expounds the priority of Dasein, as a particular entity which is interrogated in order to attain the meaning of Being, over all other entities in three different ways namely 'ontical,' 'ontological' and 'the ontico-ontological.'[8] The understanding of the threefold nomenclature of the priority of Dasein over other entities depends on how Heidegger demarcates ontical from ontological. The nature of inquiry will be ontological if one inquires into the question of 'to be' or Being or isness, and it will be ontical if one inquires into an entity rather than its Being.[9] Dasein is an entity and it is ontically (i.e. on the ground of being an entity) distinct from other entities 'by the fact, in its very Being, that Being is an issue for it.' But as we have seen above the nature of inquiry is ontological if one inquires into the issue of Being, which implies that 'Dasein is ontically distinctive in that it is ontological.' Here Dasein's 'Being-ontological' means that Dasein takes its Being as an issue for itself, it does not mean that Dasein is to develop a theoretical inquiry which aims at working out a study 'explicitly devoted to the meaning of entities.' In this regard, what Heidegger has in his mind 'in speaking of Dasein's "Being-ontological" is to be designated as something "pre-ontological" which simply signifies that Dasein is being such a way that it has an understanding of Being.[10]
The difference between ontical and ontological leads Heidegger further to the distinction between 'existentiell' and 'existential.' Heidegger defines existence (Existenz) as '[t]hat kind of Being towards which Dasein can comport itself in one way or another, and always does comport itself somehow.' This comporting of Dasein becomes the ground of its understanding of its own, which is to say, 'Dasein always understands itself in terms of its existence-in terms of a possibility of itself: to be itself or not itself.' Dasein's understanding of itself or its self-awareness which it attains that way, and which is its 'ontical affair,' is what Heidegger calls 'existentiell'.[11] Unlike the ontical self-awareness of Dasein, the understanding of the ontological structure of its existence 'aims at the analysis (Auseinanderlegung) of what constitutes existence.' This analysis 'has the character of an understanding which is not existentiell, but rather existential.' By 'existentiality' Heidegger means:
"the state of Being that is constitutive for those entities that exist. But in the idea of such a constitutive state of Being, the idea of Being is already included. And thus even the possibility of carrying through the analytic of Dasein depends on working out beforehand the question about the meaning of Being in general."[12]
The essential character of Being, in Heidegger's view, which belongs to Dasein is 'Being in a world.' Owing to the essential character of 'Being in a world' of every entity to be investigated, Dasein is to understand Being pertaining 'with equal primordiality' both to the understanding of world, and to the understanding of Being of the entities to be investigated within the confinement of the world. So whenever an inquiry or study is to take place relating to a particular type of entities, whether Dasein itself or some other entity, it is grounded upon 'Dasein's own ontical structure, in which a pre-ontological understanding of Being is comprised as a definite characteristic' provided the essentiality of Being is Being in a world. 'Therefore fundamental ontology, from which alone all other ontologies can take their rise, must be sought in the existential analytic of Dasein.' To sum up the issue concerning the threefold priority of Dasein and the question of Being, Heidegger says:
"The first priority is an ontical one: Dasein is an entity whose Being has the determinate character of existence. The second priority is an ontological one: Dasein is in itself 'ontological', because existence is thus determinative for it. But with equal primordiality Dasein also possesses-as constitutive for its understanding of existence-an understanding of the Being of all entities of a character other than its own. Dasein has therefore a third priority as providing the ontico-ontological condition for the possibility of any ontologies. Thus Dasein has turned out to be, more than any other entity, the one which must first be interrogated ontologically."[13]
I.2. Ontical Nearness and Ontological Distance of Dasein
After having established the structure of the question of Being as well as the priority of the question and Dasein, Heidegger now turns to the method of his inquiry in order to attain the meaning of Being. In the first step, Heidegger explains how Dasein is closest to us ontically but farthest ontologically. Dasein is ontically closest to us in the sense that we are ourselves, each of us, what it is. On account of the essentiality of Dasein's Being in relation to its world, 'the entity towards which it comports itself proximally and in a way which is essentially constant', Dasein understands its own Being. When Dasein tends to interpret itself ontologically, it reflects back to its understanding of the world which has already been attained by itself in its own understanding of Being. That is to say, the ontological interpretation of Dasein is attained in terms of its understanding of the world, which makes it get 'ontologically farthest', but since it understands the very world in terms of its own understanding of Being therefore pre-ontologically Dasein 'is surely not a stranger.' So Dasein is closest to itself ontically, not a stranger pre-ontologically, and farthest ontologically.[14]
According to Heidegger, there are many ways at Dasein's disposal through which it can get itself ontologically interpreted, which is to say,
"Dasein's ways of behaviour, its capacities, powers, possibilities, and vicissitudes, have been studied with varying extent in philosophical psychology, in anthropology, ethics, and 'political science', in poetry, biography, and the writing of history, each in a different fashion."[15]
Each of such interpretations of Dasein has to be carried through with a primordial existentiality comparable to whatever existentiell primordiality it may have possessed. So in dealing with the question of Being, the first requirement is the existential analytic of Dasein. In this regard, Heidegger turns to Dasein's 'average everydayness' as a plane of its existential analytic, as on that plane 'it can show itself in itself and from itself [an ihm selbst von ihm selbst her].' Heidegger also mentions the limits of everydayness as a perspective in which the Being of Dasein is brought out explaining that the bringing out of its Being is to occur 'in a preparatory fashion' which cannot provide 'a complete ontology of Dasein.'[16] That is to say, the existential analytic of Dasein on the plane of its everydayness is a provisional analytic in that '[i]t merely brings out the Being' of Dasein without interpreting its meaning, but it is also 'a preparatory procedure' in the sense that it gets Dasein the horizon for the most primordial way of interpreting its Being. After having arrived at that horizon, 'this preparatory analytic of Dasein will have to be repeated on a higher and authentically ontological basis.' It shows that the meaning of the Being of Dasein is attained at a relatively higher level which is ontological rather than pre-ontological. The structures of Dasein, which have already been exhibited provisionally on the plane of everydayness, 'must be interpreted over again' on ontological basis 'as modes of temporality'[17]
I.3. To Be is to Be Temporal
Heidegger equates temporality with the meaning of the Being of Dasein. In this regard, time is attempted to 'be brought to light-and genuinely conceived-as the horizon for all understanding of Being and for any way of interpreting it.' In order to make us understand time 'as the horizon for the understanding of Being', Heidegger explains how this notion of time or temporality is to be taken as the source from which both the traditional conception of time and the ordinary way of understanding time have sprung. The ordinary way of understanding time is characterized by taking something as temporal which 'always means simply being [seiend] 'in time'.'[18] Within this horizon of the ordinary way of its understanding, time has acquired its self-evident function 'as an ontological- or rather an ontical-criterion for naively discriminating various realms of entities.' The entities may be taken as 'temporal' entities like natural processes and historical happenings as well as 'non-temporal' entities like spatial and numerical relationships. Philosophically speaking, the temporal entities are also distinguished from 'the supra-temporal' eternal, and the cleavage between the two is attempted to be bridged. Unlike these philosophical underpinnings regarding the various realms of entities where time always remains unquestionable, Heidegger raises the fundamental question-'how time has come to have this distinctive ontological function, or with what right anything like time functions as such a criterion.'[19]
Heidegger attempts to conceive Being in terms of time, and his treatment of the question of the meaning of Being enables one 'to show that the central problematic of all ontology is rooted in the phenomenon of time.' In order to make Being visible in its 'temporal' character, Heidegger suggests to make 'the various modes and derivatives' of Being 'intelligible in their respective modifications and derivations by taking time into consideration.' In the process of conceiving Being in terms of time, ''temporal' can no longer mean simply 'being in time', '[e]ven the 'non-temporal' and the 'supra-temporal' are 'temporal' with regard to their Being.'[20] Heidegger calls this process '"Temporal" determinateness' through 'which Being and its modes and characteristics have their meaning determined primordially in terms of time'. Being-time relationship, as Heidegger expounds it, can become more transparent if one focuses it in terms of Dasein-time relationship.
In his treatise, Der Begriff der Zeit (The Concept of Time), Heidegger shows how Dasein is to be taken as time or temporality. Drawing from his day's development of research in the field of physics particularly Einstein's relativity theory, he focuses 'the destructive side' of the notion that '[t]here is no absolute time, and no absolute simultaneity either', i.e., time is nothing, it instead 'persists merely as a consequence of the events taking place in it.'[21] The fundamental problem with this physicist conception of time it is that it takes time as something measurable leading it to be necessarily 'uniform' and 'homogenous.'
Out of this uniformity, Heidegger draws the arbitrariness of time in terms of 'now'. That is to say, time is to be measured in terms of two different 'now-points', 'one is earlier and the other later.'[22] This arbitrariness of now-point shows that if one is to come across an event with a clock, it does not indicate how-much is the duration of the event rather it 'makes the event explicit…with respect to its unfolding in the now.'[23] He then questions taking the experience of now as experience of I am. So the question of now-I am equality points the Heideggerian inquiry into time 'in the direction of Dasein…the entity that we each ourselves are, which each of us finds in the fundamental assertion: I am.'[24] Dasein's determining itself as "I am" is as fundamental as its being-in-the-world (In-der-Welt-sein) or its being-with-others having the same world there with others. This character of Dasein 'has a distinctive ontological determination' to be concerned with language. 'The fundamental way of the Dasein' to be in the world as having world shared with others is 'speaking' a language. 'It is predominantly in speaking that man's being-in-the-world takes place.'[25] Dasein's engagement in the dialogic process with others is not only an involvement in the discourse 'about its way of dealing with its world' but it is also a process of 'self-interpretation of Dasein…which maintains itself in this dialogue.'[26] That is to say, 'in all speaking about the world there lies Dasein's speaking out itself about itself', and 'so all concernful dealing is a concern for the Being of Dasein.' The important aspect of Dasein's being with others in the world is that 'the Dasein of Others [is] not able to substitute' rather 'the sole appropriate way of having Dasein' is to say: 'I never am the Other.'[27] Thereby Dasein, owing to the possibility of its own rather than the Other's death, cognizes 'the most extreme possibility of itself, which it can seize and appropriate as standing before it.' Its interpretation with respect to its death is the most certain and authentic self-interpretation of Dasein, as its death is 'the indeterminate certainty of its ownmost possibility of being at an end.' Drawing from the concept of death as the most extreme possibility of Dasein, Heidegger extends the delineation of the Dasein-time relationship. Heidegger thinks of having one's own death as 'Dasein's running ahead to its past, to an extreme possibility of itself that stands before it in certainty and utter indeterminacy.'[28]
The most significant aspect of Heidegger's concept of past it is that he conceives it in terms of 'how'-'what' distinction. The past is not a 'what', for Heidegger, but a 'how' in the sense that 'the past is not some occurrence, not some incident in my Dasein' rather 'it uncovers my Dasein as suddenly no longer there; suddenly I am no longer there alongside such and such things, alongside such and such people, alongside these vanities, these tricks, this chattering.' This past is…indeed the authentic 'how' of my Dasein…to which I can run ahead as mine.'[29] Dasein's running ahead to 'the past as authentic 'how' also uncovers everydayness in its 'how', as this 'running ahead to the past is Dasein's running up against its most extreme possibility', and that's how '[t]his is Dasein's coming back to its everydayness which it still is.' Dasein's maintaining 'itself in this running ahead' guarantees the authenticity of its existence as being temporal, as Heidegger owes to the notion of running ahead in order to relate past, present and future together. 'In running ahead, 'Dasein is its future, in such a way that in this being futural it comes back to its past and present.'[30] Dasein's running ahead that way is 'not in time' but 'is time itself'. Dasein's running ahead is its coming back to everydayness in which 'Dasein is that Being that one is. And Dasein, accordingly, is the time in which one is with one another: one's' time. So '[w]hat Dasein says about time it speaks out of everydayness' which, 'as that particular temporality which flees in the face of futuricity, can only be understood when confronted with the authentic time of the futural being of the past.' This is the way past is 'experienced as authentic historicity…something to which one can return again and again.'[31] Drawing form this repeating character of past as authentic historicity in its 'how', Heidegger finds the first principle of hermeneutics. He says:
"The possibility of access to history is grounded in the possibility according to which any specific present understands how to be futural. This is the first principle of all hermeneutics. It says something about the Being of Dasein, which is historicity itself."[32]
The significance of Heidegger's conception of Being in terms of time is its concern with how- rather than what-nature of temporality that may have compelled him to seek such a method of investigation that too characterizes the how rather than 'the what of the objects of philosophical research.' Phenomenology is such a method. He does not borrow the conception of phenomenology as it is from his predecessors instead he develops his own version of it which, on the one hand, 'comprehensively…determines the principles on which a science is to be conducted', and on the other hand, it is 'primordially…rooted in the way we come to terms with the things in themselves.'[33] The uniqueness of Heidegger's contribution to the development of this conception of phenomenology is the hermeneutic turn he has given to the conception.
III. BEING, UNDERSTANDING AND INTERPRETATION: THE ONTICAL-ONTOLOGICAL-HERMENEUTICAL TRIAD
Drawing from the etymology of two Greek terms φαινόμενον (phenomenon) and λόγος (logos), Heidegger explores the meaning of the conception of phenomenology. The word φαινόμενον is, according to him, 'derived from the verb φαίνεσθαι[34] which means 'to show itself'. So 'the expression 'phenomenon', according to him, 'signifies that which shows itself in itself, the manifest.' Now the question is what is that which shows itself in itself? Whether is it an entity[35]or other than that? Heidegger explains this demarcating the ordinary conception of phenomenon from the phenomenological conception of phenomenon. The former is the Kantian sense of phenomenon wherein 'that which shows itself in itself' is taken to be 'those entities which are accessible through the empirical intuition.'[36] Grounding upon the Kantian sense of phenomenon having ordinary signification, Heidegger develops the phenomenological conception of phenomenon. The phenomenon which is ordinarily understood is 'that which already shows itself in the appearance' prior to the understanding and its showing itself is unthematic, but it can 'be brought thematically to show itself; and what thus shows itself in itself (the 'forms of intuition') will be the "phenomena" of phenomenology.
In order to further understand the concept of phenomenon as Heidegger expounds it, one should go through the discussion concerning the distinguishing of phenomenon both from semblance and appearance. Depending upon the various modes of reaching at it, there are many possibilities for an entity to show itself from itself. One of such possibilities is semblance in which something shows 'itself as something which in itself it is not.'[37] It is also a sense in which the Greeks used to refer to the term φαινόμενον. In case of phenomenon as semblance, some entity looks like something which it is not in itself. But one should not confuse this sense with the notion of 'appearance', as Heidegger conceives it as different both from phenomenon and semblance. The appearance of something is much like 'the symptoms of a disease'. The symptom of a disease, in its appearing, does show the disease rather than itself. In this showing, the disease is one which does not show itself in itself rather it always needs the symptom to show itself, and this is what Heidegger considers 'the announcing-itself by something which does not show itself.' 'Appearing is', therefore, 'a not-showing-itself.'[38] Now one can differentiate between the three notions namely phenomenon, semblance and appearance. Phenomenon is the showing itself in itself, semblance is the showing itself as something which it is not, whereas appearance is simply a not-showing-itself rather the announcing-itself by something else. In the next step of the development of his argument, Heidegger complements the notion of phenomenon with that of logos in order that the concept of phenomenology may take shape as a notion different from that already expounded by his predecessors.
Three Greek terms namely λόγος, άπόφανσις and λεγόμενον are the key words to understand the Heideggerian conception of logos. Overlooking the various interpretations of the word λόγος, like "reason", "judgment", "concept", "definition", "ground", or "relationship" etc., Heidegger focuses 'the basic signification of λόγος', which according to him is "discourse."[39] Referring to Aristotle's explication of the term λόγος, he relates it to another Greek word, άποφαίνεσθαι. Discourse as άπόφανσις 'lets something be seen', which is to say, it makes manifest what is being said by someone, 'and thus makes this accessible to the other party.' Appealing to the various interpretations of λόγος like reason, ground and relationship, Heidegger further expounds it in relation to another Greek word, λεγόμενον. Λόγος, as letting something be seen, lets entities be perceived showing its signification as reason (Vernunft).[40] Moreover, λόγος is not only to let something be seen but it is also used with the signification of 'λεγόμενον (that which is exhibited, as such)' which, 'as present-at-hand, already lies at the bottom [zum Grunde] of any procedure of addressing oneself to it or discussing it.' So 'λόγος qua λεγόμενον means the ground.' Finally, λόγος acquires the signification of relationship when λόγος as λεγόμενον signifies 'that which, as something to which one addresses oneself, becomes visible in its relation to something in its relatedness.'[41]
The composite words like sociology, biology, theology etc. show that when the term "logos" is attached with some word representing some specific thing, it makes that thing an object of study and so the composite words are to represent certain fields of study. That is to say, sociology is a discipline in which we study about society as in case of biology and theology we study about life and God respectively. These disciplines designate the object of their study and the subject-matter regarding the same. Instead of the how- they focus the what-nature of their study. Phenomenology, according to Heidegger, is not such a composite word to represent such a field of study. It is not the science of phenomenon in the sense that one can attempt, under the heading of phenomenology, to study phenomenon as its definite subject-matter. Instead phenomenology is an investigation of the how-nature of things, namely it is an 'exhibiting' of things as they are it themselves. For Heidegger it is a science which:
"…merely informs us of the "how" with which what is to be treated in this science gets exhibited and handled. To have a science 'of' phenomena means to grasp its objects in such a way that everything about them which is up for discussion must be treated by exhibiting it directly and demonstrating it directly….The signification of "phenomenon", as conceived both formally and in the ordinary manner, is such that any exhibiting of an entity as it shows itself in itself, may be called "phenomenology" with formal justification."[42]
The theme of phenomenology is Being, 'its meaning, its modification and derivatives.' So regarding its subject-matter, 'phenomenology is the science of the Being of entities-ontology.'[43] In that sense phenomenology is a highly generalized discipline as it takes Being as its subject-matter, and Being, in its showing-itself, is neither a semblance nor an appearance. It is rather "phenomenon" of phenomenology qua ontology. In order to explicitly cognize ontology, one has to 'necessarily' focus, according to Heidegger, 'a fundamental ontology.'[44] As Being is always 'the Being of some entity' the fundamental ontology takes 'as its theme that entity which is ontologico-ontically distinctive, Dasein.' Here Heidegger complementarily attaches the notion of έρμηνεύειν (hermeneun) with the concept of phenomenology. Dasein as an ontologico-ontically distinctive entity has itself 'the basic structures of Being', but in order to make those structures 'known to Dasein's understanding of Being', it needs to interpret. The interpretation is extended 'by uncovering the meaning of Being and the basic structures of Dasein in general' in order that one 'may exhibit the horizon for any further ontological study of those entities which do not have the character of Dasein.' Heidegger also incorporates the concept of transcendence in the notion of hermeneutic-phenomenology. Being, not being a 'class or genus of entities', 'pertains to every entity.'[45] Owing to this universality of Being, it lies along with its structures 'beyond every entity and every possible character which an entity may possess.' In that sense of being beyond all, 'Being is the transcendens.' Further, '[e]very disclosure of Being as the transcendens is transcendental knowledge.'[46] That's how Heidegger conceives philosophy as a 'universal phenomenological ontology' whose primary step is 'the hermeneutic of Dasein.' He says:
"Ontology and phenomenology are not two distinct philosophical disciplines among others. These terms characterize philosophy itself with regard to its object and its way of treating that object. Philosophy is universal phenomenological ontology, and takes its departure from the hermeneutic of Dasein, which, as an analytic of existence, has made fast the guiding-line for all philosophical inquiry at the point where it arises and to which it returns."[47]
At this point, a brief look at Heidegger's notion of interpretation in relation to understanding will be of use in order to aptly grasp his concept of phenomenological hermeneutics or hermeneutic phenomenology. He does not grasp understanding as one of the modes of cognition, instead, understanding is for him a 'mode of Being.' Understanding is a mode through which the Being of Dasein 'discloses in itself what its Being is capable of' in the entirety of Being-in-the-world as an essential basic state of its Being.[48] That is to say, understanding is the intelligibility of the whole mode of Being-in-the-world in which the Being of Dasein not only understands itself but the world as well. Understanding is the disclosure of possibilities of Being of Dasein in the world to guarantee 'the full disclosedness of Being-in-the-world throughout all the constitutive items which are essential to it.'[49] Here arises the notion of interpretation, as expounded by Heidegger, as directly related to the development of understanding. Understanding is a projection of the Being of Dasein upon possibilities whereby understanding develops itself. This development of understanding is called interpretation (Austegung) by Heidegger. So interpretation is not, as traditionally conceived, an additional account of something which has already been understood rather it is 'the working out of possibilities projected in understanding.'Having the fore-structure of understanding in background interpretation is to work out something as something-in-itself in a web of relations established in the totality of world.[50] This sort of interpretation is worked out at three levels namely (1) fore-having (Vorhabe), (2) fore-sight (Vorsicht) and (3) fore-conception (Vorgriff). The Vorhabe is the level of the appropriation of understanding in which the interpretation is grounded in 'something we have in advance', the grasp of totality of involvements in the whole situation. After this phase of appropriation if something is still unveiled then there arises one more 'act of appropriation' called Vorsicht. In this level, we see in advance the appropriate way in which things can appear 'under the guidance of a point of view which fixes that with regard to which what is understood is to be interpreted'. Whatever is held in our Vorhabe and Vorsicht 'becomes conceptualizable through the interpretation' in the third level of appropriation called Vorgriff (fore-conception). In this level, 'the way in which entity we are interpreting is conceived in advance'. So interpretation 'is never a presuppositionless apprehending of something [as something] presented to us', rather it is always 'founded essentially upon fore-having, fore-sight and fore-conception.'[51]
This understanding-interpretation relationship having the notion of being-in-the-world in background is circular in the sense that all interpretations require the fore-structure of understanding and again all understanding is developed or projected through interpretation. This is what Heidegger calls the 'circle of understanding' denying any possibility of its being vicious. According to him, every being as being-in-the-world has a 'circular structure' ontologically, if being is itself an issue for it. The circle of understanding or hermeneutic circle 'is not an orbit in which any random kind of knowledge may move; it is the expression of the existential fore-structure of Dasein itself.'[52] That is to say, it involves 'the structure of meaning' as the circular relationship between understanding and interpretation which is rooted in 'the existential constitution of Dasein' as being-in-the-world. That is why Heidegger denies any possibility of reducing this hermeneutical circle to
"the level of a vicious circle, or even of a circle which is merely tolerated. In the circle is hidden a positive possibility of the most primordial kind of meaning. To be sure, we genuinely can hold of this possibility only when, in our interpretation, we have understood that our first, last and constant task is never to allow any fore-having, fore-sight and fore-conception to be presented to us by fancies and popular conceptions, but rather to make the scientific theme secure by working and then fore-structures in terms of the things themselves."[53]
Heidegger's hermeneutic phenomenology is 'simple' in the sense that it deals with Being as phenomenon but at the same time complex, as it amalgamates Being with understanding and interpretation. Overlooking the complex nature of Heidegger's philosophy, if one takes hermeneutic phenomenology as phenomenology of Being with a concern of interpretation, one may simply find it contradictory. Phenomenology is concerned with the cognition of reality as it shows itself to human intuition. If one cognizes reality phenomenologically, then it will be irrelevant to interpret the same, as one has already cognized reality as it is. If one needs to interpret reality after even having cognized it as it is, then it means that the cognition was lacking something which is to be compensated through interpretation. In any case, both phenomenological experience and interpretation cannot be put together to be complementary to each other. But one can avoid this problem of complementarity between phenomenology and hermeneutics if one takes it as the complex structure of hermeneutic phenomenology as Heidegger expounds it. Phenomenology is ontology whose theme is Being, its meaning and modification etc. But Being is always the Being of some entity, and it is to be shown not by itself rather by some entity. The most prior of entities, ontically, ontologically and ontico-ontologically, is Dasein. Without an entity like Dasein, Being remains implicit and so it is interpreted to be explicitly understood by the help of Dasein. That's how interpretation becomes complementary to phenomenological description in the triadic structure of Dasein being ontologico-ontically prior in phenomenological research and hermeneutically explicit in understanding.
[1] Martin Heidegger, Sein und Zeit (Being and Time), trans. J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson (New York: Blackwell, 1962), pp. 22-24
[2] Ibid., p. 22
[6] Ibid., pp. 25-26
[9] For the analysis of Heidegger's nomenclature of these two types of inquiry one should go through Michael Gelven's interpretation. Gelven not only shows how ontical is different from ontological but on the basis of this difference also explains the difference between some other Heideggerian terms as follows:
"Object of Inquiry Being (Sein) Entity (Das Seiende)
Type of inquiry ontological ontic
Terms of inquiry existentials categories
Status of occurrence in inquiry factical factual
Type of self-awareness in inquiry existential existentiell"
See Michael Gelven, A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time: A Section-by-Section Interpretation (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1970), p. 19
[10] Martin Heidegger (1962), p. 32
[21] According to Heidegger, Aristotle has already seen time the way Einstein conceives it. He cites from Aristotle's Physics IV, ch. 11, 219a stating time as something 'within which events take place.' See Martin Heidegger, Der Begriff der Zeit (The Concept of Time), trans. William McNeill (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), p.3E, also see translator's note 5, p. 24
[22] Ibid., p. 4E
[27] Ibid., p. 11E
[34] It is not only this to which Heidegger refers to explore the most appropriate meaning of the term φαινόμενον rather there are certain other etymological options as well to reach at the same meaning of the term. These options include φαίνω (to bring to the light of day, to put in the light), the source word of which is φα like φως which means 'the light' or 'that which is bright' or 'that wherein something can become manifest, visible in itself'. See Martin Heidegger (1962), p. 51
[35] The Greeks at times identified φαινόμενον with τά όντα (entities). See Ibid.
[50] Ibid., pp. 188-193
[51] Ibid., pp. 191-2
This entry was posted in Articles. Bookmark the permalink.
Transcendent Philosophy Journal Volume 12, December 2011
THE QUR'AN-A COHERENT STRUCTURE OR AN ATOMISTIC COLLECTION OF VERSES: CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF WAHĪDUDDĪN KHAN'S REMARKS ON NAZM AL-QUR'ĀN


text:
Michigan II
Dover II
Richmond II
Bristol II
Las Vegas II
Talladega II
Charlotte II
Kansas II
Texas II
Martinsville II
NASCAR Cup / Commentary
Could a change of crew chiefs also change Kasey Kahne's fortunes?
Jim Utter
Kasey Kahne's new crew chief, Jon Leonard, is ready to "compete with the big boys" and it starts this weekend.
In his first season with Leavine Family Racing, Khane has yet to earn a top-10 finish and enters this weekend's Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series race at Sonoma (Calif.) Raceway 28th in the series standings.
During the past off week, LFR announced Leonard, the team engineer, was named interim crew chief replacing Travis Mack. Mack had formerly served as car chief for the No. 88 team at Hendrick Motorsports.
Leonard served as a crew chief for five races at the end of last season for driver Michael McDowell.
"As for transitioning into the crew chief role, I'm excited and thankful for the opportunity. I've had a little experience at it before, so I can appreciate and understand what is expected and needed," Leonard said.
"A lot of my role will stay the same – set-up preparation, history analysis, and practice decisions from an engineering standpoint. At the end of the day, all the decisions are going to be connected to my name.
"It's not always going to be easy, and I'm sure it won't always be right, but being able to own your mistakes, and grow from them is what is important. Being able to be a leader and bring this group together (including Kasey) will bring us success."
Kahne has a solid track record at Sonoma. In 14 starts, Kahne has won one race, won two poles and as two top-five and six top-10 finishes. He's finished ninth or higher in four of his last five starts.
"Sonoma is a really fun track, but it can also be a tough track. Making your tires last, as well as turning in Turn 4, Turn 7, and Turn 10 are some pretty key things to focus on there," Kahne said.
"Getting off of Turn 11 is also really important, but having forward drive and keeping your tires on the car throughout the race are some of the important things we focus on at Sonoma."
Leonard believes Kahne and LFR's No. 95 team can turn the corner on this season beginning this weekend.
"I'm really looking forward to what this No. 95 team can achieve for the rest of the season," he said. "We have a good bunch of guys who want to compete with the big boys – and that's what we're here to do starting this weekend."
Five Cup drivers enter Sonoma K&N West race for more track time
Spectra Premium to partner with Gaunt Brothers Racing for Sonoma race
Series NASCAR Cup
Drivers Kasey Kahne
Teams Leavine Family Racing
Author Jim Utter
IRL: Scheckter penalized for unsportsmanlike conduct
Blink of an Eye - In Theaters September 12
Blink of an Eye exclusive clip
Martin Truex Jr. at Dover and Montoya at Mid-Ohio
Hamlin's Texas victory and Penske honored by IMS
NASCAR 2020: what you need to know
Erik Jones sees 'big aero change' in NASCAR's Next Gen car
Jones kicks off 2020 NASCAR Next Gen testing in Miami
NASCAR alters aero rules in Cup for short tracks, road courses
Justin Haley to try for two consecutive Cup wins at Daytona
Kevin Harvick to test modified car at Martinsville Speedway


text:
Our site's FAQ consists in
the official FAQ, in which the first section is editable by ♦moderators and the rest is identical across all Stack Exchange sites;
the community FAQ, which consists of all the Meta questions to which a ♦moderator has added the faq tag.
I don't think our community FAQ is as helpful as it should be. It contains 19 posts of varying relevance and searchability.
Please help improve the FAQ!
If you see a Meta question that deserves better answers or should be better worded, go ahead and answer or edit!
Are there Meta questions where you think the faq tag should be added or removed? Suggest them here.
If you'd like to suggest improvements to the official FAQ (first section only), we're listening.
discussion site-faq meta
user56user56
A mention of chat would be nice:
Open-ended discussion are not suitable for the site's question and answer format, but we welcome you discussing such topics in the site's chatroom.
edit to add:
There should be a mention of the various media we accept questions about:
Books (including short stories)
This is already mentioned in the don't ask section. But we might point to chat near the part where we say we don't want recommendations. – user56 May 21 '11 at 18:08
Yeah, that's what I'm looking for. The currrent placement of the mention of chat isn't optimal given the number of open-ended questions we keep getting. – user1027 May 21 '11 at 20:38
Usefulness of "Plot hole" answers/comments
The meta question has 2 well-recieved answers (with similar high level content), one at +11 votes and one at +10 votes, over a period of over a year.
Short version:
Usually, in-universe answers are preferable to "no info in canon" or "plot hole" answers.
Bare "plot hole" answers are obvious and usually interesting to either OPs or other users, unless the answer contains unobvious information.
In larger universes, it's more likely than not that what seems like a "obvious plot hole" has actually been explained/retconned/addressed elsewhere in the univers.
Most users are on SFF to discuss in-universe stuff.
However, good "no info in canon" or "plot hole" are definitely allowed and in scope. In order for such an answer to be a good answer, it should fit one of the following:
The question explicitly asked for out-of-universe reason.
You have incontestable proof (e.g. admission from author themselves).
Explain how the answer "no info" was researched, in detail. Research should be exaustive for larger canon/universes, and clearly indicate what you did and didn't check (e.g. did you check JKR interviews for Harry Potter or only go from memory of reading 7 books? Did you check EU books for Star Wars if the question wasn't limited to G-canon? Did you check ST Technical Manual for Star Trek?)
Preferably, "plot hole" answers should be posted after a certain timeout period (couple of days) unless it satisfies one of the conditions above.
Long version explained in detail in the linked Meta
Given the removal of "General Reference" and "Too Localized" from the list of Vote To Close reasons, we should remove this line from the FAQ:
Facts easily found on a reference site: Who played X in Y?
Do we want to open the door for such trivia questions by removing it, though? – Izkata Oct 25 '13 at 0:47
@Izkata That happened already, when we got rid of General Reference. This change simply updates the FAQ to reflect reality. – user1027 Oct 25 '13 at 0:52
A suggestion for addressing both @apoorv020 and @Keen:
We have a broad policy as to what constitutes science fiction and fantasy - if you feel that it's sci-fi/fantasy, then that's likely good enough (we do, however, generally exclude children's stories, including children's cartoons). It also doesn't matter what medium the story is in (poems, short stories, novels, TV, films, games, anime, comics, ...) as long as you're asking about the sci-fi/fantasy aspect.
I think the FAQ doesn't need to be exact - as long as it conveys the right general impression. For example, I think that the conclusion about children's material is that if there was a question that was interesting to a sci-fi/fantasy 'expert', then it would likely be on topic, even though mostly they are not, but the FAQ doesn't need to go into that much detail.
A mention of horror would perhaps be good as well - but I'm not sure what the status of this is. Some meta discussion indicates that it's off-topic, but others indicate that it is on-topic, and all that discussion is fairly old now.
Tony MeyerTony Meyer
There are some overlapping questions in the community FAQ and some questions that duplicate information in the FAQ. Not sure whether they should be merged into one question for the community FAQ or removed altogether.
"Spy movies/ books: On topic?" and "Can I ask a question about video game based scifi/fantasy?" overlap with "Which mediums can be the basis of questions?".
"Are Google-able questions appropriate?", "How should we handle questions that are easily answered by Wikipedia?" and 'Should "trivially easy to find" be a benchmark for moderating the site?' overlap with each other and FAQ.
"Are list questions allowed?" overlaps with the FAQ.
apoorv020apoorv020
The community FAQ overlap is definitely something I had in mind. Yes, we should have a single place that collects our idea of how we define the genre. There should be a single place for general references as well. The overlap between the community FAQ and the official FAQ is on purpose: the official FAQ is the chapter headings, the community FAQ has the details. – user56 May 21 '11 at 18:10
I definitely think tagging should be addressed. Namely, when to create new tags (i.e. title tags for popular works vs. less popular works).
RyanRyan
Do you think this question has enough information? – user56 May 21 '11 at 18:11
Yes, I think that it has enough to get a new user going when asking a question. – Ryan May 21 '11 at 18:16
Mention of what constitutes science fiction/fantasy or any other relevant topic would be good, especially given the mismatch between domain name and site name. This answer by Gilles to the question "Would non-horror Speculative Fiction be on-topic for this site?" is I suppose what should be stated, and the corresponding question should be included in the community FAQ.
Should the FAQ be updated to remove all traces of General Reference?
What is the process by which a specific already-discussed policy gets added to site FAQ?
Should we burninate General Reference?
Usefulness of "Plot hole" answers/comments
What are standard internet reference sites for SF?
Are we really here to solve problems?
General tagging practices
Would non-horror Speculative Fiction be on-topic for this site?
Are questions about science fiction/fantasy itself not considered on topic?
What should our logo and design look like once we are no longer in beta?
Futurama Group Viewing Event!
What does "canon" mean?
How should we handle questions that are about non-SF/F elements in a SF/F work?
What should our simple test be for character tags?
Proposals for a list of FAQ questions
Why is there no Review audit on Scifi & Fantasy Stack Exchange?
Should we edit the help centre to mention Worldbuilding?