text:
User:LBird BASc/sandbox/ATK/Seminar5/Truth/Group 1 Medicine

Energy Healing
Energy healing has been performed by various civilisations throughout the Ages, most notable of which are the Indian and the Chinese (Qigong, Reiki, Qi Do). This article focuses on "putative energy medicine", in which a healer guides a person's energy with their hands to solve medical problems of an energetical level.

India
Prana is the life-force that exists on all planes of reality and in everything within Hindu philosophy and also the energy field healers within the Indian tradition aim to affect (? - proof).

Chakra
Chakra is the name given to the seven energy centers of the body which correspond to different colours, gemstones, planets, glands, organs, planets, etc. Regularly cleansing the energy in these centers ensures proper flux; concentrating energy on them is said to have beneficial aspect on both the aspect of life they are related to and the relevant body part (? - proof). On the other hand, problems with a particular body part may indicate problem on a higher level with these same associated aspects of life. Healing them includes releasing the energy blockage - different chakras are blocked by different emotions - and meditation on the given chakra/body part, involving the use of the colour, gemstones, and mantra associated with it, may also help, but will not ultimately resolve the problem.

 * Muladhara, the first chakra (base of spine) - physical survival and safety, base of Kundalini energy; blocked by fear, anxiety and insecurity; associated body parts, colour, and mantra - anus, red, "Lam"
 * Svadhishthana, the second chakra (just below belly-button) - joy of life, sexuality & emotion (unconscious desires), creativity; blocked by fear of death in particular OR, according to some, by guilt; the tongue (sense of taste), genitals, ovaries and testes; orange, "Vam"
 * Manipura, the third chakra (between the navel and the solar plexus) - energy, (will) power, ego, passion, also creativity; blocked by shame; the eyes (sense of sight), the feet (movement), the digestive system (metabolism), pancreas, adrenal glands; yellow, "Ram"
 * Anahata, the fourth chakra (heart) - connection between the lower (physical body) and the higher self (consciousness), action, emotion (love); blocked by grief; the heart, hands (sense of touch), skin, thymus; green, "Yam"
 * Vishuddha, the fifth chakra (throat) - communication (creativity and self-expression), purification, learning lessons from negative experiences, success in life; blocked by fear (of speaking out), guilt, according to some - (the one specifically associated with) lies; ears (hearing), mouth (speaking), thyroid gland; blue, "Ham"
 * Ajna, the sixth chakra (between eyebrows) - "third eye", subconsciousness, intuition, clairvoyance, intellect; blocked by illusion; brain, pineal gland, "Om"
 * Sahasrara, the seventh chakra (crown of head) - connection with the universe, spiritual centre, pure consciousness; blocked by attachment to the ego/the physical world; fontanelle, intersection of the coronal and sagittal strutures; purple, "Kham"

Definition
An inert substance or treatment which is designed to have no therapeutic value, such as tablets (like sugar pills), inert injections (like saline), sham surgery. It affects how patients perceive their condition and encourage the body's chemical processes for relieving pain, but have no impact on the disease itself.

Ethical Concerns
Although the use of placebo in medicine had many positive effects on both patients and the development of the medical field, many were left sceptical about the use of "non-functional" medical processes. Some argued that the use of placebo should not be characterized as legitimate treatment as it is based on the idea of deceiving the patient.

Truth in Medical Diagnosis
Truth in medical diagnosis can be seen as both positivist and interpretive. Whilst the physiological fact of a patient’s condition may be absolute, the impact of that disease will differ from person to person, dependant on their own context. Truth in medical diagnosis is innevitably two sided with both the physician and patient playing roles in the decided outcome. Such a relationship, however, poses issues in the distribution of honesty and responsibility, but also in the perception of the whole truth

Physiologist Responsibility
Crucially, physicians must question whether the patient is to gain from learning the whole truth of their condition, or whether a redacted version may best serve the aim of doing no harm. In addition to this, there is a debate over whether a patient’s complete awareness and understanding of their condition in detail will improve the efficacy of treatment.

In "The Problem of Diagnosis" an article published to the BMJ (British Medical Journal), Iona Heath (President of the Royal College of General Practitioners) addresses the issue of converting empirical clinical evidence to valuable treatment that is specialised to suit a specific patient's varied needs. To form statistically valid results, clinical tests must be wholly disconnected from sources of subjective bias or influence. The application of such results could, therefore, be viewed as a source of contention when provided to a patient who may well be unaware of the complexity or meaning of the findings.

Patient Responsibility
GP Liam Farrell explores an inverse issue of truth in diagnosis in "The Truth Hurts", published to the BMJ. His satirical article addresses frustration over the unequal patient - doctor relationship whereby the patient is able to avoid the disclosure of the full truth around their health or lifestyle, yet the doctor is obligated to do the best by their patient. It could be concluded that a physician can never be wholly truthful if the information they initially received from the patient is distorted to hide confidential truths.


text:
User:LBird BASc/sandbox/ATK/Seminar6/Truth/Mental illness

Psychological Treatment
Subjective treatment Psychotherapy is a way to treat mental illnesses by psychological means. Psychological treatment relies on talking with a patient, also, it could include her/his family members or other important people support. As results vary depending on the support of family members, patient’s personality, competence, experience of psychotherapist it is often not considered to be an objective way to treat mental illnesses. Also, the impact of therapies usually can be described mostly by subjective means as patient’s feedback, feelings afterwards, So, psychological treatment could be considered as an interpretative truth, because it relies on human factor.

However, psychological treatment is popular as it helps for quite a few people. There are many types of psychotherapies, but firstly it is important to choose a specialist that would suit the patient's personality and guide one to the right direction. Afterwards mental health professional analyses conditions, related problems, patient’s character and suggests techniques that could improve mental health. Also, in psychological treatment a very important part is communication, thus, specialist is always aware of one’s thoughts, behaviour, feelings and is responsive to these aspects. A person usually gains knowledge about his/her illness and knows what is he/she able to do, how he/she can improve the situation. It helps to feel included in treatment, learn to cope and manage stress, which often is a problem with scientific treatment as it is focused on scientific data and medicine, but not the feelings of a person with mental illness.

Moreover, people going to group therapies might feel more included in society as they find people that are experiencing similar symptoms, understands him/her easier. Family therapies also help not only patient, but the people surrounding him/her to understand his/her situation better and act in a way that would help solving problems rather than creating additional ones. This support from surroundings motivates people struggling with mental health to seek better results, it makes them not to feel alone and to be able to get help not only from specialists.

Treatment with medication
Objective Treatment When we look on the internet how to treat mental illnesses, websites mostly tell people how to treat it at home, without medication, simply by following a therapy. However, mental illnesses are diseases and need to be treated with medication, like any other illness. Medicine is a drug, or a substance used to minimise the effects of the disease. Using good medication is often very efficient to treat the different illnesses. It is reliable as we know the effects it has on the body and we can anticipate its action. Medicine for mental illnesses change the chemical reactions in the patient’s brain, to try and balance the hormone levels, and limit the progress of the illness. Medication for mental illnesses is a scientifically proven treatment and acts directly on the anatomical problem. However, medication doesn’t work as efficiently on every patient. The dose and type of medication depends on each patient and how their body will react. This is why treating a mental illness needs to involve a doctor which knows you, who will prescribe the right treatment for the patient.

Subjective
Diagnosis of mental illness- How it could be subjective?

For example, depression: The official NHS website states:

The main way your GP will tell if you have depression is by asking you lots of questions about your general health and how the way you're feeling is affecting you mentally and physically.

From this we could say that how depression, one of the most common mental illness is diagnosed almost purely based on the conversation between patient and the physician, which is easily influenced by the particular personality traits, ways of expression, the patient’s self-judgement and many varying factors etc. It illustrates how this process is subjective to both parties, as the patient could be exaggerating/ underestimating the severity of their symptoms or misjudging their mood and feelings. The GP would also determine the patient’s condition by assessing their mood, physical health and how they are getting on with life, this could include judgement based on the patient’s dress code, their job/work, and their facial and physical expressions during the conversation. All those observations would be judged subjectively by the GP to determine the condition of the patient, despite that the physical will try his best to use professional knowledge, his judgement would be based on his own personal experiences and interpretation of the patient’s words/ expressions.

In cases of other mental illness, for example psychotic ones like schizophrenia, the diagnosis involves a more complex process. The patient would be refereed to a specialist and a series of tests would be run on them, which includes surveys and possible brain scan. Nevertheless it is undeniable that it is still largely subjective. As one of the predominant symptom of schizophrenia is hallucination and hearing voices, the patient could be denying those sensations and not admitting to his illness; or he could be believing that as a spiritual conversation.

Objective
It is important in the field of medicine to have a degree of objectivity in determining a patient's state in the diagnosis of a treatment.

Defining mental illnesses is hard as there are many symptoms, which vary from person to person. Therefore, a proper diagnosis of mental illness has to involve objective exams and tests to avoid any errors. An American Psychiatric Association managed to detail symptoms of each mental illness in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Mental health professionals therefore use this to diagnose mental conditions. Psychiatrists and psychologists hence do physical exams, lab tests and psychological evaluations to diagnose their patients. During these exams, the doctor tries to find the origin of the patient’s symptoms, thoughts and feelings, checks the functioning of some organs such as the thyroid, and checks the patient’s background regarding alcohol and drugs. All these tests lead to an objective diagnosis of a specific mental illness, which will help the patient get the appropriate help and care.

Another objective method of diagnosis of mental illnesses is through brain scans. Brains scans through MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) machines are used to help doctors diagnose their patients with certain mental illnesses and determine what type of treatment would be appropriate for the patient. For example, for an illess such as depression, which is a general diagnosis for patients with vastly different symptoms, brain scans may help determine the potentially different types of depression, and therefore give more specific and personalised treatments to patients suffering from different symptoms. A study at Emory University showed that successful treatment through Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) showed a pattern in the patients' scans, while for patients with a different brain scan pattern, medication was a more effective treatment than therapy. As such, two patients, both diagnosed with major depression can show different symptoms and patterns that make it challenging for doctors to treat. Using brain scans as a more objective method of determining the state of the patient, the diagnosis of mental illnesses can be categorised and personalised to suit each patient.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text: Category:Book:Raku Programming

title: Category:Book:Raku Programming


text:
User:LGreg/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge (LG seminar)/Group 1/Truth

This is the sandbox page for the issue: Truth.

Peach

Janelle & Jing

Ebani, Joy and Jorge

Sibylle, Louise and Pia

Jason, Sophia and Zewei

Technology and truth


text:
User:LGreg/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge (LG seminar)/Group 2/Truth

This is the sandbox page for the issue: Truth.

Religion & Natural Sciences

Philosophy & Environmental Science

Mathematics, Economics, and Art

Laws & Physics


text:
Visual Basic for Applications/Chacacter 1D Arrays

This page has been replaced by https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Visual_Basic_for_Applications/Character_1D_Arrays


text:
Visual Basic for Applications/Character 1D Arrays

Summary

 * This VBA code module is intended for any Microsoft Office application that supports VBA.
 * It allows strings to be loaded into one-dimensional arrays one character per element, and to join such array characters into single strings again.
 * The module is useful in splitting the characters of a single word ,something that the Split method cannot handle.

Notes on the code
Copy all of the procedures below into a VBA standard module, save the workbook as a xlsm type, then run the top procedure to show that the process is accurate.


text:
Visual Basic for Applications/The Knuth String Shuffle

Summary

 * This code module includes both a Fisher-Yates character shuffling routine for strings, and a Durstenfeld-Knuth routine to shuffle one-dimensional arrays.
 * The procedure FisherYatesStrShuffle shuffles characters of a single string. This is limited to shifting single characters around within one string.
 * Procedure KnuthArrShuffle sorts the elements of a one-dimensional array. The procedure is limited only by what can be stored in array elements.
 * The two methods are pseudo-random and bias-free.  Elsewhere, the use of a random generator does not necessarily guarantee that the results will be free from bias.
 * The code can work in any of the MS Office applications that support VBA.

Code Notes

 * The Fisher-Yates shuffle applies a pseudo random selection method.  It is described here for characters in a string but a related method, the  Durstenfeld-Knuth method is preferred for arrays.
 * Taking each element of a string in sequence for repositioning leaves one end of the result string badly biased. The Knuth algorithm instead proposes a random position within the string. The element at that position is then accumulated into the output and removed from the original.   Subsequent selections are made in the same way from the ever shortened string.
 * Note that there is still the possibility of a given character being unmoved in the process, but only within expectation.
 * Set the number of strings required with variable Cycles in the top procedure. The Immediate Window has proved the best place for display and copying.
 * It should be pointed out that any attempt to avoid the unmoved elements, will not only change the random nature of the shuffle but prevent the use of other than non-repeat strings.  That is to say strings with repeated characters could not then be shuffled.
 * The Durstenfeld-Knuth method for arrays differs only slightly from that of the Fisher-Yates implementation.
 * To reduce processing, and no doubt to overcome the burden of removing an element from the middle of an array during shortening, the algorithm instead overwrites the element selected for output with the last element.  In this VBA implementation the array is then conveniently shortened by one element with Redim Preserve.
 * See Fisher Yates Shuffle for a good description of both methods.

The VBA Code Module
Copy all of the code below into say, an MS Excel standard module, save the workbook as an xlsm file type, and run either of the test procedures to test the requisite code. Be sure to open the Immediate Window for output.


text: User:Pazderski/Books

title: User:Pazderski/Books


text:
User:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 3/Truth/Gene Editing

International Interdisciplinary Observatory on Gene Editing (Opinions)

Philosophy and Biology Approach
In order to contribute properly at the observatory of gene editing, first I have to question the morality of this principle. Therefore, my philosophical knowledge helps me analyse if the observatory in the matter is the right thing to do. As the philosopher Nietzsche said: "what is useful has always been defined as good, therefor usefulness is goodness as value" and "the value or the non-value of an action was derived from its consequences, if the experiment has a major contribution to humankind and it will help our future development, the question of morality is explained. On the other hand, this increase of technology can not only harm our world, but destroy it because of the new gene editing technique we do not yet master. Another discipline I can contribute with is human anatomy and physiology. My knowledge of cell development and molecular biology help me understand the basic principles of gene editing and not only apply them, but also perfect them in order to improve the observatories results. The truth in biology is actually that there is no truth. Although there is no denying that science is the best procedure yet discovered for exposing fundamental truths about the world, is being sustained by the evolution of ideas, as every new discovery becomes are now truth. Science springs from humanity and exercises it in all its endeavours. Truth invariably prevails in science even though the road to it is not always straight. Furthermore, every culture shapes its own truth, basically shaping its own reality and perspective on the natural sciences. The truth in philosophy has a totally different approach, as philosophy itself is the discipline that studies truth from different perspectives. In this case, we analyse truth by reviewing philosophers concepts about this abstract subject and develop our own personal conclusions. Philosophers have long wondered whether we really know the truth, but few really ask whether we should to know it all. What value does true adds to believed? Nietzsche says: "Here. I touch on my problem, on our problem, my unknown friends...in us the will to truth becomes conscious of itself as a problem." Will both truths combine harmoniously together and work in a dynamic way? Yes. As philosophers study every aspect of life, biology is part of them. There is one condition in order for the two to work together without any inconvenient. The lead scientist of the experiment has to be cognising of the moral dilemma between cloning people and helping the human race. For example, if the person considers that only God can change the world, then the truths can't work together, as "gene editing" is breaking the human nature rules.

Environmental Science Approach
The impact of gene editing on the environment and its ecosystems is a topic that must be considered before implementing such techniques in the real world. As gene editing has a potential of completely changing the ecosystem and environment, looking at gene editing from the point of view of environmental science can reveal more truths of its potentially large impacts.

For example, there has been a success in the effort to eliminate the population of malaria-carrying mosquitoes through the use of gene editing. The female mosquitoes carrying the edited genome wouldn’t be able to reproduce or suck human blood, while its male counterpart will develop normally and pass on the edited genome until eventually, the whole population goes extinct. This new discovery in the field of gene editing seems entirely beneficial as it eliminates the threat of malaria, which is known to be the most deadly disease in the world. However, using the basic truths of environmental sciences, further implications of the study can be revealed.

The first truth in environmental sciences is the idea of the interconnectedness of the various aspects that make up our environment. This represents itself, for example, in the idea of ecosystems. Each species in the ecosystem has its role, and the altering of one species can have a potentially disastrous effect on both the other animals in the ecosystem and on the environment in which it lives. This truth can be applied to see the effects of potentially removing the entire species of malaria bearing mosquitoes. They have the role of subduing other potentially harmful mosquitoes by occupying the most dominant position as well as serving as food for species of fish. Wiping out the mosquitoes can also wipe out or heavily alter the lives of the fish, thereby altering the ecosystem.

The truth that environmental science brings to the table can also be used to improve the function and lower the potentially disastrous effects of gene editing. By bringing to light such potential downsides to the idea, it can then be used to make sure to keep the ecosystem intact or approach the problem from a different angle.

Moral Philosophical and Social Equity Approach
Ethics and morals are often wrongly used interchangeably. Ethics actually refers to what is 'right' within the established laws and norms of a society, while Morals deals with what is 'right' within one's personal interpretation of actions. Thus, the argument that utiiity (or usefulness) is a measure of how 'good' an action is is an ethical justification but not a moral one.

Let us consider a hypothetical society with no legal constraints on the limit of gene editing, and sufficient technology to enable all gene editing conceivable. We can say with complete certainty that cancer is eradicated, malaria a thing of the past and sickle cell a distant memory. Utilitarians say that the morality of an action should be determined by the total amount of good it does; thus, gene editing is infallible. In this hypothetical world, there will again, without a doubt, be those who curate their unborn children to have blonde hair and blue eyes, have a zero percent chance of being born with dwarfism and other birth 'defects' and be naturally intelligent. A Deontologist would say that the morality of an action should be judged based on whether that action itself is right or wrong within a given set of rules, rather than on its consequences. Curating your unborn's child racial features to what you perceive as ideal would be today called supremacy - and thus, morally wrong under deontology, and while it is difficult to be a dwarf, this is ony the case because we live in a society that does not cater to them - not that the condition itself is hard. There are those who would argue that dwafrism is not a disease to be eradicated or defect, but just an anomaly. To these people, gene editing out dwarfism would be not only morally wrong, but offensive.

The problem with gene editing is wheere do we draw the line? And who gets to decide?

The social equity argument is simple: when gene editing is developed and eventually perfected, it will only be available to the those who can afford it i.e. the rich.Is it morally justified to deny anyone a life-saving procedure? Do we already do this anyway?

Theology/philosophy - is it within our power/right to actively take part in that which is divine? What gives a human any control over another?

Ethics/morals - what are the potential outcomes of this? (perhaps designer babies or the human race becoming more homogenous)

Immunology - drawing on the concept of 'systems' what if humans are made immune to some diseases through their DNA but instead another issue arises as an 'accidental' result of this? We could potentially wipe out the human race.

Cost - how expensive would this treatment be? And touching again on ethics and drawing into economics, would it be worth the cost? Are there other problems that take priority and are more easily solves? Why do we even need gene editing in the first place? What does it seek to resolve?

Scientific research - there are some disorders where we there is dispute over whether or not they're genetic - could this provide 'evidence'? Perhaps exploration of gene editing at different stages of development may enable us to come up with 'cures' for what are thought to be life-long disorders.

These questions arising from different disciplines cannot necessarily be answered easily and so the 'truths' are more difficult to understand.

Artistic Approach
As gene editing can be seen as an improvement of our life conditions, some people, including artists, perceive it as a threat to mankind and thus try to depict the fear they feel when they face this issue.

Released in 1997, Gattaca is an anticipation movie which depicts a world where gene editing has become mainstream and so widely used that people are afraid to have babies “naturally”. The movie describes a cloned society where only these perfect human beings have access to decent employment, and normal individuals who are not killed before their birth are less valued than clones because they are full of natural defects. The movie tries to make us understand that even if we are capable of producing genetically perfect individuals, they will not necessarily be better than their natural counterparts, and that in any case, by “playing the role of Nature”, we are finally going to lose our humanity.

Another way of feeling how gene editing is often seen as a threat is a cover of the Newsweek magazine published in 2004, which headline reads “Boy or girl, now you can choose, but should you, the new science of sex selection”. This document shows that technology and science have progressed so much that today, even the most natural aspect of life can be altered by progress. Science now allows to “manipulate” the natural process of having babies, allowing to choose the gender, getting rid of some imperfections, and selecting a few features, such as the color of the eyes, hair, body type, etc. Science clearly influences what used to be natural odds, and people are scared about it. Ethics and moral considerations are taken into account, and the magazine clearly shows it as it directly asks the reader "should you?".

The cartoon named Clones R Us, published in 2012, is an anticipation cartoon in which we can see an assembly line with 5 individuals on a speedwalk. 4 of them are strictly identical, tall and muscular, with perfect body features. The fifth one is much smaller and thinner, and the machine above them picks him up to eliminate him from the line. He is put in a crate for rejects. It can be considered as the genesis of a new era of eugenics. This cartoon can be considered as a warning: if in 2004 it was only possible to see basic commercial implications of cloning, in 10 years, preoccupations have considerably evolved: we are not excited anymore about choosing a baby’s eyes color, but we are scared that if technology keeps on evolving, it could constitute a threat to mankind; threat that would result in a uniform society, where difference would be seen as bad, and thus eliminated.

Through these three examples we can see how artists, in various artistic disciplines such as cinema or drawings, can scare people by sharing their pessimistic vision of gene editing and its future.

(Wikibooks didn't allow to add links to the previously cited documents)

 Social, environmental and moral approach

The truth on social sciences resides in empirical evidence, acquired by the observation of facts. From this perspective, we can see gene editing has a positive impact on people’s welfare in everyday life. The greatest contribution of gene’s editing to civilisation might be our modern food production system. It is one of the main enablers of the industrialisation of agriculture and livestock farming. Besides it made possible to nourish adequately the increasing population it could prevent famine, a major issue through human history.

However, natural science to which is often attributed the monopoly of truth because of its proceeding method, has provided us key information to criticise gene editing. From theory of evolution we know species have specific reasons to be the way they are, including diversity. But gene editing modifies the natural characteristics destroying the diversity within the specie and exposing it to extinction. Moreover, this practice is one of the main factors that originated the industrialisation of food production, a major cause of the sixth extinction wave.

From a relativist perspective we can see that all the damage caused to the environment is due to a specific use of gene editing. In medicine, as an example of adequate use of progress, gene editing in human beings has transcendent perspectives. It could make possible immunotherapy, an advanced treatment for cancer, as well as the cure for other genetic diseases. Therefore, the moral issue concerning this scientific practice is more about the use we give it than gene editing itself.


text:
User:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 4/Truth/Gene Editing

International Interdisciplinary Observatory on Gene Editing (Opinions)
Sheila Jasanoff and Benjamin Hurlbut have called for an international interdisciplinary observatory for gene editing. You have been selected to be part of the observatory. What disciplinary perspectives are you bringing to the table on the topic of gene editing? What are their truths and how would you make sure that these truths work together in a dynamic way?

Gene editing :

The modification of the DNA of a human being adresses several disciplines, essentially science and progress.

When referring to progress, medical technology must be developed by active search. However, gene editing is an important milestone for a society. In other words, it confronts ethic and law. Indeed, it can be considered an alteration to the nature of being. In that way, truth about medicine is reconsidered as it does not have the same purpose as initially ; it has a direct effect on human by changing its nature and can be see as a negative finality (which is the opposite of medicine). Furthermore, the essence of ethics prevents such practices ; truth about science and ethic clashes.

Appart from the difficult question of combining medical changes to ethic, science and technology work together in order to ameliorate human being which shows that their truths can create a dynamic dialogue. They follow the same "goal" : progress in our modern world. Following that aim, how can law adapt to gene editing ? At what point is not ethic taken into account ? To what extent is progress allowed for the society's opinion ?

International interdisciplinary observatory for gene editing

“Genome editing (also called gene editing) is a group of technologies that give scientists the ability to change an organism's DNA. These technologies allow genetic material to be added, removed, or altered at particular locations in the genome.”

During this International Interdisciplinary Observatory on Gene Editing, it is important to bring together scientific disciplines and ethical ones. In fact, scientists working in genetic engineering will explain the scientific advances in gene editing and it is essential. We will also need to talk about technologies as the "use of the technology known as CRISPR-Cas9 [...] has opened up new frontiers in genetic medicine". At the same time, disciplines like philosophy, bioethics and law are necessary because they raise awareness on the consequences of gene editing on the society and question the power of science.

However, bringing together science and humanities could seem difficult because they approach truth and knowledge differently. On one hand, science relies on facts. Thus, truth is mainly seen as empirical and positive: scientists make measurements, observe them and draw conclusions. On the other hand, the humanities fields, such as bioethics and law, truth is discussed as normative: this means that values are a key point and that they focus on how a phenomenon will affect people and its consequences over the society.

Thus, how could science and humanities work together in a dynamic way? First, there should have a discussion in which they (researchers in science and in humanities) express their ideas and researches, in an understandable language -explanation of technical vocabulary for example. Scientists could argue that gene editing helps to understand genetic diseases and could treat them. It can also improve the yield of crops and have an impact on livestock. The researchers working in bioethics could express their apprehension regarding gene editing and its consequences on society and future. Indeed, if scientists were allowed to alter reproductive cells, it could lead to eugenics because parents could choose their children and embryo judged as abnormal in the society could be eliminated.

Then, they need to understand that they are complementary. “It makes little sense to treat the questions raised by genome editing as if they belonged to a single field […]. [It] should be addressed as part of different technology convergences […] which also includes political technologies (regulation, legislation, etc.)”.

In order to work together, they need to agree on the issue(s) that gene editing raises and need to have a “conversation about the limits and directions of research”. In conclusion, despite the difference of truths, dialogue and cooperation can help to work together and find a solution.

Broadening the conversation surrounding gene editing
From the paper calling for previously unheard voices to enter the conversation about gene editing, Sheila Jasanoff and Benjamin Hurlbut are looking for conversations with disciplines other than science, technology, law and ethics. Gene editing transcends academia into real life, and so a rounded conversation involves broad questions with the public, generalists and specialists.

Beyond the four broad disciplinary areas stated in the paper (science, technology, law and ethics), the 'discipline', or area of thought, untouched is culture.

 * 1) the arts and other manifestations of human intellectual achievement regarded collectively.
 * 2) the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society.

The understanding and representation of culture (arts and humanities) changes individual and societal attitudes towards all areas of human life. Questions of individual belonging are constantly asked by visual, written and performance art. Challenges to the audience's perspective are also posed, allowing and encouraging a search for complex understanding of other's interpretive truth, though the lease of the audience's personal interpretive truth.

A key aim of Jasanoff and Hurlbut is to involve more people in the debate, and thus broaden the conversation. Taking science related ethical questions into diverse cultures, such as religious sects, less-wealthy and rural areas in an accessible, artistic way would give a platform to voices not yet heard. If everyone's individual interpretive truth, with different biases from their surroundings, are heard and discussed, different cultures may challenge each other's perspectives, posing new questions to those with power. Asking less represented groups, through accessible arts ie drama, participatory workshops, street artists in schools, hospitals would involve a broader spectrum of society and culture, taking the debate from positivist science to real life ethics. If the discussion and decision of power and boundaries is going to be decided by many, in a law court style 'jury', it is important that the whole of society is consulted. Art provides a way to access interpretive truth after being presented with data. The selection and presentation of data is inherently bias, and would require a large discussion in order to eliminate individual and discipline bias.

Gene editing through the lens of Agriculture:

Over time humans have used different genetic techniques in agriculture to increase yield. One of these technics is hybridization, which is the genetic crossing of two different plant species. Hybridization created new plant varieties that had the desirable agronomic characteristics from both initial plant species. Recently, due to progress in science, new genetic engineering techniques have been developed. Through mutagenesis, humans can now inhibit the expression of a particular gene of the plant’s genome. Humans can also add one or multiple genes to a plant’s genome by using transgenesis. In transgenesis, the used genes come from another plant species’ genomes. Transgenesis creates a new genetically modified plant variety, called a genetically modified organism (GMO).

When it comes to food production, genetic engineering is very controversial. Many call it dangerous or unnatural. People are especially skeptical towards genetically modified organisms (GMOs) because of the ambiguity surrounding GMOs and the unknown risks they may pose.

However, GMOs have many benefits. First, GMOs can nourish the growing population without further destroying the environment. Indeed, adding a gene for immunity to a plant’s genome can reduce the need for pesticides and insecticides, which can be harmful to human health and the environment. In addition, GMOs can help farmers enhance food security. For example, some genetically modified rice can withstand the effects of flooding. These varieties will become especially valuable in the near future when floods will become more frequent because of climate change.

To summarize, in agriculture, gene editing has many advantages such as enhancing food security and sustainability.

Gene editing
Technology and biochemistry (science) have positivist and empirical truths relying on objective facts and quantitative tests which show how gene editing can be used and why it should be used. Genetic editing is when DNA is modified, altered or deleted in a living organism. Common methods include using ‘molecular scissors’ to cut genomes and replace them. The aim is to change inheritance patters and increase the chance of desired sequences. These will be inherited in offspring and so can eradicate some fatal genetic diseases. New technologies have made gene editing easier for example CRISPR. CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats) are DNA sequences in genomes found in bacteria. Researchers can easily alter DNA sequences with this which can treat/prevent diseases. This suggests that if gene editing is easy and can benefit society, there should be no limits to it.

Ethics and Law can often have a subjective truth on the matter of gene editing. The obvious truth in the area of law and ethics is that when using technologies such as CRISPR, bioethics and legal regulations should be put in place to ensure there is no misuse of such a powerful technology. For example, human testing which could have unpredictable results has been created controversy. Gene editing on a human embryo in China in 2018 produced gene-edited twin girls. This led to a global moratorium being issued and pushed for all clinical activities surrounding gene editing to be banned until ethical frameworks are put in place. Although this is the view of many in ethical fields, some researchers have a different approach of increasing human trails and using gene editing technology to a greater extent in the hopes to alleviate pain and suffering caused by diseases such as malaria and HIV/AIDS. In other words, restricting the use of technologies such as CRISPR would be more unethical.

Medicine lies between a positivist and interpretive truth. Gene editing especially CRISPR will most definitely find clinical use because of its improvement in areas such as sensitivity, reliability and efficiency of nucleic acid measurement. Gene editing is a tool in the fight against disease. About 6% of all births have a serious birth defect which is caused genetically/part genetically. – about 8 million children could benefit from gene editing.

How would they work in a dynamic way? Ethical perspective helps to show that the process would affect the person as a whole not just one strand of DNA – showing the bigger picture. Medicine as a discipline helps to bridge these truths as it looks at the scientific positivist approach as well as thinking of human/ animal wellbeing and the ethical challenges of gene editing. Additionally, all disciplines seem to be working for a common objective, to reduce painful and fatal disease and conditions. references: Wang, W., Hou, J., Zheng, N. et al. Cell Biol Toxicol (2019) 35: 285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10565-019-09480-w Savulescu, J., Pugh, J., Douglas, T. et al. Protein Cell (2015) 6: 476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13238-015-0184-y

 Gene editing through various disciplines and the importance of the interdisciplinary view

When looking at the concept or method of gene editing, we have to look at it from several perspectives in order to understand all its complexity and its potential impact, its "truth".

For example, we can look at it from purely scientific point of view, drawing our "truth" from disciplines such as biology, chemistry, or more specifically genetics and ecology, in order to understand what is gene editing as a biological/chemical process, how it works, how it affects living organisms and their environment (benefits and drawbacks) and more.

Furthermore, we can look at it from the standpoint of social sciences, such as economics (closely connected with agriculture), ethics, sociology or politics. Gene editing has a great impact in all these disciplines - with this new technology, where we can produce more efficiently at lower cost, there will be many implications on the economy of food production, its price on the market, etc. This goes hand with hand with agriculture, since this is the discipline that is concerned with production of food, ways of farming (methods, usage of this new technology), etc. In addition, these implications and changes in fields of econimics and agriculture, will most definitely affect government policies and laws, that will be introduced as a response to these changes - for example, government might limit the production, impose additional taxes, or encourage production by investing in the technology and giving certain advantages to the producers. What kind of policies and laws will be introduced is directly connected with first, scientific findings of usage of that method - for example, ecology might argue that gene editing and therefore genetically modified organisms (GMOs) can have serious negative consequences on the environment and ecosystem (the endangerment of other species, degradation of environment, etc.) - and second, with ethics - from a certain moral standpoint, is it acceptible to modify organisms? Which organisms should we modify and to what degree? What should we take in consideration when gene editing?

We can see, that if we try to truly understand a process as complex and as impactful as gene editing, we have to perceive it from different perspectives, from different disciplines that are concerned with different, but nevertheless important, implications of this process on different spheres of our natural and social world. Despite of different "truths" that disciplines propose, they are in fact all merely a part of a bigger picture, of the whole truth, and they therefore not necessary contradict one another. If there are certain contradictions between these truths that is merely a difference in opinion (that is indeed based and justified on the said truths) on how we should act, which actions should be taken in regard to this process. It is merely the difference in concerns and in focus of the disciplines, in other words, what disciplines perceive as the most important aspect, impact of the process. We can therefore conclude that each discipline provides us with different perspective, different truth, which is just a part of a bigger truth, rather than an alternative whole truth of the process. If we can see and give importance to all these little parts of the truth, we will be able to see the bigger picture and gain a deeper understanding of the process.

In addition, to make sure these truths work together in a dynamic way, we have to see and understand not only individual elements (in our case different truths) of a bigger system (gene editing), but also to seek to detect and analyse complex interections and relationships between them. Many truths are dependent or were derived from one another - for example, "truth" in ethics and economics can strongly influence "truth" in politics - and therefore political actions in terms of taxes, policies, etc., "truth" in genetics can have a great impact on how the "truth" in ecology is formulated, etc. The point is that eventhough disciplinary truths are different, not only that they are parts of a greater, interdisciplinary truth, they are also extremely interconnected and interdependent from one another, making it easier to (try to) more deeply comprehend the process in question.

 Approaching Gene Editing Through Different Disciplines

Gene editing can be approached and viewed from various different perspectives and through various disciplines. Of course, for gene editing to be performed scientific disciplines are necessary. Here, the truth of gene editing seems quite clear, as from a purely scientific perspective the question may only be to what extent gene editing is possible. Therefore, the scientific truth can be objectively established, only being limited by technological advancements. To what extent gene editing is actually implemented, however, cannot be decided simply through scientific disciplines. It directly affects living organisms, and therefore needs to be considered through disciplines within the humanities such as politics, law and ethics. But as it is an idea that only really arose as an issue in this past century, it becomes challenging to use whatever ethical perspectives already existed to create new laws or new truths. Furthermore, it is questionable if politicians could make such laws suitably, without sufficient interaction with experts of the field itself, but also with representatives of disciplines/fields that will be affected by such laws. In gene editing of plants and crops, one needs to consider the discipline of Agriculture, which is of course closely related to Economics. Additionally, Health experts would need to investigate any effects of consuming genetically modified plants. Opinions would also vary greatly depending on cultural background, as this can have an impact on how much one thinks it to be responsible to interfere with nature – especially when going beyond plants and considering animals. If a small group of experts – perhaps all from the same country or cultural background - makes a decision for a people of a different country or cultural background, this could very quickly become problematic. Therefore it would not only be necessary to bring together representatives of a variety of disciplines, but also of a variety of cultures, to bring together their views or truths on the subject into one law.

 Different discipline approaches to gene editing:

Philosophy - ‘Truth’ is found through using reason to make theories

• Moral philosophy - application of philosophical theories to real-world moral issues

• Focus on whether gene editing is intrinsically ‘good’ and ‘bad’, alongside discussion of consequences

• Absolutism vs relativism etc...

• Can be used alongside scientific research and evidence on the mechanism and possible consequences of gene editing to support/debate Biology - scientific objectivity • ‘truth’ in natural science is found through hypothesis and experiment • Search for objective truth - can limit capacity to discuss ethics of both application of science and research involved • Research on gene editing is valuable to expanding our scientific knowledge and understanding of the world and human capability (Needs discussion with philosophy on what it means to be human? Why we see this understanding as valuable ...) Economics

• Social science - mix of philosophy’s truth using reason and building ‘scientific models’ to understand society

• Based on the truth of humans reacting to incentives - market structure

• Fixes the debate on gene editing in the real world ◦ Brings philosophy down from abstract theorising ◦ Discussion of how scientific research and the impact of commercialised gene editing will affect the economy and overall market structure ‣ E.g. inequality of access considered

gene editing in ethics, religion and art

CRISPR CAS9 is a tool that edits human genome. According to the Oxford dictionary definition, the genome is “the complete set of genes or genetic material present in a cell or organism ». It is inexpensive and was created in order to cure genetic illnesses such as HIV. Its use conveys a lot of controversy and raises ethical and moral questions. Should we be able to modify humans? How far can it go? Will it be used unethically? One of the first and loudest opponents to gene editing is religion, especially Catholicism. The catholic church is against the suffering of humans and their modification. The French catholic newspaper “La Croix” states that “it is not morally acceptable to edit genes as the risks are too big and could modify the progeny”. It also says the the catholic church is not only against gene editing but also in vitro fecundation. Last year, I asked a class of 12 students in a catholic school in Paris called Alma what they thought about bioethics and gene editing. These were their answers: out of twelve, only three students, which means 25% of the group, were against the use of gene editing to cure genetic illnesses. However, 92% of students, so eleven out twelve, were against the use of gene editing to modify human characteristics. These numbers show subjective truth which means that since we do not know the exact consequences of gene editing, there can not be an objective truth, only people's subjective perception of the truth. Moreover, with faith, catholics have a certain perception on this matter. They believe what the church tells them.

The question of ethics in gene editing was also raised when a few Chinese scientists used CRISPR CAS9 on embryos in 2016. It was the first time gene editing was used on human embryos. Although these embryos weren’t going to go through live birth, they were still developing. The team of scientists used gene editing on 86 embryos which caused a worldwide outrage. Out of 86, 71 survived and only 28 embryos were successfully modified. The experiment stopped as it was judged as risky and dangerous. In most parts of the world it is forbidden to use this tool on humans as we do not yet know the consequences, there is no "objective truth" on the matter right now. However, with medicinal research, the truth in medicine changes all the time. What we might consider true today might vary tomorrow. The French law forbids the human’s specie modification. In The article 16.4 in its civil code proves it: “No one may infringe upon the integrity of mankind. Any eugenic practice which aims at organizing the selection of persons is forbidden. Any medical procedure whose purpose is to cause the birth of a child genetically identical to another person alive or dead is forbidden. Without prejudice to any research that aims at preventing and treating genetic diseases, there may be no transformation of genes in order to alter the descent of a person.”

We can also see how art relates to gene editing. The “being human” exhibition at the Wellcome Collection showcases a box of CRISPR tools to show how easy it is to obtain them. It also explains how people use them. The point of this collection is to observe the relationship between the visitors, humans, and their health and how gene editing makes them feel. The whole exhibition aims to “challenge how we all think and feel about health”. It has an interdisciplinary approach, as the gallery combines health and art, as well as science and medicine. Art shows gene editing to raise questions about the ethical truth in the matter. How can we know if it is ethically correct to use gene editing tools? Does this only depend on our subjective truth?


text:
User:LBird BASc/sandbox/ATK/Seminar6/Truth/Neuroscience and Schizophrenia

Neuroepistemology
An empirical approach to epistemology. It is based on modern neuroscience and seeks to study the structure and functions of the brain with a focus on the direct relationship between the brain and capabilities (and incapabilities) that are epistemic by nature.

Assumptive framework

 * Contextual effects on assumptions shaped by socio-politico-historical factors.
 * Relationships of power in a given field and their influence on thought.
 * The comparison between objective systems of validity and concepts that may be subjective and/or dependent on their given contexts.

Application

 * "Tacit biases" in observations - "assumptions on the nature of mind"
 * Theory was not the result of data itself. Preconceived ideas (eg about the Central Nervous System) have appeared to affect research and theoretical outcomes.

Neuroscience and Truth
Whether theories concerning relationships between neural structures and their given functions can be accepted as ‘true’ if they have been influenced by beliefs is debatable.

Positive and Normative Statements in Neuroscience - Objective and Subjective Truths
Positive and Normative statements concern themselves with what is objectively and subjectively true respectively. Positive statements are verifiable via testable, empirical means whilst normative statements involve the input of beliefs and value judgements. The level of ‘truth’ behind such normative statements is therefore debatable. What is objectively ‘true’ in Neuroscience may be the structure and its correlation to a given task/function but claims those structures hold certain functions might only be subjective truths. Evidence behind those claims might even be subject to criticism in terms of the methodology used to obtain that evidence. Neuroscience employs a variety of objective, scientific research methods that are not open to interpretation or bias. They are reliable in that the same results can be replicated and obtained by different researchers, regardless of their background, ethnicity, age or gender. The degree of reliability is a good proxy for the degree of objective truth in any given claim or theory where the same results must be agreed upon universally. However, the interpretation of such results - ie that a certain structure gives rise to a given function, might be subjective. This is especially so in the discussion of mental illnesses where even the categorisation of the functions as mental illnesses are subjective due to this being a topic that is culturally relative in nature, making it so that categorisations might be true in some cultures but not others.

Biological Explanations - Ventral Striatum
Schizophrenia can be explained in biological terms with reference to the ventral striatum - a structure believed to have a role in motivation. Avolition in schizophrenia is typically explained by low activity levels in this region. Neurological research by Juckel et al. (2006) showed a negative correlation overall negative symptoms and ventral striatum activity. An objective truth in this is the negative correlation between negative symptoms and ventral striatum activity. However, the assumption that low activity levels cause avolition is subjectively true. It is an assumption where it could be true that the direction of causality is actually reversed - that avolition results in reduced information passing through the ventral striatum, resulting in lower activity levels. Furthermore, other explanations suggesting the role(s) of genetics, neurochemicals, pregnancy complications and even social factors might even completely disregard the role of the ventral striatum in schizophrenia.

Classification of Schizophrenia
The classification of schizophrenia as a ‘mental illness’ is a truth that is and is culturally relative. Whether an individual receives a diagnosis also depends on the basis of classification and the individual performing the assessment(s). Reliability (inter-rater and criterion) in the classification of schizophrenia is also generally poor. Cheniaux et al. (2009) illustrated different assessment systems (ICD and DSM) as well as different psychiatrists performing the assessments produce disparate results in the number of diagnoses made.


text:
User:Pazderski

I am Pazderski.

title: User:Pazderski


text: Talk:Brief History of Europe

title: Talk:Brief History of Europe


text:
Wikijunior:Asia/Turkmenistan

Turkmenistan is a country formerly known as Turkmenia, is a Turkic state in Central Asia.

Where is Turkmenistan?
It is bordered by Caspian sea to the west, Iran to southwest,  Afghanistan to southeast ,  Uzbekistanto north east. The capital city is Ashgabat

How many people live in Turkmenistan?
There are 4.5 million people estimated living in Turkmenistan according to 1995 census. Natives identifies themself as Turkmens (85%) with large minorities of Uzbeks (5%) and Russians (4%). Small minorities include the Kazakhs, Tatars, Ukrainians, Kurds, Armenians, Azeris, Balochs and Pashtuns. The census is quite dated because President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow withheld the results of the last two censuses.

What are the most common languages in Turkmenistan?
The national language of Turkmenistan is Turkmen, which is a Turkic language spoken by about 5 million people in Turkmenistan

What is the most common religion in Turkmenistan?
89% of Turkmen are affiliated with Islam and acknowledge Islam as an integral part of their culture. The Central Asian country of Turkmenistan has no official religion, and there is provision for freedom of religion in the country’s constitution.

What is the sport of Turkmenistan?
Falconry Team Hunting is national sports of Turkmenistan. Turkmen let falcons attack a bag in turn. With the bird's help, they hunted for fur-bearing animals, wild ducks, pigeons and partridges.

What are some important sites?
Darvaza Gas Crater - Also known as Door to Hell or Gates of Hell. It is a large crater in the Karakum Desert of north-central Turkmenistan. The origin of this man made wonders is in 1971 when a Soviet drilling rig accidentally punched into a massive underground natural gas cavern, causing the ground to collapse and the entire drilling rig to fall in. Having punctured a pocket of gas, poisonous fumes began leaking at an alarming rate. To prevent gas discharge, the geologists decided to burn it off, hoping the fire would use all the fuel in a matter of days. Unfortunately, the fire won't stop burning. The flames are caused by natural gas seeping from the surrounding rock into the crater. The gas travels through joints (natural near-surface fractures), permeable rock units, and bedding plane separations.

Köw Ata Underground Lake - The lake lies on the Turkmenbashy – Ashgabat road, between Balkanabat and Nokhur. The lake is located in the underground cave which is built with stairs leading to the lake. The name Kow ata means “father of caves”. Legend has it mentioned during the era of the Parthian kings, there is a happening a miraculous healing of rebel slaves who were supposed to be tortured to death. The warm waters of the lake contain a high amount of different salts and minerals, most notably sulfur, which is responsible for the distinct pee smell within the cave. It is also a natural monument, established to protect the largest known colony of bats in the whole of Central Asia.

The Great Kyz Kala - It is a monumental mudbrick, fortified-building, one of a number of similar structures known as köshks, within the UNESCO World Heritage Site of Merv, Turkmenistan. Renowned for its massive scale and 15m tall corrugated walls, it is not only the largest and best preserved example of this unique building type to survive into the modern era, it is also one of the largest mudbrick buildings standing anywhere in the world

title: Wikijunior:Asia/Turkmenistan


text:
Radiation Oncology/Epidemiology/Taiwan Cancer Registry

Cancer Epidemiology
• Taiwan Cancer Registry Website

• '''Chiang et al. (2016) Incidence and survival of adult cancer patients in Taiwan, 2002–2012. J Formos Med Assoc. 2016 Dec;115(12):1076-1088. (PMID 26786251)'''

• A total of 105,832 people diagnosed with various types of cancer in 2016 in Taiwan

• Estimated a new cancer case every four minutes and 58 seconds

• Median age for cancer diagnosis about 63 years of age

• Cancer Incidence (2016) in Taiwan:

(1) Colon cancer

(2) Lung cancer

(3) Female breast cancer

(4) Liver cancer

(5) Oral cavity cancer (including oropharyngeal cancer, hypopharyngeal cancer, etc.)

(6) Prostate cancer

(7) Thyroid cancer

(8) Stomach cancer

(9) Skin cancer

(10) Esophageal cancer

• Male Cancer Incidence (2016) in Taiwan:

(1) Colon cancer

(2) Liver cancer

(3) Lung cancer

(4) Oral cavity cancer (including oropharyngeal cancer, hypopharyngeal cancer, etc.)

(5) Prostate cancer

(6) Esophageal cancer

(7) Gastric cancer

(8) Skin cancer

(9) Bladder cancer

(10) Leukemia

• Female Cancer Incidence (2016) in Taiwan:

(1) Breast cancer

(2) Colon cancer

(3) Lung cancer

(4) Thyroid cancer

(5) Liver cancer

(6) Endometrial cancer

(7) Ovarian cancer

(8) Cervical cancer

(9) Skin cancer

(10) Gastric cancer

• Childhood Cancer Incidence (PMID 25599927) in Taiwan:

(1) Leukemia

(2) Brain tumor

(3) Lymphoma

(4) Neuroblastoma

(5) Germ cell tumor

(6) Osteosarcoma

(7) Soft tissue sarcoma

(8) Wilms' tumor

(9) Hepatic tumor

(10) Retinoblatoma

• The 10 leading causes of cancer death in 2016 in Taiwan

Radiation Oncology

 * /Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
 * Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (Ther Radiol Oncol; TRO; 2616-2768), launched in September 2017 and originated in 1994 and known in the field as the Blue Journal, publishes papers describing original research, case reports and clinical investigations related to radiation oncology
 * This includes clinical radiotherapy, radiobiology, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, hyperthermia, tumor biology, experimental therapeutics and clinical oncology. It also covers fields of medical physics, radiology, nursing care, education, technology, health information and health policy as it relates to radiology and oncology
 * /Taiwan Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
 * /Taiwan Society of Neutron Capture Therapy
 * /Chinese Society of Medical Physics


text:
History of China/Han Dynasty

The Han Dynasty (漢朝), divided into the earlier Western Han (202 BC - 9 AD) and later Eastern Han Dynasties (25 AD - 220 AD), was one of the most influential time periods in Chinese history. Its impact can be seen in the name of the dominant ethnic group of modern day China, Han Chinese and in the name they call their language, Hanyu (漢語), amongst others. During this period, China reached one of its territorial peaks in ancient times, as well as a golden age of culture and prosperity. This period also solidified Confucianism as the main national policy for centuries to come. The Han Dynasty was headed by the Liu (劉) family.

title: History of China/Han Dynasty


text:
Radiation Oncology/CNS/Cerebral Cavernous Malformation

• Cavernous hemangiomas located in the brain

• Referred to as cerebral cavernomas or more usually as cerebral cavernous malformations (CCMs)

• Can be found in the white matter

• Often abut the cerebral cortex

• Can represent a potential seizure focus

• Can change in size and number over time

• Asymptomatic lesions may not require treatment but need to be monitored for any change in the size

• Treatments for cerebral cavernous hemangiomas include radiosurgery or microsurgery

Poorthis et al. (2013) Treatment of cerebral cavernous malformations: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

• Ovid Medline, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library searched for peer-reviewed publications: 63 cohorts involving 3424 patients

• The incidence of the composite outcome was 6.6 (95% CI 5.7 to 7.5) per 100 person-years after neurosurgical excision (median follow-up 3.3 years) and 5.4 (95% CI 4.5 to 6.4) after stereotactic radiosurgery (median follow-up 4.1 years)

• Conclusion: (1) The reported risks of CCM treatment (and the lower risks of neurosurgical excision over time, from recently bled CCMs, and for CCMs outside the brainstem) compare favourably with the risks of recurrent haemorrhage from CCM (2) Long-term effects, especially important for stereotactic radiosurgery, are unknown


text:
History of China/Zhou Dynasty

The Zhou Dynasty (周朝), divided into the earlier Western Zhou (c. 1045 – 771 BC) and the later Eastern Zhou (770–256 BC), was the longest dynasty in Chinese history and laid the foundation for the Chinese civilisation. Being in the pre-imperial period of Chinese history, it was ruled by a king with landed nobles at his command, somewhat similar to European feudalism. The Zhou Dynasty was headed by the Ji (姬) family. While the Western Zhou was relatively stable, the Eastern Zhou was an extremely fractured state where the king held little authority and nobles fought each other. Eastern Zhou was further divided into the Spring and Autumn Period (春秋時期) and the Warring States Period (戰國時期), with the latter being even more turbulent. Despite the chaos, a lot of thinkers came up during this period to push forward their philosophical ideas and political thinking. Such philosophers include Confucius (孔子), Mencius (孟子), Laozi/Laotzu (老子) and Hanfei (韓非) among others. These became hugely influential systems of thinking in later eras.

title: History of China/Zhou Dynasty


text:
History of China/The Three Kingdoms Period

The Three Kingdoms Period, popularised primarily by the classic novel Romance of the Three Kingdoms, was the turbulent period following the collapse of the Han Dynasty. Warlords from different parts of China gained power in their respective regions and battled each other, until only 3 remained: Wei (魏), Shu (蜀) and Wu (吳). In the end, none would unite China, as after Shu was conquered by Wei, Wei was usurped by Jin (晉), and Jin finished conquering Wu, thus uniting China. Heroes who appeared during these period are still famous in modern China, showing up in popular media and video games.


text:
History of China/Yuan Dynasty

The Yuan Dynasty (1271 AD - 1368 AD) was significant from a historical point of view, because it was the first non-Chinese ruled dynasty that managed to rule all of China. Instead, it was ruled by the Mongols. Founded by Kublai Khan, grandson of Genghis Khan, the Yuan Dynasty was short-lived compared to other dynasties, lasted only for 98 years. The Mongols separated the populace into classes, with the Chinese mostly in the lowest, yet they were sinicised as well, since they tried to adopt the Chinese method of ruling and accepted a lot of Chinese culture. The famed Marco Polo visited China during this period. It also solidified Beijing as a leading city in China.

title: History of China/Yuan Dynasty


text:
User:Jollee713/sandbox

Introduction
This is my sandbox! I am going to practise WikiBooks editing here.

mathematical knowledge
Paul Benacerraf states that "any philosophically satisfactory account of truth, reference, meaning, and knowledge must embrace them all and must be adequate for all the propositions to which these concepts apply. An account of knowledge that seems to work for certain empirical propositions about medium-sized physical objects but which fails to account for more theoretical knowledge is unsatisfactory-not only because it is incomplete, but because it may be incorrect as well, even as an account of the things it seems to cover quite adequately."

title: User:Jollee713/sandbox


text:
History of China/Jin Dynasty

The Jìn Dynasty (晉朝), not to be confused with Jīn dynasty (金朝), was divided into the earlier Western Jin (266 - 316 AD) and later Eastern Jin Dynasty (317 - 420 AD). The Western Jin Dynasty was marked with internal strife and foreign invasions, while the Eastern Jin was forced out of the Chinese heartland of the Yellow River Basin and into the south. This was a significant period in Chinese history, as it was the first time non-Chinese controlled vast areas of Chinese lands. This resulted in a mixture of Chinese and northern cultures. The migration of the political center and influential families towards the south also sped up southern development. Cities like Jianye (current day Nanjing) and Suzhou developed greatly because of this. The Jin Dynasty was headed by the Sima (司馬) family.

title: History of China/Jin Dynasty


text:
User:LGreg/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge (LG seminar)/Group 1/Truth/Peach

= Comparing Truth in Architecture and History of Art - By Yu K., Lola K., and Minnie H. =

What are its truths?
Within architecture, truth is both relative and subjective. The concept of truth is developed by the notion of expressing a statement that is either rejected or accepted as "true". Relating to this, it can be said that buildings themselves create a statement or express ideas by their mere presence/existence. A pre-modern example of this would be the expression embodied by a cathedral, and a modern example would be architecture that serves as a platform for advertisement. In these cases, the buildings would be considered to be correct for their function and purpose, however it is subjective to assume that all buildings are correct based on their function. Architecture is arguably a mathematical discipline, therefore has theory and rules that are followed to create spaces in a "correct" way, a technical or empirical truth.

Similarly, the study of History of Art is something that is largely subjective but also follows mathematical rules. It is true in that the art is studied in terms of its historical context, therefore looking into the factual events that occurred surrounding the artwork's creation, according to accurate records. However, the analysis of the art itself is considered to be subjective, since events and possible influences can be interpreted in considerably different ways depending on who is analysing the work. Much like architecture, on the other hand, the analysis of Art History takes into account compositional techniques that are evident in the work; this would cause History of Art to be true in an empirical sense.

How does it come to realise/evaluate the truth?
Architecture:

One defines what relates or not Architecture. The main consensus on this subject is that architecture is not only about the construction of a building structure, but also about the artistic creation of what makes up a building (light, interior, technical aspects of access to facilities), as well as the analysis of architectural styles from ancient times studied by anthropologists, archaeologists, historians...

It is subjective to evaluate the visual aspect of architecture, as it relates to tastes towards an architect's own style. We cannot define what is "good" and what is not from this point of view. However, the creation of construction plans requires absolute certainty of the feasibility of an architectural project. A positive truth emerges from the use of mathematics, geometry and engineering to keep the building in place in defined proportions and with these specific materials. Furthermore, the study of architectural theories overtime has developed (with the use of science such as mathematics, physics and later the advent of technologies) that have made it possible to approach old buildings. More knowledge on ancient civilizations and their relationship to architecture have resulted from this. This use of science has allowed the borrowing of styles over time, such as churches in the Roman style during the Renaissance.

History of Art: As Art History focuses its study on artwork over the millenia, art historians establish theories that stand for truth. They agree on terms and principles that classify and define certain artworks, by finding common points of analysis between them. For instance, the Canon of Art History is one of the most common ways of defining famous artworks across different time period like Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, Renaissance... Therefore, a constructivist truth is widespread in this dicipline, as it makes certain analytical criteria universal.

The main goal of History of Art is to question the artwork. Each interpretation is different. There is no such thing as "absolute truth" in this discpline as it is defined by its process of understanding a work of art, its features, its message, its techniques. Moreover, what is said to be an artwork by historians has evolved throughout the years, which makes it difficult to come up with an exact definition of Art.

However, the history of art bears some commonly accepted criteria for analysis. Thus, if the substance is subjective, the form of analysis is quite common, and the historian is invited to focus on particular criteria (such as light, color, period, subjetc...).

What the disicipline evaluates is the process of research and understanding the works. Its purpose is to reveal the truth about these works, but it is also in line with the almost impossible nature of explaining a work of art in its entirety.

The purpose of these two disciplines is discussed. Some philosophers (such as Samuel Davies) refute the fact that architecture serves any other purpose than to create practical and useful objects where others say that the creative process of building construction is an art form. Similarly, some will see art history as the analysis of human culture through artworks, while others will emphasize a technical approach to the works. This discussion highlights the fact that the truth about the purpose of architecture and history of art is not absolute. Therefore, « truth » in some of these humanities is more a matter of the philosophy of art and architecture than of the two disiciplines themselves.

Is truth important to the discipline?
It is first crucial to realise the freedom of expression confirmed by artistic license. Thus, artists do not have the obligation to portray the absolute truth. Moreover, truth can be relative and art is the perfect discipline that can use this quality to reimagine reality to a uniquely interpreted artwork. Appreciating art, unlike taking a stand for or against a cause in life, does not require a yes or no to statements. It requires only that the viewers look and appreciate, that they experience as richly and fully as possible the feeling and attitudes involved in the worldview that is presented. Philosophers and scientists are concerned with whether materialism is true; appreciators of art are concerned only to capture the feeling appropriate to the worldview in question. However, for the two disciplines of history of art and architecture this view becomes challenged by the fact that science becomes intertwined with art. Without the absolute truth in measurements or construction, architecture would not be possible as a quantitative discipline. Moreover, history of art needs to recognise the complexity of truth in history and historians must adhere to the correspondence of truth.


text:
History of China/The Southern and Northern Dynasties

The Southern and Northern Dynasties (南北朝), was a period when northern and southern China had separate states and their respective successions. The Northern Dynasties lasted from 493 to 581 AD, and consisted of Northern Wei and its successor states. The Southern Dynasties lasted from 420 AD to 589 AD, and consisted of the successor states of the previous Eastern Jin Dynasty, starting with Liu Song. The Northern Dynasties were mostly ruled by so-called northern barbaric peoples, for example Xianbei people, while the south had mostly Han rulers. In 581 AD, Yang Jian (楊堅), a powerful noble and general in Northern Zhou usurped the child emperor's throne and established the Sui Dynasty. Sui conquered the Chen Dynasty in the south and united China, ending 273 years of disunity.


title: User:Swadhin7/sandbox


text:
History of China/The Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms

The Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms (五代十國) was a period when China broke apart into various states each vying for power, and lasted from 907 to 979 AD. There were 5 states that appeared successively in the Chinese heartland and were the most powerful, constituting the Five Dynasties. Around them was a sleuth of smaller kingdoms, the ten strongest ones making up the Ten Kingdoms. The chaos in China gave a chance for the Khitans in the north to establish the Liao Dynasty, becoming a major threat later. Zhao Kuangyin, a general of the last dynasty in this period Later Zhou, was urged by his army to take the throne for himself, creating the Song Dynasty. He would then unite most of China, facing only the Liao Dynasty in the north as his rival.


text:
Radiation Oncology/Head & Neck/Nasopharynx/Ho's Technique

• Patients immobilized in flexed head position in the initial phase (dose: 40 Gy / 20 fx)

• Three field arrangement:

(1) Opposed lateral fields: irradiate the upper cervical lymphatics (up to level III) en bloc

(2) Anterior field: irradiate the lower field

• Shielding of the lateral fields to adjust for the beam overlap with the anterior field

• Midline shield placed in the lower anterior field throughout the treatment

• Brainstem shielded with 5 HVL block (0.5 cm behind the upper edge of the clivus and 1 cm below the lower edge)

• Eye with 5 HVL shield placed 1.5 cm behind the lateral canthus

• Posterior tongue shielded with standard block

• Upper half of the pituitary Foss shielded

• Three field arrangement used in the boost phase (dose prescribed: 22.5 / 9 fx):

(1) Replanned in the extended head position with oral stent

(2) Anterior cervical-facial field used in all patients

(3) Lower border of the lateral fields reduced down to the level of angle of mandible

(4) Dose reduction allowed for TM joints, ears, parotids, and pinnae

• Posterior oblique boost given after the second phase in patients with parapharyngeal disease (dose prescribed: 20 Gy / 10 fx)

(1) Field usually 5.5 cm * 8 cm in size

(2) Ascending ramus of the mandible shielded in this phase


text:
User talk:Chrisho952

Hello, I have moved the page you created into the book. All Wikibooks pages should be named in a way that automatically includes them in the book. E.g., Book name/Section name/Chapter name/YOUR PAGE NAME and not YOUR PAGE NAME. Thanks - QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 12:34, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
 * You are still doing the same thing. Please stop doing so and stop creating extra work for people. It shouldn't be that difficult: this is the page you just edited to link to your new one. Do you see how all the existing pages specify a complete structure beginning with "Radiation Oncology"? All you need to do is copy this structure to add your new page and not just add it as a single word. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 12:10, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

*Wilms' Tumor (Nephroblastoma) *Neuroblastoma *Rhabdomyosarcoma *Hepatoblastoma *Retinoblastoma *Ewing's sarcoma *Bone PNET *Pediatric Hodgkin's *Burkitt's Lymphoma *Langerhans cell histiocytosis

Blocked
I have temporarily blocked you from editing until you acknowledge this discussion to avoid more bad pages being created. Your repeated incorrect page creations is making work for people to clean up. Please respond here indicating you understand how to create pages now, or ask for further help - thanks QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 12:14, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Probably back as . 大 诺 史 ( Talk/留言/토론/Discussion ) 13:28, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Bad pages
Hello, you are doing it again - please take the time to create your pages properly. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 16:21, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I suggest another block. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (discuss • contribs) 10:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

 * You have been blocked until you pay attention to the messages above and stop creating work for other people. It isn't difficult. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 09:33, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * User is back at it again. --Minorax (discuss • contribs) 02:55, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Page moved to Radiation Oncology/China
I have moved a page you recently created to Radiation Oncology/China and I have added a link to this page on the main page of the Radiation Oncology book.--ЗAНИA talk 14:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

This is your ONLY warning. I have repeatedly warned you over the period of a year not to create standalone pages and to follow the guidance posted here. You have ignored it again. If you do so once more, you'll be blocked for good. No more warnings. QuiteUnusual (discuss • contribs) 15:11, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

title: User talk:Chrisho952


text:
User:LGreg/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge (LG seminar)/Group 1/Suggested readings

If you've read anything of interest, please feel free to post about it here. Let us know which issue it links to, and maybe even jot down your thoughts. Happy reading!

The False Promise of DNA Testing
This article discusses the use of DNA testing in forensic science and its unreliability as evidence. It shows how an attempt was made to introduce objective truth to law, an arguably very subjective discipline in pursuit of justice, and the effects thereafter.

Although the science behind DNA testing has been validated as an empirical truth through thorough research and reviewing, what greatly limits its reliability as an objective truth is the human bias introduced from all sides; human error, peer pressure, greed, inconsistencies in technology and training, and the limits of human ability itself. This issue is made all the more severe by the fact that it is a method of evidence regarded widely by the law as purely objective, and thus results are used to make decisive decisions by placing blind faith in science and disregarding any doubts about its reliability as evidence.

Several efforts have been made to remove sources of human bias in DNA testing by introducing advanced technology; a notable effect is that this also allows for much more accurate and complex analyses of DNA samples, which previously could not be processed accurately by human workers. However, a lack of transparency in the source code used by this newfound technology means that it is effectively no more useful than previous methods of testing, as a lack of human bias cannot be proven, and thus the evidence is no more reliable or trustworthy than it was before.

I thought that this article was really interesting; the key issue raised seems to be that it is not science which causes problems, but rather the way in which it is used - as soon as human bias is introduced, scientific results can no longer be relied on for objective truth without considering the subjective context it lies within. In short, it is impossible for science to remain solely objective when used as a means of evidence in a human setting.

Power: Racism
Group-based Differences in Perception of Racism

Group-based Motivated Perceptions of Racism

Belonging to a group fundamentally shapes the way we interpret and attribute the behavior of others (Vallone, Ross, & Lepper, 1985), and we argue that perceptions of racism are similarly influenced by group membership. Social categorization theory suggests that people tend to identify others as members of one’s ingroup (i.e., “like me”) or outgroup (i.e.,“not like me”; Tajfel & Turner, 1979). This categorization influences our behavior, as we are often motivated to support and protect fellow ingroup members (Brewer, 1999; DiTomaso, 2013; Dovidio, Gaertner, Validzic, Matoka, Johnson, & Frazier, 1997; Smith & Henry, 1996). Social categorization theory provides insight into why Whites and Blacks may have different perceptions of racism: their different group-based motivations cause them to attend to different information. Blacks are motivated to detect early warning signs that they or another ingroup member will become a target of racism, adopting lower thresholds for cues that suggest racism (Richeson & Shelton, 2003; Shelton, Richeson, & Salvatore, 2005). However, Whites are motivated to avoid confirming the stereotype that Whites are racist (Apfelbaum, Sommers, & Norton, 2008; Goff, Steele, & Davies, 2008; Salvatore & Shelton, 2007). To satisfy this goal, Whites may use higher thresholds when detecting racism, applying the “racist” label only to ingroup members who behave in blatantly racist ways. As we will see, Whites’ and Blacks’ perceptions of racism diverge in part because they have different definitions of which attitudes and behaviors signal racism.

Individual Racism VS Structural Racism

Historically, racism was likened to a “disease” found in morally corrupt individuals (Allport, 1954; Duckitt, 1992). Thus, much research has focused on identifying racist individuals through their responses to implicit or explicit prejudice measures and taking steps to help them reduce their prejudiced attitudes and behavior (Monteith, 1993; Olson & Fazio, 2004; Paluck & Green,2009; Todd, Bodenhausen, Richeson, & Galinsky, 2011). However, by identifying “who” is prejudiced, we engender defensiveness and block productive conversation (Trawalter & Richeson, 2008). Furthermore, the traditional conception of racism as the behavior of White perpetrators acting against Black targets promotes group-based motivated perception as Whites and Blacks are motivated to avoid the “racist” label and to identify instances of racism, respectively. Whites may be motivated to not see racism (because their ingroup is the perpetrator) in the same situations where Blacks are motivated to see racism (because their ingroup is the target). Conceptualizing racism as a deficiency within people may provoke reliance on lay theories of racism or motivated comparison standards – factors where we know there are group-based differences. However, a broader conceptualization of racism may illuminate the overarching structural factors that create and sustain inequality between groups while reducing defensiveness. Shifting the lens outward to structural barriers that impede equality may create common ground between Whites’ and minorities’ perceptions of racism, which may, in turn, allow for further conversations.

What is structural racism?

In contrast to the individual notion of racism, structural racism encourages perceivers to consider widespread factors, such as those within an environment or societal context, that perpetuate racial inequality (Murphy & Walton, 2013). For example, studies of policies such as stop and frisk (New York Civil Liberties Union, 2014) or incarceration policies for drug-related offenses (Lowney, 1994) reveal that these policies disproportionately affect racial/ethnic minorities compared to Whites. These policies that have a disparate impact are more consistent with a structural notion of racism, yet conversations about racism tend to focus on disparate treatment (i.e., the ways that Whites and minorities are treated differently; individual racism). Research suggests that teaching about racism as a combination of disparate treatment and impact might help narrow the gap between how Whites and Blacks perceive racism. Increasing Whites’ knowledge about structural racism. Two studies by Glenn Adams and colleagues (Adams, Edkins, Lacka, Pickett, & Cheryan, 2008) illustrate how teaching about the structural (versus individual) nature of racism can shift how people perceive racism. In the first study, White students completed an online tutorial about Perceptions of Racism 275 © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social and Personality Psychology Compass 9/6 (2015): 269–280, 10.1111/spc3.12181 stereotyping and prejudice. All participants received the same initial tutorial about racism, which defined key terms (i.e., stereotype, prejudice, and discrimination) and described similarities and differences between blatant and subtle racism. Then, participants were assigned to a standard or sociocultural tutorial condition. Students in the standard tutorial condition learned about the individual difference factors associated with prejudice (e.g., authoritarianism, religiosity, and conformity) as well as the automatic and controlled components of individual prejudice. That is, consistent with individual racism, this tutorial focused on ways to identify prejudiced people. Conversely, participants in the sociocultural tutorial condition learned about prejudice as a systemic phenomenon that affords privilege to some groups over others and were provided with examples of structural racism (e.g., stereotypes and prejudice as systemic associations). Thus, this tutorial emphasized prejudiced structures and policies more than prejudiced people. After the tutorial, participants’ perceptions of racism were assessed. The participants in the sociocultural racism tutorial were significantly more likely to perceive new examples of structural racism (e.g., “A Mexican-American man goes to a real estate company to look for a house. The agent takes him to look only at homes in low income neighborhoods”.) as indicative of racism compared to participants in the standard tutorial. There were no differences between groups on judgments of individual acts of racism (e.g., “Jack, a Black American man, walks past a group of young White American men, and hears them use a racial epithet”) – both tutorial groups believed those acts “counted” as prejudice. These effects persisted one week after the tutorial.

Thus, this first study demonstrated that, compared to teaching about the racism of individuals, teaching about structural racism shifted Whites’ perceptions of racism toward a more inclusive definition that mirrors the way that Blacks often perceive prejudice. Furthermore, a second study showed that the sociocultural (versus standard) lecture was more likely to engender support for policies aimed to combat racial inequality on a structural level.

These studies demonstrate that teaching about structural factors that perpetuate racism may help converge Whites’and Blacks’ perceptions of racism so that both groups attend to individual and structural racism. Carefully designed tutorials can be effective ways to change not only the ways people think about racism but also to align Whites’ egalitarian goals with support for policies designed to reduce racial inequality without provoking group-based defensiveness. Teaching explicitly about structural racism is not the only way to increase Whites’ acknowledgement of its role in impeding racial equality. One reason Whites may be reluctant to acknowledge structural racism stems from self-image threat (Lowery, Knowles, & Unzueta, 2007). Acknowledging structural racism can be uncomfortable for Whites because it requires acknowledging the (unearned) privileges associated with being an advantaged group member.Structural racism can inspire collective guilt at the privileges that advantaged group members receive (Blodorn & O’Brien, 2011; Unzueta & Lowery, 2008). Thus, interventions aimed to increase Whites’ acknowledgment of structural racism may do well to also alleviate the self-image threat that could accompany this process.

Two studies explored how affirming one’s self-image increases Whites’acknowledgement of structural racism (Unzueta & Lowery, 2008). In Study 1, White participants who were given the opportunity to describe the best parts of themselves (i.e., self-affirmation) were significantly more likely to endorse a structural notion of racism than non-affirmed participants. Furthermore, participants who had self-affirmed acknowledged that Whites received benefits and advantages in society (i.e., White privilege) more than non-affirmed participants. A second study manipulated self-image threat by giving White participants threatening or affirming feedback on an intelligence task. Again, participants who were affirmed endorsed a structural notion of racism more than participants in the threatening condition. In neither study were there differences in people’s acknowledgment of individual racism—all White participants endorsed this notion of racism to the same extent. In sum, these results indicate that Whites may be reluctant (276 Perceptions of Racism © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Social and Personality Psychology Compass 9/6 (2015): 269–280, 10.1111/spc3.12181) to think of racism as a structural problem because it is more threatening to their self-image than individual racism. However, tasks such as self-affirmation can reduce the threat associated with acknowledging structural racism, increasing Whites’ motivation to endorse racism as a structural and individual problem (see also Adams, Tormala, & O’Brien, 2006).

Syncretic When reading a book called 'The Polymath' by Waqas Ahmed, I came across a reference to something Philosopher David E. Cooper mentioned about truth. Polymaths usually take a "syncretic" approach to truth. The way to reach truth is to "gather many perspectives from which will emerge a common core". This 'common core' is the truth (or where it lies). This is actually similar to what I read in 'Knowledge Power' by Alan Wilson where he mentions that truth is in consensus. This is sort of a democratic way of approaching truth - majority rules. This is a very subjective outlook on truth and does not necessarily correspond with reality. I really recommend reading 'The Polymath' to see the evolution from interdisciplinary to disciplinary approaches to learning and education!

Eyewitness Testimony as Evidence
Eyewitness testimony, persuasive and highly regarded in the courtroom, plays a crucial role in the conviction of a defendant. The weight given to testimonies as evidence is as highlighted by Judge William Brennan, ““[T]here is almost nothing more convincing than a live human being who takes the stand, points a finger at the defendant, and says ‘That’s the one!’”. However, wrongful convictions due to unreliable and inaccurate testimony has been a perennial problem— research suggests that 71% of wrongful convictions are a result of inaccurate statements given. (http://www.newenglandinnocence.org/eyewitness-misidentification).

Inaccurate testimonies can come about as a result of deliberate lies by witnesses, but more often than not, is a result of incorrect and inaccurate memory (https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00703/full). A witness’ memory of the event does not always accurately capture and portray the reality of it. Memory is described to be “a constructive, dynamic, and selective process that can be influenced by many factors". It is malleable; and can be distorted and/or contaminated by extreme stress, cognitive biases, leading questions by lawyers, schemas, conversations with other witnesses etc. (https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-psychology/chapter/memory-distortions/ ; https://nobaproject.com/modules/eyewitness-testimony-and-memory-biases) Many researchers have tested and proven the ease of creating false memories in individuals.

Hence, while testimonies as evidence provide value to the justice system, they should only be carefully considered with the knowledge and understanding that eyewitness memory is fluid and subject to bias/error.


text:
User:LGreg/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge (LG seminar)/Group 2/Suggested readings

If you've read anything of interest, please feel free to post about it here. Let us know which issue it links to, and maybe even jot down your thoughts. Happy reading!

Maslin, M (2004) Climate Change: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, Chapter 3. (Evidence)

source

Tommy Orange, There there, a novel about the condition of Native Americans in the US (History)


text:
User:Danielravennest/template

 * Small Heading - Violet

0.0 - Level 2 Header

 The Bold Paragraph Head is an open-source collaboration to develop the concepts, technologies, and working examples of automated self-expanding production systems. A Seed Factory bootstraps itself from a starter set of core machines. It grows to any size you need by making parts, materials, and entire new machines. The machines can be copies of the starter set, larger versions, or different ones that enable new products. Design files and instructions are supplied for guiding the production process.

 0.1 - Level 3 Header

 Biological seeds grow into larger organisms using local matter and energy, and eventually produce copies of the original seeds. A Seed Factory is a new kind of production system intentionally designed to grow in a similar way. It begins with a small starter set (the seed), expands to a mature factory, then eventually makes copies of the starter set. Like any factory, the point of building it is to produce useful products as outputs. But in additions it self-expands by making some items for internal use. The expansion uses a combination of three methods:

 * Indented List
 * 2nd item
 * 3rd Item

Level 4 Header

 * Indented Paragraph - Large, specialized factories tie up a lot of capital in their construction, and do not respond well when technology or markets change. If the factory becomes uneconomic, it can have a disproportionate impact on a local community.  Although economies of scale can apply to mass production, there are dis-economies to having a pyramid of highly paid management and the slower reaction time of a large organization.

title: User:Danielravennest/template


text:
User:Roshid7378/sandbox

hi my mail account someone use .plz make cecurity

title: User:Roshid7378/sandbox