"'I'll make old vases for you if you want them—will make them just as I made these.' He had visions of a room full of golden brown beard. It was the most appalling thing he had ever witnessed, and there was no trickery about it. The beard had actually grown before his eyes, and it had now reached to the second button of the Clockwork man's waistcoat. And, at any moment, Mrs. Masters might return! "Worth stealing," a Society journalist lounging by remarked. "I could write a novel, only I can never think of a plot. Your old housekeeper is asleep long ago. Where do you carry your latchkey?" "Never lose your temper," he said. "It leads to apoplexy. Ah, my fine madam, you thought to pinch me, but I have pinched you instead." How does that strike you, Mr. Smith? Fancy Jerusha Abbott, (individually) ever pat me on the head, Daddy? I don't believe so-- The confusion was partly inherited from Aristotle. When discussing the psychology of that philosopher, we showed that his active Nous is no other than the idea of which we are at any moment actually conscious. Our own reason is the passive Nous, whose identity is lost in the multiplicity of objects with which it becomes identified in turn. But Aristotle was careful not to let the personality of God, or the supreme Nous, be endangered by resolving it into the totality of substantial forms which constitute Nature. God is self-conscious in the strictest sense. He thinks nothing but himself. Again, the subjective starting-point of305 Plotinus may have affected his conception of the universal Nous. A single individual may isolate himself from his fellows in so far as he is a sentient being; he cannot do so in so far as he is a rational being. His reason always addresses itself to the reason of some one else—a fact nowhere brought out so clearly as in the dialectic philosophy of Socrates and Plato. Then, when an agreement has been established, their minds, before so sharply divided, seem to be, after all, only different personifications of the same universal spirit. Hence reason, no less than its objects, comes to be conceived as both many and one. And this synthesis of contradictories meets us in modern German as well as in ancient Greek philosophy. 216 "I shall be mighty glad when we git this outfit to Chattanoogy," sighed Si. "I'm gittin' older every minute that I have 'em on my hands." "What was his name?" inquired Monty Scruggs. "Wot's worth while?" "Rose, Rose—my dear, my liddle dear—you d?an't mean——" "I'm out of practice, or I shouldn't have skinned myself like this—ah, here's Coalbran's trap. Perhaps he'll give you a lift, ma'am, into Peasmarsh." Chapter 18 "The Fair-pl?ace." "Yes," replied Black Jack, "here they are," drawing a parchment from his pocket. "This is the handwriting of a retainer called Oakley." HoME大桥未久AV手机在线观看 ENTER NUMBET 0016hulp.com.cn
On sexual behavior and sex-role reversal
by
Schuiling GA.
Division of Human Biology,
Faculty of Medical Sciences,
University of Groningen,
Groningen, The Netherlands.
g.a.schuiling@med.umcg.nl
J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2005 Sep;26(3):217-23.
ABSTRACTSex is not about reproduction; sex is about (re-)combination of DNA. Sex, not reproduction, always involves physical contact between two individuals; to achieve this, strategies of sexual behavior evolved. Sexual behavior, therefore, did not evolve as part of a reproductive strategy, but evolved to enable exchange of genetic material. In multicellular organisms the situation is more complicated than in unicellular organisms, as it is impossible for each cell within a multicellular body to have sex with another cell. Hence, evolution selected a system in which the possibility to have sex was limited to only one cell-line: the germ cells. As a result, sex adopted the character of fertilization, and sex and reproduction became inseparably linked. Still, in some species, including humans, sexual behavior still exhibits features of its evolutionary past: in humans (like in bonobo's) most sexual activity and many sexual behavioral patterns have nothing to do with reproduction (masturbation, homosexual behavior, for example); in humans, sexual behavior also became associated with other strategic objectives, such as intensifying the pair bond, expression of love or power. Different genders - male and female - evolved, and each gender evolved typical gender-related sexual and reproductive strategies as well. In most multicellular species, these strategies became inextricably mixed, and sexual behavior increasingly more - and in most species even exclusively - 'served' the interests of reproduction: sexual behavior became more or less synonymous with reproductive behavior. In most species, the 'mix' of sexual and reproductive strategies evolved into typical gender-related patterns of behavior, that is, in typical 'sex-roles'. Often, males are bigger and more 'beautiful' (= more intensely ornamented) than females; males compete with each other for access to females; males court females, while females choose males ('female choice'). However, ecological circumstances may cause a reversal of sex-roles, resulting in a situation in which females are bigger and more intensely ornamented than males, females compete for access to males, females court males and only males invest in care for the young, provided they are relatively certain of their paternity. Also, as in the case of the spotted hyena, females may be highly virilized and be socially dominant. This 'sex-role reversal' is seen, e.g., when males are relatively rare due to high predation pressure, or when the process of reproduction is very risky for the same reason: then it is 'better' that males, with their plenty of sperm, are wasted, than females with their few, precious eggs. It can be argued, with women being the fair sex, exhibiting competitive behavior and with an actively displaying courtship, and with men investing heavily in their offspring, meanwhile taking all (cultural) kinds of measures to guarantee their paternity, that humans, too, exhibit some degree of sex-role reversal.Eugenics talk
Reprogenetics
'Designer babies'
Private eugenics
Psychiatric genetics
Eugenics before Galton
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis
Sex differences in brain and behaviour
Gene therapy and performance enhancement
The commercialisation of pre-natal enhancement
Refs
and further readingHOME
Resources
Wireheading
BLTC Research
cognitive-enhancers.com
Superhappiness?
Utopian Surgery?
The Good Drug Guide
The Abolitionist Project
The Hedonistic Imperative
The Reproductive Revolution
MDMA: Utopian Pharmacology
Critique of Huxley's Brave New World