“New linguistics minor program approved - Tufts Daily” plus 3 more |
- New linguistics minor program approved - Tufts Daily
- Welcoming all is the philosophy at Mt. Olive church - Morris County Daily Record
- Greenspan: Financial Crisis Doesn’t Indict Ayn Rand ... - ABC News Blogs
- Red Sox philosophy a novel one in these parts - Worcester Telegram & Gazette
| New linguistics minor program approved - Tufts Daily Posted: 05 Apr 2010 10:47 AM PDT Faculty members on Wednesday approved a new minor in linguistics that the School of Arts and Sciences will start to offer next fall. Ray Jackendoff, a distinguished linguist and Seth Merrin Professor of Philosophy, said that the minor, to be hosted by the Department of Philosophy, is an amalgamation of current course offerings. "There has been, for now about three years, a collection of courses in theoretical linguistics, and there has been a lot of interest from students in the linguistics courses, so we felt it might be useful to collect what we had into a grouping of courses and give students an opportunity to get a bit of depth," Jackendoff said. Assistant Professor of Psychology Ariel Goldberg noted that the number of linguistics offerings has grown at Tufts over the past several years, in conjunction with rising student demand. Goldberg, who specializes in the cognitive processes of language, worked with Jackendoff to develop the minor. They will serve as co−directors of the minor program. Jackendoff said the minor was created in response to sustained interest over the years in linguistics courses. "Over 40 people take Introduction to Linguistics every year, and there has been a fairly steady enrollment in other theoretical linguistics courses," Jackendoff said. "The minor gives people an opportunity or a reason to take more of them." Students pursuing the minor are first required to take three theoretical linguistic courses, according to Jackendoff. He explained that approximately 20 selected philosophy, psychology, child development, romance languages, classics and English courses will be crosslisted as linguistics courses to count toward the minor. Students must choose three additional electives from this list of courses to complete the minor. "Could be historical linguistics, or child language development, or psycholinguistics, or philosophy of language — a variety of things," Jackendoff said. Goldberg said the courses counting toward the minor are typically offered every year and focus primarily on the scientific study of language. The interdisciplinary minor will allow students to pursue their own interests within the field. "Language is the object of study, either exploring how the mind produces language or the historical development of language over time," Goldberg said. Jackendoff reiterated that there would be a great degree of flexibility in the minor. "It's pretty much whatever they want," he said. "If this were a major it would have more structure. [With] a minor, we're trying to give people some idea of the range of things you can study that have to do with language." One requirement for linguistics minors, however, will be that their foreign language and culture requirements be fulfilled entirely through foreign language classes, whether through six semesters of one language or three semesters of two languages each, according to Jackendoff. Senior Laina Rosebrock, who is majoring in cognitive and brain sciences, applauded the new program. "I started to get interested in linguistics even in high school, and so when I came here the cognitive and brain sciences major was the only thing that really encompassed linguistics, so I think it's really cool that they're making this minor," Rosebrock said. Rosebrock said the linguistics courses she has attended have been engaging. "For the most part they've been really well attended and people get really into the discussions," she said. "Most of the people that are in the [psychology] major are really interested in the language side of it." Sophomore Christopher Stoj said that the new minor was a pleasant surprise. "I'm taking several linguistics classes because I'm interested in it; I didn't expect that [to] be recognized by a major or a minor," Stoj said. "I do appreciate that there's a label for the amount of study that I put into linguistics." He expressed his hope that the school would go further and establish an official linguistics major program. "It's sort of a shame that I may take more linguistics courses than the minor requires," Stoj said. "It's certainly a very promising department at Tufts; the faculty are excellent … It's very connected to other departments." He cited the new Psycholinguistics and Linguistics Lab that Goldberg established as a significant development in linguistics at Tufts. "It's an indication of Tufts' investment in the linguistics program, which is definitely going to grow in upcoming years," Stoj said. Rosebrock, who works in the lab, echoed this sentiment, saying it adds on to existing research being done in psychology labs. Jackendoff said that information about the minor will be posted on the philosophy department's Web site in the coming weeks. Be the first to comment on this article!Five Filters featured article: Chilcot Inquiry. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| Welcoming all is the philosophy at Mt. Olive church - Morris County Daily Record Posted: 05 Apr 2010 01:00 AM PDT MOUNT OLIVE -- Five-year-old Donna Romana spent a good portion of Sunday's Easter morning service walking around the Christ Episcopal Church sanctuary. Her older sister Amanda Romana, of Oxford, followed her, but didn't try to stop the tyke from interrupting the service. She wasn't. "My sister has Down syndrome,'' Amanda Romana said. "She can walk up and down the aisle and hug anyone she wants.'' Such is the philosophy behind the All God's Children services at the church every first and third Sunday of the month. Children with autism, attention deficit disorder, Down syndrome, and other disabilities, are welcome with their family for the 30 minute service. Close to 60 parents and children attended Sunday's 9 a.m. gathering. Now in its third year, All God's Children, a non-denominational service, lets special needs children be themselves and allows them to move around the church, or, if need be, make noise during a service. Byram resident Ray Bonker, whose two daughters are autistic, said many children like his cannot tolerate formal services. At the time he said the church was looking for its own identity. A visit from the church's bishop, who noted during a visit that it was Autism Awareness Month, crystalized Bonker's vision. "We felt the presence of the Holy Spirit,'' he said. The church spent the next few months developing a quick service -- they're 30 minutes -- to include several three-minute-long events designed to keep the children's attention. For instance, the service begins and ends with a Cross Parade, during which children and families circle around the sanctuary a church member who leads the procession carrying a staff topped with a cross. Bonker said the services are structured around kids who can't sit down. "This is going to be the norm -- where kids act like that and the congregation has to adapt to that,'' Bonker said after Sunday's service, which was anything but a time when children acted out. For the most part, the special needs children stayed seated with their families and listened and reacted to The Rev. Sonia Waters' sermon. And they clearly enjoyed speaking prayers, singing songs and listening to stories, which were told in the rear of the sanctuary where children could sit in a circle as if it was story time. "All steps are optional,'' Bonker said of children participating in things they might not otherwise, such as receiving communion. The purpose is identical to a traditional church service, to spread God's word. "It's basic Christianity because kids don't need much more than that,'' Bonker said. Amanda Romana said her 5-year-old sister Donna looks forward to the bi-monthly services. "She loves it,'' Amanda Romana said. "I love how they let the kids express how they are,'' she said. Five Filters featured article: Chilcot Inquiry. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| Greenspan: Financial Crisis Doesn’t Indict Ayn Rand ... - ABC News Blogs Posted: 05 Apr 2010 09:35 AM PDT « Previous | Main | Next » April 04, 2010 11:28 AM If the recent financial crisis reveals a problem with the Ayn Rand view that free markets can police themselves, Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan doesn't see it. Greenspan will testify before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission on Wednesday, and I asked him about his free market mentor Ayn Rand in my exclusive "This Week" interview. Greenspan said, "I think that there is no alternative if you want to have economic growth, higher standards of living, in a democratic society, to have competitive markets." The major mistake, he said, was in "assuming what the nature of the risk would be." Greenspan added, "That's the critical mistake. And I made it. Everybody that I know who works in this business made it. And it means that basically we have to work our way back to understanding what went on." WATCH VIDEO HERE:
But isn't it -- isn't it more than a flaw? Isn't it an indictment GREENSPAN: Not at all. I think that there is no alternative, if So it's not the principle of competitive markets which really has no That's the critical mistake. And I made it. Everybody that I know April 4, 2010 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (99) Bring on Peter Schiff to debate Greenspan. He saw this coming years ago. Posted by: Bob | Apr 5, 2010 3:01:23 PM Peter Schiff saw the collapse in advance. Please have him on ABC to expose Greenspan's cognitive dissonance. Posted by: Frank | Apr 5, 2010 2:37:54 PM Please encourage a debate between Peter Schiff and Alan Greensoan. Posted by: Dan | Apr 5, 2010 2:18:12 PM Please put Peter Schiff on ABC! Posted by: Becky | Apr 5, 2010 1:53:09 PM Mr Greenspan appears stuck in a time warp, considering everything to have been fine before 2008. He selectively ignores his own and the country's past history of monetary abuse at the root of the problems. The cause of the 95% reduction of value in the US dollar since the formation of the Federal Reserve system can be laid at their doorstep. Posted by: seine | Apr 5, 2010 1:26:43 PM "...so how could the financial crisis - which was a result of interventionist policies..."
Posted by: Skip | Apr 5, 2010 1:17:28 PM
We will never be able to correct any of this until we are able to criticize ourselves first. Every one of us can do more and should have done more. Instead of using words for constructive meaningful argument and legislation, we use words as sticks and stones to break bones. God was there and he is watching right now, and our failure to be able to do the right thing comes from a lack of faith. Religions have been used as a crutch. The young people of today are going to have to decide between entitlements and freedom. God only offers one. Peace is only offered by Him as well. Farming has taught me that even on the worst day, good things still happen. Soon we will all experience this. As always, Love to all Lighthouse Dave Peace and Family Posted by: LighthouseDavepeace | Apr 5, 2010 1:15:14 PM Alan G - no friends at Goldman? They put on a short housing trade via CDS that netted them $4bn (separate from loading AIG with their subprime exposure). You are hanging out with the wrong crowd Alan. Also, Peter Schiff was the only investor on the major networks talking about what everyone already knew - that housing was a bubble. He did lay out the scenario well and I'd love to see him debate Greenspan. Schiff would crush him. Posted by: TC | Apr 5, 2010 1:14:20 PM I think the public deserves to hear from one of the "exceptionally adroit" people that Greenspan confesses actually predicted the housing/credit bubble. PETER SCHIFF could offer clear answers on this very important issue. If we don't collectively reach some honest conclusions on this we are doomed to repeat! Posted by: Max | Apr 5, 2010 1:14:13 PM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRbf_6QKR98 Here's an official challenge to Alan Greenspan from Peter Schiff where Schiff offers to pay his "speaking fee" just for the opportunity to debate him. Greenspan is a fraud. If he wasn't, he would have no problem debating someone who did publicly predict exactly what has happened over the past few years in regards to our financial crisis. Schiff vs Greenspan 2010. ABC, Make it happen. DR Posted by: Dan | Apr 5, 2010 1:09:01 PM Let Peter Schiff debate Greenspan! It'll be a lot of fun! Posted by: Laurent Parmentier | Apr 5, 2010 1:06:57 PM Get Peter Schiff to debate this guy. He would own him so much, I am so tried of government intervention in the market. Alan Greenspan is a fraud he has no respect. Wait maybe he can help helicopter Ben and Obama to re-inflate another bubble. Posted by: Jamal | Apr 5, 2010 12:51:54 PM You guys have a non-ending train of "government is the solution" talking heads on. I'm sick of the likes of Axelrod, Reich and the like. Please put on a alternate point of view. That doesn't mean McCain. If you put Schiff on I'll even wade through your morass of online commercials to watch it multiple times on your web site. Posted by: Norm | Apr 5, 2010 12:26:36 PM Rand was for a free market and free society. The US doesn't have a free market, so how could the financial crisis - which was a result of interventionist policies, and Austrian Business Cycle Theory aptly explains - be a result of the free market? Makes no sense. Posted by: Jack | Apr 5, 2010 12:20:35 PM Get Peter Schiff to debate Alan Greenspan. Seconded. Posted by: Brendan | Apr 5, 2010 12:07:48 PM Alan Greenspan is a fraud. I would love to see a debate between him and a REAL capitalist like Peter Schiff. Posted by: Elmas | Apr 5, 2010 11:41:40 AM What is this a joke? USA has laissez-faire capitalism? Since when? The free market can't police themselves if risk is removed. That is why failure is always an option. It's keeps the markets regulated. Alan Greenspan is the worst Fed Chairman ever probably. The man is a fraud, and ABC should stop putting this guy on, as he is obviously lying, or doesn't know what he is talking about. Posted by: Samuel Morales Jr. | Apr 5, 2010 11:17:01 AM ABC you should contact Peter Schiff for either a debate with Greenspan or allow Peter to publicly reply to some of the statements Greenspan made in this interview. There are many of us out here that feel a lot more could be added to this discussion. Thanks! Posted by: Robert N | Apr 5, 2010 11:13:48 AM It sounds like Greenspan wants to blame the disaster on group-think instead of misplaced faith in flimsy economic philosophy. That's what happens when you ask one of the architects. He accepts responsibility for incorrectly assessing the risk, but how could so many people be so dumb? I think it's a much more likely explanation that once they got the bubble growing and the gravy-train rolling nobody had the guts to step forward and try and rein it in before it crashed. They weren't incorrectly assessing risk, they were taking on excessive risk. With everything the same why should we expect it to be any different if there's a next time? Will the next generation of businessmen and investors be so fundamentally different in character? The concept of self-policing free markets is a joke as long as they're dominated by unchecked Greed. Posted by: Skip | Apr 5, 2010 10:48:59 AM ABC - You can set up a PPV Event. I'd pay $19.99 for this. Alan vs Peter. Highest rated economic event in TV history. Krugman your next!!! Posted by: TXcarlosTX | Apr 5, 2010 10:44:19 AM Post a comment Five Filters featured article: Chilcot Inquiry. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| Red Sox philosophy a novel one in these parts - Worcester Telegram & Gazette Posted: 05 Apr 2010 01:28 AM PDT
It was the evening of March 1, 1996, and the Red Sox were playing Boston College in their annual spring training opener at City of Palms Park in Fort Myers, Fla.
Sox general manager Dan Duquette, fresh off his team's startling AL East title in 1995, was talking baseball with former Boston manager and BC alum Joe Morgan. Morgan wondered about the Red Sox's balance — maybe they didn't have enough pitching and defense. Thinking about a batting order that included Mo Vaughn, Jose Canseco and John Valentin, one that would eventually account for 209 home runs, Duquette said his team would have enough offense to overcome any weakness it might have in the field or on the mound. "You'd think so," Morgan replied, "but it doesn't work that way." By April 21, the Vaughn-Canseco Red Sox were 3-15 and 8 games out of first place in the AL East. By the time they got things into balance, their season was over. Things have pivoted 180 degrees in 14 years. The 2010 Sox seem to have the pitching and defense. Will that be good enough to overcome what looks like a lack of offense? We'll see if it works that way. These Sox are a transition team. They will have a different No. 1 catcher, a different starting third baseman, and a different starting shortstop (as usual). Their regular center fielder has moved to left field, replaced by a guy who made his major league debut four years before Duquette and Morgan had their spring training conversation. The 2010 Sox are also a very good best-case-scenario team. If Adrian Beltre hits like he once did, if Marco Scutaro hits like he did last year, if David Ortiz can regain his power, and if Mike Cameron isn't too old, Boston will have an excellent season, since it definitely will be good defensively and most likely will have strong pitching. But because there are so many question marks, this year's Sox head into the season with lower expectations than most of the Theo Epstein-era teams. That may turn out to be a good thing, since Boston teams have often done well when little was expected of them. The 1967 Impossible Dream Red Sox finished in ninth place the year before, the '75 Sox followed the worst fold in franchise history, the '86 Sox were one year removed from an 81-81 record, and the '95 AL East champs were Boston's first winning team in three years. History is what you want to make of it, and the Red Sox are coming off a season in which they were swept in the first round of the playoffs by the Angels. Before 2009, the last time that happened was in 2005, when the White Sox did it, and the '06 Sox failed to make the playoffs. Then again, when Boston won the 2004 World Series, it was three years until the next championship in 2007. Three years from '07 equals 2010. As part of their transition season, the Sox will probably have to deal with a reduced role for Ortiz, and in 2009 already began to deal with a reduced role for Jason Varitek. Unless Ortiz turns back the clock, he will get fewer at-bats, especially against lefties. And with Victor Martinez starting the year as the No. 1 catcher, the Sox will find out if their pitching problems in '09 with him behind the plate, as opposed to Varitek, were a matter of Varitek just being a better catcher, or Martinez not having Varitek's experience with the staff. It was a wash anyway. The Sox had a team average of .264 and an ERA of 4.10 before Martinez arrived last year. It was .279 and 4.79 after he got to Boston. The bottom line — winning — was almost identical. The Sox were 60-42 (.588) before Martinez and 35-25 (.583) after. The Red Sox don't aim for perfection. They aim for consistent excellence. They want to win 95 games a year and make the playoffs 8 of every 10 years. In essence, they are card counters, and it has worked very well for them since Epstein took over as general manager. This may be one of those years, though, when the house holds the best cards.
Five Filters featured article: Chilcot Inquiry. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Philosophy - Bing News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment