click links in text for more info
SUMMARY / RELATED TOPICS

Relativism

Relativism is the idea that views are relative to differences in perception and consideration. There is no objective truth according to relativism. Moral relativism encompasses the differences in moral judgments among cultures. Truth relativism is the doctrine that there are no absolute truths, i.e. that truth is always relative to some particular frame of reference, such as a language or a culture. Descriptive relativism seeks to describe the differences among cultures and people without evaluation, while normative relativism evaluates the morality or truthfulness of views within a given framework. Anthropological relativism refers to a methodological stance, in which the researcher suspends his or her own cultural prejudice while trying to understand beliefs or behaviors in their contexts; this has become known as methodological relativism, concerns itself with avoiding ethnocentrism or the application of one's own cultural standards to the assessment of other cultures. This is the basis of the so-called "emic" and "etic" distinction, in which: An emic or insider account of behavior is a description of a society in terms that are meaningful to the participant or actor's own culture.

An etic or outsider account is a description of a society by an observer, in terms that can be applied to other cultures. Philosophical relativism, in contrast, asserts that the truth of a proposition depends on the metaphysical, or theoretical frame, or the instrumental method, or the context in which the proposition is expressed, or on the person, groups, or culture who interpret the proposition. Methodological relativism and philosophical relativism can exist independently from one another, but most anthropologists base their methodological relativism on that of the philosophical variety; the concept of relativism has importance both for philosophers and for anthropologists in another way. In general, anthropologists engage in descriptive relativism, whereas philosophers engage in normative relativism, although there is some overlap. Descriptive relativism assumes that certain cultural groups have different modes of thought, standards of reasoning, so forth, it is the anthropologist's task to describe, but not to evaluate the validity of these principles and practices of a cultural group.

It is possible for an anthropologist in his or her fieldwork to be a descriptive relativist about some things that concern the philosopher but not about others. However, the descriptive relativist's empirical claims about epistemic principles, moral ideals and the like are countered by anthropological arguments that such things are universal, much of the recent literature on these matters is explicitly concerned with the extent of, evidence for, cultural or moral or linguistic or human universals; the fact that the various species of descriptive relativism are empirical claims, may tempt the philosopher to conclude that they are of little philosophical interest, but there are several reasons why this isn't so. First, some philosophers, notably Kant, argue that certain sorts of cognitive differences between human beings are impossible, so such differences could never be found to obtain in fact, an argument that places a priori limits on what empirical inquiry could discover and on what versions of descriptive relativism could be true.

Second, claims about actual differences between groups play a central role in some arguments for normative relativism. The anthropologist's descriptive account of relativism helps to separate the fixed aspects of human nature from those that can vary, so a descriptive claim that some important aspect of experience or thought does vary across groups of human beings tells us something important about human nature and the human condition. Normative relativism concerns normative or evaluative claims that modes of thought, standards of reasoning, or the like are only right or wrong relative to a framework. ` Normative' is meant in a general sense. This does not mean, of course, that framework-relative correctness or truth is always clear, the first challenge being to explain what it amounts to in any given case. Normative relativism therefore implies that things are not true in themselves, but only have truth values relative to broader frameworks. (Many normative ethical relativist arguments run from premises about ethics to conclusions that assert the relativity of truth values, bypassing general claims about the nature of truth, b

Long Bridge (Potomac River)

Long Bridge is the common name used for a series of three bridges connecting Washington, D. C. to Arlington, Virginia over the Potomac River. The first was built in 1808 for foot and stagecoach traffic. Bridges in the vicinity were replaced several times in the 19th century; the current bridge was built in 1904 and modified in 1942. It is used only for railroad traffic. In 2019 Virginia announced plans to build a new rail bridge parallel to the existing one to double its capacity; the first bridge at this location was a wooden toll bridge. The Washington Bridge Company was authorized on February 5, 1808 by the District Commissioners and an Act of Congresswith the purpose of shortening the distance in the country's main mail route. President Thomas Jefferson signed it into law soon after, it was built to provide foot and stagecoach traffic an access route to Washington City. It was the second bridge to cross the Potomac in the District of Columbia, following a 1797 span at a narrower crossing near Little Falls, upstream of Georgetown, at the site of the present Chain Bridge.

At the time it opened, in official documents, it was referred to as Washington Bridge, Potomac Bridge or "the Bridge" but by the 1830s it began to be called the "long Bridge across the Potomac" to distinguish it from the bridge near Little Falls. Over time, the colloquial name was shortened to just "Long Bridge". Built as a timber pile structure with two draw spans, it connected the city of Washington to Alexandria County; the bridge opened to traffic on May 20, 1809 and, at 5000 feet long or a mile including the abutments, was the longest bridge in the United States at the time. On the city of Washington side, it landed at the end of Maryland Avenue SW near 14th Street SW. Before the bridge was built, only a ferryboat connected the city of Washington and Alexandria County; the ferryboat ride made for a treacherous crossing when the river froze as the river was wide. It was 36 feet wide, with 29 feet for the broad carriageway in the center; the rest was for walkways on each side, protected from center traffic by a guardrail.

It was built on 201 piers, with 20 lamps, a 25' wide draw on one side and a 35' wide one on the other. A 100-foot-long wharf was constructed near one of the draws. A board of commissioners oversaw the subscription of stocks to raise capital for the build, not to exceed $200,000, equal to $3,201,250 today. A toll was put in place with prices set by Congress and posted at the bridge for up to 60 years after opening: Foot passenger: 6 1/4 cents Person and horse: 18 3/4 cents Chaise, sulky or riding chair: 37 1/2 cents Coach, stage-wagon, phaeton or curricle or other riding carriage: 100 cents with an additional 12 1/2 cents for each horse or other animal pulling the carriage Four-wheeled cart, dray or other two-wheeled carriage of burthen: 18 3/4 cents with an additional 12 1/2 cents for each horse or other animal pulling the cart Sheep or swine: 3 cents each Horse or neat cattle not pulling a coach or cart or with a rider: 6 1/4 cents No toll was to be collected for: Vehicles and passengers with property of the United States Troops of the United States, state, or District of Columbia marching in a body, any cannon or equipment belonging to the United StatesOn August 25, 1814, one day after the Battle of Bladensburg during the War of 1812, the British troops burned the north end of the bridge as they entered the City of Washington.

The American troops had burnt the south end of the bridge. It was restored to service after the war, in 1816. On February 22, 1831, high water and ice carried away several spans of the bridge, leading to closure and bankruptcy of the bridge company; the following year, Congress purchased the bridge for $20,000, appropriated $60,000 to repair it. However, more funds would be needed to complete the project. On October 30, 1835, the bridge was reopened with his Cabinet present, it was to remain in its current state until the mid-1850s. In March of 1847, the Virginia Assembly voted to formally accept the retrocession of Alexandria and Arlington, thus the south approach of the bridge became part of Virginia. After 1835, the B&O Railroad was provided access to Washington City through the Northeast quadrant. There were several attempts to bring the railroad to Alexandria City; the A&W Railroad connected the B&O Railroad New Jersey Avenue Station located on Capitol Hill to the Long Bridge on the north shore by 1855 and in Alexandria by the end of 1857.

However, the Virginia legislature had banned any other connections and tracks were not placed on the bridge. Goods were offloaded, transported over the bridge in omnibuses over the bridge and reloaded on the other side.' In 1860, the President of the B&O company had requested, been denied, permission to reinforce or replace the bridge. With the beginning of the Civil War in 1861, the secession of the state of Virginia on May 23, 1861, the value of the bridge was made evident. On May 25, 1861, 13,000 Union troops moved in to take control of the bridge along with Alexandria and its railroad. Under the command of Colonel John G. Barnard, Fort Jackson was built to guard the bridge to avoid the passage of spies and invasion by the Confederates with four cannons present in the fort. Competition between railroads became sharper

Liam O'Sullivan

Liam O'Sullivan was a Scottish football player, who played as a defender for Hibernian and Brechin City. O'Sullivan achieved success in youth football with Hutchison Vale, signed a five-year contract with Hibernian after leaving school in 1997. In May 2000, he joined Icelandic top division club Keflavík on loan, he went on to play seven league matches for the club, before being recalled by Hibernian manager Alex McLeish two months later. O'Sullivan played in the Scottish Football League for both Clydebank and Brechin City during 2000, but suffered a serious knee injury; as he was battling to recover from that injury, O'Sullivan was found dead in a friend's house in Haddington. It was suspected that a drugs overdose, including ecstasy, was the cause of death. Liam O'Sullivan at Soccerbase

NIDDK Office of Technology Transfer and Development

The Technology Advancement Office is an office within the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, of the National Institutes of Health, an agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services. TAO facilitates research collaborations and the exchange of research materials by use of a Material Transfer Agreement or other types of technology transfer agreements between NIDDK and the global scientific community by developing research partnerships. Unlike most technology transfer and development offices, TAO helps NIDDK inventors advance their technologies through preclinical development. Technology transfer is the process by which basic science research and fundamental discoveries are developed into practical and commercially relevant applications and products. TAO is committed to transferring its technologies and research resources to external organizations for further research, development and/or commercialization to create biomedical products and services that benefit public health.

TAO's staff members have been drawn from industry as well as other external organizations to provide a remarkable variety of skills to assist potential research partners. TAO staff evaluate and manage invention portfolios, oversee patent prosecution, negotiate licensing agreements and review cooperative research agreements; the function of technology transfer is a process by which technology developed in one organization, in any one particular area and purpose, is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. Put, NIDDK TAO facilitates the movement of technology from the federal laboratories to industry and to state and local governments in order to maximize results of ongoing Federal research endeavors; the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 established the foundation for technology transfer within the Federal government. This law recognized the need for enhanced information dissemination from the Federal government to private industry, it required Federal laboratories to take a more active role in cooperation with potential users of federally developed technology.

Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 gives federal contractors and cooperative agreement funding recipients the option to retain ownership rights to inventions they create as part of a federally sponsored research project and profit from commercializing them. The act protects the government’s interests by requiring that federal agencies and their authorized funding recipients retain a license to practice the invention for government purposes, it granted universities the clear right to pursue patents on government-funded research. The Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 provides the legal basis for and encourages shared use of Government facilities and resources with the private sector to aid in the commercialization of new products and services; this act established the Cooperative Research and Development Agreement which encourages such research and development and it gave organizations the option to license their product. The goal of the NIDDK research is to expand the basic scientific knowledge pertaining to health.

Scientists submit manuscripts pertaining to their advances and discoveries to a variety of professional publications. This assures distribution of taxpayer-funded research results; the research yields a potential new therapeutic, preventative treatment, or diagnostic product. NIDDK technologies may be patented if this it facilitates or attracts investment by partners for further research and commercial development. A patent is important if development requires approval of the Food and Drug Administration. TAO encourages the development by industry for public use and benefit of inventions from technology resulting from NIDDK and collaborative research. One of TAO's important functions is to raise visibility of the Institutes inventions by seeking out possible partnerships to further commercial development in order to benefit public health. Commercialization is one of the most effective methods of transferring technologies. TAO assesses technical and marketing development, manufacturing requirements and financial feasibility in order to maximize a product’s or invention’s potential.

TAO evaluates perceived need for the product, size of potential market, expected sales, advantages over competing products, the cost of promoting the product. Royalties are a form of income, received by the inventor and the Institute as a result of a license granted to a collaborator to develop, manufacture or otherwise use or produce the invention for sale or distribution; the royalty rate a percentage of sales of the invention, is negotiated as part of the license agreement between NIDDK and the licensee. NIDDK conducts and supports research on many chronic and costly diseases affecting public health: diabetes, nutrition, digestive disorders and metabolic disorders, hematologic diseases, kidney and urologic diseases, as well as complications from HIV infection. NIDDK’s biomedical research efforts could be characterized as “internal medicine”-oriented as they relate to the medical specialties of endocrinology, hematology, infectious disease, nephrology. NIDDK employs clinicians who manage clinical research studies on these various diseases.

NIDDK employs medicinal chemists, who conduct research to synthesize and evaluate both macro-molecules and small molecules, including agonists and antagonists to G protein-coupled receptors such as Thyroid-stimulating hormone, 5-Hydroxytryptamine receptors. In addition, NIDDK employs biologists and process scientists who create a vast array of technologies ranging from cell lines to transgenic

Julian Cooper

Julian Marc Cooper is a British academic, specialist on Russian economic matters, including Russian defence budget and military expenditure. Julian Cooper graduated from the University of Bath with a BSc degree in economics in 1968, he graduated from the Department of Industrial Economics and Business Studies and the Centre for Russian and East European Studies at Birmingham University with a PhD in 1975 for a thesis on "The development of the Soviet machine tool industry, 1917–1941". Cooper was director of the Centre for Russian, East European Studies at Birmingham University from 1990 to 2001, from 2007 to 2008, he is professor emeritus at Birmingham University. Professor Cooper was co-director of the Centre for East European Language-Based Area Studies from 2006 to 2011, he is an associate fellow of the Russia and Eurasia programme at the Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs. Cooper has advised successive British governments, the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, US governmental agencies on Russian economic matters.

He has advised international organizations such as NATO, the European Commission, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the International Labour Organization, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Professor Cooper was appointed an Officer of the Order of the British Empire for services to Soviet and Russian economic studies in the 2012 New Year Honours in the Diplomatic Service and Overseas list

Lehmstedt–Tanasescu reaction

The Lehmstedt–Tanasescu reaction is a method in organic chemistry for the organic synthesis of acridone derivatives from a 2-nitrobenzaldehyde and an arene compound: The reaction is named after two chemists who devoted part of their careers to research into this synthetic method, the German chemist Kurt Lehmstedt and the Romanian chemist Ion Tănăsescu. Variations to the reaction name are the Lehmsted–Tănăsescu reaction, Lehmsted–Tănăsescu acridone synthesis and Lehmsted–Tanasescu acridone synthesis. In the first step of the reaction mechanism the precursor molecule 2-nitrobenzaldehyde 4 is protonated by sulfuric acid, to intermediate 5, followed by an electrophilic attack to benzene; the resulting benzhydrol 6 cyclisizes to 7 and to compound 8. Treatment of this intermediate with nitrous acid leads to the N-nitroso acridone 11 via intermediates 9 en 10; the N-nitroso group is removed by an acid in the final step. The procedure is an example of a one-pot synthesis