Categories
Philosophy

Human Dignity

The concept of human dignity is the belief that all people hold a special value that’s tied solely to their humanity. It has nothing to do with their class, race, gender, religion, abilities, or any other factor other than them being human.

Dignity is the right of a person to be valued and respected for their own sake and to be treated ethically. It is of significance in morality, ethics, law, and politics as an extension of the Enlightenment-era concepts of inherent, inalienable rights. The term may also be used to describe personal conduct, as in “behaving with dignity”. The English word “dignity”, attested from the early 13th century, comes from Latin Dignitas (worthiness) by way of French dignité. It aligned much closer with someone’s “merit.” If someone was “dignified,” it meant they had a high status.

There are a number of competing conceptions of human dignity taking their meaning from the cosmological, anthropological, or political context in which human dignity is used. Human dignity can denote the special elevation of the human species, the special potentiality associated with rational humanity, or the basic entitlements of each individual.  There are, by extension, dramatically different normative uses to which the concept can be put. It is connected, variously, to ideas of sanctity, autonomy, personhood, flourishing, and self-respect, and human dignity produces, at different times, strict prohibitions and empowerment of the individual. It can also, potentially, be used to express the core commitments of liberal political philosophy as well as precisely those duty-based obligations to self and others that communitarian philosophers consider to be systematically neglected by liberal political philosophy.

The original meaning of the word “dignity” established that someone deserved respect because of their status. In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that concept was turned on its head. Article 1 states: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.” Suddenly, dignity wasn’t something that people earned because of their class, race, or another advantage. It is something all humans are born with. Simply by being human, all people deserve respect. Human rights naturally spring from that dignity.

English-speakers often use the word “dignity” in proscriptive and cautionary ways: for example, in politics, it can be used to critique the treatment of oppressed and vulnerable groups and peoples, but it has also been applied to cultures and sub-cultures, to religious beliefs and ideals, and even to animals used for food or research.

“Dignity” also has descriptive meanings pertaining to the worth of human beings. In general, the term has various functions and meanings depending on how the term is used and on the context. In ordinary modern usage, the word denotes “respect” and “status”, and it is often used to suggest that someone is not receiving a proper degree of respect, or even that they are failing to treat themselves with proper self-respect. There is also a long history of special philosophical use of this term.

However, it is rarely defined outright in political, legal, and scientific discussions. International proclamations have thus far left dignity undefined, and scientific commentators, such as those arguing against genetic research and algeny, cite dignity as a reason but are ambiguous about its application

As a consequence of these antagonistic currents of thought, philosophical analysis of human dignity cannot be separated from wider debates in moral, political, and legal philosophy. Nor can a certain level of selective reconstruction be avoided. The genealogy of the concept has been traced, tendentiously, through the whole history of Western, and sometimes non-Western, philosophical thought; such genealogies are not always illuminating at a conceptual level. More specifically, it is a desideratum of a philosophical analysis of human dignity that the concept can be shown to have sufficient clarity to make a useful contribution to modern philosophical debate.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted in 1966, continued this understanding. The preamble reads that “…these rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person.” This belief goes hand in hand with the universality of human rights. In the past, only people made dignified by their status were given respect and rights. By redefining dignity as something inherent to everyone, it also establishes universal rights.

Human dignity can be violated in multiple ways. The main categories of violations are: Humiliation, Instrumentalization or objectification, Degradation, and Dehumanization. The concept of human dignity isn’t limited to human rights. In fact, for centuries, religions around the world have recognized a form of human dignity as we now understand it. Most (if not all) religions teach that humans are essentially equal for one reason or another.

In Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, it’s because humans were created in the image of God, becoming children of God. Dignity is something that a divine being gives to people. In Catholic social teaching, the phrase “Human Dignity” is used specifically to support the church’s belief that every human life is sacred. This defines the denomination’s dedication to social issues like ending the death penalty. In the 20th century, dignity became an issue for physicians and medical researchers. It has been invoked in questions of the bioethics of human genetic engineering, human cloning, and end-of-life care (particularly in such situations as the Terri Schiavo case, a controversial situation in which life support was withdrawn from a woman diagnosed in a persistent vegetative state).

 

Information Sources:

  1. humanrightscareers.com
  2. iep.utm.edu
  3. wikipedia
Categories
Philosophy

Types Of Humanism

Humanism is a philosophy, world view, or life stance based on the naturalism-the conviction that the universe or nature is all that exists or is real. Humanism serves, for many humanists, some of the psychological and social functions of a religion, but without belief in deities, transcendental entities, miracles, life after death, and the supernatural. Humanists seek to understand the universe by using science and its methods of critical inquiry-logical reasoning, empirical evidence, and skeptical evaluation of conjectures and conclusions-to obtain reliable knowledge.

The word “humanism” is ultimately derived from the Latin concept humanitas. It entered English in the nineteenth century. However, historians agree that the concept predates the label invented to describe it, encompassing the various meanings ascribed to humanitas, which included both benevolence toward one’s fellow humans and the values imparted by bonae litterae or humane learning (literally “good letters”).

Humanitas meant the development of human virtue, in all its forms, to its fullest extent. The term thus implied not only such qualities as are associated with the modern word humanity understanding, benevolence, compassion, mercy but also such more assertive characteristics as fortitude, judgment, prudence, eloquence, and even love of honor. Consequently, the possessor of humanitas could not be merely a sedentary and isolated philosopher or man of letters but was of necessity a participant inactive life. Just as action without insight was held to be aimless and barbaric, insight without action was rejected as barren and imperfect. Humanitas called for a fine balance of action and contemplation, a balance born not of compromise but of complementarity.

In the second century AD, a Latin grammarian, Aulus Gellius (c. 125–c. 180), complained:

Those who have spoken Latin and have used the language correctly do not give to the word humanitas the meaning which it is commonly thought to have, namely, what the Greeks call φιλανθρωπία (philanthropy), signifying a kind of friendly spirit and good-feeling towards all men without distinction; but they gave to humanitas the force of the Greek παιδεία (paideia); that is, what we call eruditionem institutionemque in bonas artes, or “education and training in the liberal arts”. Those who earnestly desire and seek after these are most highly humanized. For the desire to pursue of that kind of knowledge, and the training is given by it, has been granted to humanity alone of all the animals, and for that reason, it is termed humanitas, or “humanity”.

Gellius says that in his day humanitas is commonly used as a synonym for philanthropy or kindness and benevolence toward one’s fellow human beings. Gellius maintains that this common usage is wrong, and that model writers of Latin, such as Cicero and others, used the word only to mean what we might call “humane” or “polite” learning, or the Greek equivalent Paideia. Yet in seeking to restrict the meaning of humanitas to literary education this way, Gellius was not advocating a retreat from political engagement into some ivory tower, though it might look like that to us. He himself was involved in public affairs. According to legal historian Richard Bauman, Gellius was a judge as well as a grammarian and was an active participant the great contemporary debate on harsh punishments that accompanied the legal reforms of Antoninus Pius (one these reforms, for example, was that a prisoner was not to be treated as guilty before being tried). “By assigning pride of place to Paideia in his comment on the etymology of humanitas, Gellius implies that the trained mind is best equipped to handle the problems troubling society.”

Humanism says people can find purpose in life and maximize their long-term happiness by developing their talents and using those talents for the service of humanity. Humanists believe that this approach to life is more productive and leads to a deeper and longer-lasting satisfaction than a hedonistic pursuit of material or sensual pleasures that soon fade. While service to others is a major focus of Humanism, recreation and relaxation are not ignored, for these too are necessary for long-term health and happiness. The key is moderation in all things. Humanism considers the universe to be the result of an extremely long and complex evolution under the immutable laws of nature. Humanists view this natural world as wondrous and precious, and as offering limitless opportunities for exploration, fascination, creativity, companionship, and joy.

Actually, the word “humanism” has a number of meanings, and because there are so many different meanings it can be quite confusing if we don’t know what kind of humanism someone is talking about.

  • Literary Humanism is a devotion to the humanities or literary culture. Renaissance Humanism is the spirit of learning that developed at the end of the Middle Ages with the revival of classical letters and a renewed confidence in the ability of human beings to determine for themselves truth and falsehood.
  • Cultural Humanism is the rational and empirical tradition that originated largely in ancient Greece and Rome, evolved throughout European history, and now constitutes a basic part of the Western approach to science, political theory, ethics, and law.
  • Philosophical Humanism is any outlook or way of life centered on human needs and interests. Subcategories of this type include the two following.
  • Christian Humanism is defined by Webster’s Third New International Dictionary as “a philosophy advocating the self-fulfillment of man within the framework of Christian principles.” This more human-oriented faith is largely a product of the Renaissance and is a part of what made up Renaissance humanism.
  • Modern Humanism, also called Naturalistic Humanism, Scientific Humanism, Ethical Humanism, and Democratic Humanism is defined by one of its leading proponents, Corollas Lamont, as “a naturalistic philosophy that rejects all supernaturalism and relies primarily upon reason and science, democracy and human compassion.” Modern Humanism has a dual origin, both secular and religious, and these constitute its sub-categories.
  • Religious Humanism emerged out of Ethical Culture, Unitarianism, and Universalism. Today, many Unitarian-Universalist congregations and all Ethical Culture societies describe themselves as humanist in the modern sense. The most critical irony in dealing with Modern Humanism is the inability of its supporters to agree on whether or not this world view is religious. The Secular Humanists believe it is a philosophy, where the Religious Humanists obviously believe it is a religion. This has been going on since the early years of the century where the Secular and Religious traditions combined and made Modern Humanism.  Secular and Religious Humanists both share the same world views as shown by the signing of the Humanist Manifestos I and II. The signers of the Manifestos were both Secular and Religious Humanists. To serve personal needs, Religious Humanism offers a basis for moral values, an inspiring set of ideals, methods for dealing with life’s harsher realities, a rationale for living life joyously, and an overall sense of purpose. To serve social needs, Humanist religious communities offer a sense of belonging, an institutional setting for the moral education of children, special holidays shared with likeminded people, a unique ceremonial life, the performance of ideologically consistent rites of passage (weddings, child-welcoming, coming of age celebrations, funerals, etc.), an opportunity for affirmation of one’s philosophy of life, and a historical context for one’s ideas. Religious Humanists maintain that most human beings have personal a social need that can only be met by humanism. They do not feel that one should have to make a choice between meeting these needs in a traditional faith context versus not meeting them at all. Individuals who cannot feel at home in traditional religions should be able to find a home in non-traditional religion. A popular example of Secular Humanists views of the world was said by author Salman Rushdie on ABC’s “Nightline” on 13th February 1989.

In short, humanism called for the comprehensive reform of culture, the transfiguration of what humanists termed the passive and ignorant society of the “dark” ages into a new order that would reflect and encourage the grandest human potentialities. Humanism had an evangelical dimension: it sought to project humanitas from the individual into the state at large.

The word “humanism” as a philosophy centered on humankind (as opposed to institutionalized religion) was also being used in Germany by the Left Hegelians, Arnold Ruge, and Karl Marx, who were critical of the close involvement of the church in the German government. There has been a persistent confusion between the several uses of the terms: philanthropic humanists look to what they consider their antecedents in critical thinking and human-centered philosophy among the Greek philosophers and the great figures of Renaissance history; and scholarly humanists stress the linguistic and cultural disciplines needed to understand and interpret these philosophers and artists.

The Secular Humanist has been known for defiance, defiance that dates back to ancient Greece. Humanist themes that are shown in Greek mythology are rarely ever shown in the mythologies of other cultures. And they are certainly not shown in modern religion. The best example from Greek mythology is the character of Prometheus. Prometheus stands out because he was idolized by ancient Greeks as the one who defied Zeus. He stole the fire of the gods and brought it down to earth. He was punished and still, he continued his defiance despite the torture. The next time we see a Promethean character in mythology it is Lucifer in John Milton’s Paradise Lost. But now he is the devil. Whoever defies God must be evil. That seems to be a given of traditional religion. But the Greeks didn’t agree. To them, Zeus, for all his power, could still be mistaken. This exemplifies the Secular Humanists tradition of skepticism. Just like every religion has it’s sage, so does Secular Humanism. All other sages created rules or laws save the Secular Humanists sage, Socrates. Socrates gave us a method of questioning the rules of others.

In modern times, humanist movements are typically non-religious movements aligned with secularism, and today humanism may refer to a nontheistic life stance centered on human agency and looking to science rather than revelation from a supernatural source to understand the world.

Humanism advocates the extension of participatory democracy and the expansion of the open society, standing for human rights and social justice. Free of supernaturalism, it recognizes human beings as a part of nature and holds that values-be they religious, ethical, social, or political-have their source in human experience and culture. Humanism thus derives the goals of life from human need and interest rather than from theological or ideological abstractions and asserts that humanity must take responsibility for its own destiny.

 

Information Sources:

  1. schoolworkhelper.net
  2. americanhumanist.org
  3. britannica.com
  4. wikipedia
Categories
Philosophy

Humanism

Humanism is a rational philosophy informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by compassion. Affirming the dignity of each human being, it supports the maximization of individual liberty and opportunity consonant with social and planetary responsibility. It advocates the extension of participatory democracy and the expansion of the open society, standing for human rights and social justice.

The meaning of the term ‘humanism’ has fluctuated according to the successive intellectual movements which have identified with it. Generally, however, humanism refers to a perspective that affirms some notion of human freedom and progress. It views humans as solely responsible for the promotion and development of individuals and emphasizes a concern for humans in relation to the world.

In modern times, humanist movements are typically non-religious movements aligned with secularism, and today humanism may refer to a nontheistic life stance centered on human agency and looking to science rather than revelation from a supernatural source to understand the world.

Humanism, a system of education and mode of inquiry that originated in northern Italy during the 13th and 14th centuries and later spread through continental Europe and England. The term is alternatively applied to a variety of Western beliefs, methods, and philosophies that place central emphasis on the human realm. Also known as Renaissance humanism, the historical program was so broadly and profoundly influential that it is one of the chief reasons why the Renaissance is viewed as a distinct historical period. Indeed, though the word Renaissance is of more recent coinage, the fundamental idea of that period as one of renewal and reawakening is humanistic in origin. But humanism sought its own philosophical bases in far earlier times and, moreover, continued to exert some of its power long after the end of the Renaissance.

It is a democratic and ethical life stance which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethics based on human and other natural values in a spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities. It is not theistic, and it does not accept supernatural views of reality.

Humanists believe that this is the only life of which we have certain knowledge and that we owe it to ourselves and others to make it the best life possible for ourselves and all with whom we share this fragile planet. A belief that when people are free to think for themselves, using reason and knowledge as their tools, they are best able to solve this world’s problems. An appreciation of the art, literature, music, and crafts that are our heritage from the past and of the creativity that, if nourished, can continuously enrich our lives. Humanism is, in sum, a philosophy of those in love with life. Humanists take responsibility for their own lives and relish the adventure of being part of new discoveries, seeking new knowledge, exploring new options. Instead of finding solace in prefabricated answers to the great questions of life, humanists enjoy the open-endedness of a quest and the freedom of discovery that this entails.

The word “humanism” is ultimately derived from the Latin concept humanitas. It entered English in the nineteenth century. However, historians agree that the concept predates the label invented to describe it, encompassing the various meanings ascribed to humanitas, which included both benevolence toward one’s fellow humans and the values imparted by bonae litterae or humane learning (literally “good letters”).

In the second century AD, a Latin grammarian, Aulus Gellius (c. 125–c. 180), complained:

Those who have spoken Latin and have used the language correctly do not give to the word humanitas the meaning which it is commonly thought to have, namely, what the Greeks call φιλανθρωπία (philanthropy), signifying a kind of friendly spirit and good-feeling towards all men without distinction; but they gave to humanitas the force of the Greek παιδεία (paideia); that is, what we call eruditionem institutionemque in bonas artes, or “education and training in the liberal arts”. Those who earnestly desire and seek after these are most highly humanized. For the desire to pursue of that kind of knowledge, and the training is given by it, has been granted to humanity alone of all the animals, and for that reason, it is termed humanitas, or “humanity”.

It was first employed (as humanismus) by 19th-century German scholars to designate the Renaissance emphasis on classical studies in education. These studies were pursued and endorsed by educators known, as early as the late 15th century, as umanisti that is, professors or students of Classical literature. The word umanisti derives from the studia humanitatis, a course of Classical studies that, in the early 15th century, consisted of grammar, poetry, rhetoric, history, and moral philosophy. The studia humanitatis were held to be the equivalent of the Greek paideia. Their name was itself based on the Roman statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero’s concept of humanitas, an educational and political ideal that was the intellectual basis of the entire movement. Renaissance humanism in all its forms defined itself in its straining toward this ideal. No discussion of humanism, therefore, can have validity without an understanding of humanitas.

The first Humanist Manifesto was issued by a conference held at the University of Chicago in 1933. Signatories included the philosopher John Dewey, but the majority were ministers (chiefly Unitarian) and theologians. They identified humanism as an ideology that espouses reason, ethics, and social and economic justice, and they called for science to replace dogma and the supernatural as the basis of morality and decision-making.

 

Information Sources:

  1. americanhumanist.org
  2. britannica.com
  3. wikipedia
Categories
Architecture History

Architecture Of Lahore Fort, Pakistan

Lahore Fort (Punjabi and Urdu: شاہی قلعہ:  ‘Shahi Qila’, or “Royal Fort”) was originally designed to protect the Northern-Western entrance to the walled, old city of Lahore in Pakistan. It is a citadel in the city of Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan. Lahore is a historical city filled with landmarks. People can also say that Lahore carries a lot of figments from the past. Lahore has been the cultural and social hub for the subcontinent for century’s Enumerable emperor’s set foot in this city and constructed a number of grandiloquent structures that still carry the weight of history. Lahore fort is one of the pillars of this rich legacy of this city.

The fortress is located at the northern end of walled city Lahore and spreads over an area greater than 20 hectares. It contains 21 notable monuments, some of which date to the era of Emperor Akbar. The Lahore Fort is notable for having been almost entirely rebuilt in the 17th century when the Mughal Empire was at the height of its splendor and opulence.

Though the site of the Lahore Fort has been inhabited for millennia, the first record of a fortified structure at the site was in regard to an 11th-century mud-brick fort. The foundations of the modern Lahore Fort date to 1566 during the reign of Emperor Akbar, who bestowed the fort with a syncretic architectural style that featured both Islamic and Hindu motifs. Additions from the Shah Jahan period are characterized by luxurious marble with inlaid Persian floral designs, while the fort’s grand and iconic Alamgiri Gate was constructed by the last of the great Mughal Emperors, Aurangzeb, and faces the renowned Badshahi Mosque.

Spanning over 20 hectares, Lahore Fort is a magnificent treasury of 21 notable monuments dated back to Mughal Emperor Akbar. Mughal rulers had built the whole structure in 17th during the boom of Mughal’s glory and opulence. After the fall of the Mughal Empire, Lahore Fort was used as the residence of Emperor Ranjit Singh, founder of the Sikh Empire. The fort then passed to British colonialists after they annexed Punjab following their victory over the Sikhs at the Battle of Gujrat in February 1849. In 1981, the fort was listed in the UNESCO World Heritage Sites and received a generous donation for preservation and conservation.

Architecture –

The fort is located in the northern part of Lahore’s old walled city. The fort’s Alamgiri gate is part of an ensemble of buildings, which along with the Badshahi Mosque, Roshnai Gate, and Samadhi of Ranjit Singh, form a quadrangle around the Hazuri Bagh. The Minar-e-Pakistan and Iqbal Park are adjacent to the northern boundary of the fort.

Lahore Fort has two main gates for entrance 1st is Akbari Gate and the other is Alamgiri Gate. The Fort has many gardens inside, rendering serene and tranquil ambiance while strolling around. The history of the sumptuous legacy is explicitly mentioned on the different boards erected near the Akbari gate. In various eras of Mughal’s dynasty, notable structures were built in Lahore Fort along with lush gardens. The facades include Daulat Khana-e-Khas-o-Am, Jharoka-e-Darshan, Akbari Gate, Maktab Khana, Kala Burj, Lal Burj, Mosque Maryam Zamani Begum, Diwani-e-Aam, Shah Burj, Sheesh Mahal, Naulakha Pavillion, white Moti Masjid, Alamgiri Gate, and Three-doored Pavillion.

Built, damaged, demolished, rebuilt, and restored several times before being given its current form by Emperor Akbar in 1566 (when he made Lahore his capital), the Lahore Fort is the star attraction of the Old City. The fort was modified by Jehangir in 1618 and later damaged by the Sikhs and the British, although it has now been partially restored. Within it is a succession of stately palaces, halls, and gardens built by Mughal emperors Akbar, Jehangir, Shah Jahan, and Aurangzeb, comparable to and contemporary with the other great Mughal forts at Delhi and Agra in India. It’s believed that the site conceals some of Lahore’s most ancient remains.

The fort has an appealing ‘abandoned’ atmosphere (unless it’s packed with visitors) and although it’s not as elaborate as most of India’s premier forts, it’s still a fabulous place to simply wander around.

The wall of the fort is quite wide and thick. It was made to withstand the attack from any intruder that may have the intention to capture the fort. Inside the fort are buildings that housed the Kings of that era. Beautiful gardens also adorn the ambiance of the fort. These were the parks where Kings used to stroll. One can get an idea of the luxurious life the kings used to spend by viewing these marvelous structures.

The temperature at Lahore fort is very hot in summers, so bring visitors water with them and keep a headscarf wrapped at all times. It is better to hire a guide that can show visitors all the important places in the correct sequence and tell interesting trivia related to the sites inside the fort. Must see places are:

  • Akbari Gate, was built in 1566 and now called Maseeti Gate.
  • Alamgiri Gate, it opens into Hazuri bagh. Its pavilion and towers are landmarks of Lahore city itself. The pavilion, which stands in the garden known as the Hazuri Bagh, was built by Sikh Maharaja Ranjit Singh in 1818. The upper two storeys of the structure were destroyed in a lightning strike in 1932.
  • Picture Wall, a 1,450 feet (440 m) by 50 feet (15 m) wall, and it were built in Jahangir era, decorated with glazed tiles, mosaics, and fresco.
  • Sheesh Mahal, it is located within Jahangir’s Shahburj block (if you are interested in other Jahangir buildings than you can see Hiran minar) It was constructed during Shajahan’s era for the personal use of an imperial family. It really does have amazing mirror work (Ayina Kari).
  • Khilwat Khana, it was built by Shah Jahan in 1633 to the east of the Shah Burj Pavilion, and west of the Shah Jahan Quadrangle. It was the residence of the royal ladies of the court. The plinth and door frames are made of marble with a curvilinear roof.
  • Kala Burj, built-in Jahangir reign, it was used as a summer pavilion. The vaulted ceilings in the pavilion feature paintings in a European-influenced style of angels which symbolize the virtuosity of King Solomon, who is regarded as the ideal ruler in the Quran, and a ruler with whom Jahangir identified. Angels directing djinns are also painted on tiles in the ceiling, which also reference King Solomon.
  • Lal Burj, it was built during the reign of Jahangir, though finished during the reign of Shah Jahan. Octagonal in shape, the Lal Burj was used as a summer pavilion. It features primary windows that opened to the north to catch cool breezes. The interior frescoes date mostly from the Sikh era, along with the entire upper level that was also added during the Sikh era.
  • Naulakha Pavilion, its construction cost around 9 lakh rupees (that’s why the name). It serves a personal chamber located near the Sheesh Mahal.
  • Diwan-i-Khas, it was served as a hall where the Emperor would attend to matters of the state, and where courtiers and state guests were received. The hall was the site of elaborate pageantry, with processions of up to one hour long occurring before each audience session.
  • Elephant stairs, it’s where visitors tour start. Stairs are made up of bricks and wide enough to allow elephants to pass through.
  • Vantage point, from here visitors can see Minar-i-Pakistan, badshahi masjid, and Gurdwara Dehra Sahib Sri Arjun Dev.
  • The Khwabgah of Shah Jahan, it was the bedroom of Shah Jahan. It was built by Shah Jahan under the supervision of Wazir Khan in 1634 during his first visit to the city. Five sleeping chambers are aligned in a single row. The chambers feature carved marble screens and are decorated with inlaid white marble and frescoes, It is the first building built by Shah Jahan in the fort. At present, its decorations have vanished except for a trace of the marble which once might have beautified the façade.
  • Mai Jindan Haveli, it is now a site for Sikh gallery museum. Maharani Jind Kaur was the youngest wife of the first maharaja of Sikh empire Ranjit Singh.
  • Souvenir shop, interesting place to buy keychains and fridge magnates.
  • Maktab Khana (“Clerk’s Quarters”), originally known as Dawlat Khana-e-Jahangir, was constructed in 1617 under the supervision of Mamur Khan during the reign of Jahangir as a set of cloisters near the Moti Masjid. Designed by Khawaja Jahan Muhammad Dost, it was used as a passage to the Audience Hall from the palace buildings to the north. Clerks in the Maktab Khana would also record the entry of guests into the fort. It features iwans in the Persian-Timurid style in each of its four sides. Each iwan is flanked by arches.
  • Badshahi Masjid is at a walking distance from Lahore Fort. Every Pakistani must see the architectural and historical wonder at least once in a lifetime. Overall, it was a very good trip. Going there in the summer heat might not a good idea.

In 1980, the Government of Pakistan nominated the fort for inclusion in UNESCO World Heritage Site based on the criteria i, ii, and iii together with the Shalimar. In the fifth meeting session held in Sydney in October 1981, the World Heritage Site committee added both the monuments to the list. In 2000, it was listed in the UNESCO Heritage Sites and received a generous donation for preservation and conservation. Conservation works at the Picture Wall began in 2015 by the Aga Khan Trust for Culture and Walled City of Lahore Authority. Documentation of the wall using a 3D scanner was completed in July 2016, after which conservation work would start.

The whole fort is divided into two sections, the first administrative section, connected with entrance, and includes gardens of Diwan-e-khas but the second section is dedicated to royal residence and approachable from the elephant gate. Sheesh, Mahal, and small gardens are also included in this section. The exterior walls of the 2nd section are furnished with blue Persian Kashi tiles, Mosaic art, and calligraphy. The huge Picture Wall has been taken as the triumph of Lahore Fort and exquisitely decorated with the vibrant pattern of glazed tiles, faience mosaics, and fresco. Stretching to the northern and western walls of the city, the embellish wall is approximately 1450 feet long and contains 116 panels that interpret multiple subjects like elephant fights, angels, and polo games.

There are three small museums on site (photography prohibited): the Armoury Gallery exhibits various arms including pistols, swords, daggers, spears, and arrows; the Sikh Gallery predominantly houses rare oil paintings; and the Mughal Gallery includes among its exhibits old manuscripts, calligraphy, coins, and miniature paintings, as well as an ivory miniature model of India’s Taj Mahal.

In short, Lahore Fort is the majestic spectacle of Lahore that depicts the glorious history and culture of Lahore’s Walled City and requires an extensive amount of time and endurance to explore and appreciate.

 

Information Sources:

  1. how2havefun.com
  2. redplanet.travel
  3. lonelyplanet.com
  4. wikipedia
Categories
Agriculture Philosophy

Permaculture Design Principles

Permaculture was originally a word made up of the two words ‘permanent’ and ‘agriculture’. But now the scope is broader, and permaculture is more often defined as ‘permanent culture’.

Permaculture (the word, coined by Bill Mollison, is a portmanteau of permanent agriculture and permanent culture) is the conscious design and maintenance of agriculturally productive ecosystems which have the diversity, stability, and resilience of natural ecosystems. It is the harmonious integration of landscape and people providing their food, energy, shelter, and other material and non-material needs in a sustainable way. Without permanent agriculture, there is no possibility of a stable social order.

Permaculture design is a system of assembling conceptual, material, and strategic components in a pattern which functions to benefit life in all its forms.

The philosophy behind permaculture is one of working with, rather than against, nature; of protracted and thoughtful observation rather than protracted and thoughtless action; of looking at systems in all their functions, rather than asking only one yield of them; and allowing systems to demonstrate their own evolutions.

Permaculture is not exclusive; its principles and practice can be used by anyone, anywhere:

  • City flats, yards and window boxes
  • Suburban and country houses/garden
  • Allotments and smallholdings
  • Community spaces
  • Farms and estates
  • Countryside and conservation areas
  • Commercial and industrial premises
  • Educational establishments
  • Waste ground

Permaculture encourages us to be resourceful and self-reliant. It is not a dogma or a religion but an ecological design system that helps us find solutions to the many problems facing us both locally and globally.

The Twelve Principles of Permaculture –

Permaculture gives us a range of practical solutions for a better world. These principles are most commonly used in relation to food growing systems, but can also be used to guide us in all parts of our lives.

Twelve Permaculture design principles articulated by David Holmgren in his Permaculture: Principles and Pathways Beyond Sustainability:

Observe and Interact – Being observant and responding to what we see is really important in moving towards a more ethical and sustainable way of life.

We can learn from nature, and from other people, observing how others have moved to a greener and more ethical approach, and working with the world around us to succeed in our goals.

Catch and Store Energy – Energy is abundant on our planet. Learning how to catch and store that energy in plants, with renewable energy infrastructure, or in other ways, is key to living a sustainable way of life.

Growing our own food at home is a great way to catch and store energy from our sun. The passive solar design also offers opportunities for architects, engineers, and designers to make further use of this abundant energy source.

Obtain a Yield – Taking the three core ethics of permaculture into account, we can work with nature to get all the things we need. Obtaining a yield can be as simple as using organic gardening techniques to provide food for our families but it can also be about obtaining a non-tangible yield: happiness, health or mental well-being.

Living a sustainable lifestyle that sticks to permaculture principles can allow us to obtain all sorts of more intangible yields as well as the obvious tangible ones.

Apply Self-Regulation and Feedback – Understanding where we’ve succeeded and where we’ve gone wrong is vitally important to creating real and lasting change. For example, by analyzing and evaluating all the things that we bring into our homes, we can make better purchasing decisions moving forwards: reducing, reusing, recycling, and regulating our worst consumerist tendencies.

Use and value renewable resources and services – By using the power of the sun, the wind, or the water, we can power our homes, grow our food, and regenerate our environments.

Rather than relying on finite and polluting fossil fuels, we should make full use of renewable sources of energy: for example, switching to a green energy supplier or even generating our own power with solar panels or other renewable infrastructure at home is something many of us can do to move to a more sustainable way of life.

Produce no waste – Moving towards a zero-waste lifestyle means looking at all the trash we chuck out and trying to eliminate it. We can do this by reducing the amount we buy, by buying wisely, by reusing or recycling where possible, by composting, and by working with ethical companies who look at waste throughout the entire life-cycle of their products.

Design from Patterns to Details – Whether designing a new vegetable garden or an entirely new sustainable way of life, we have to look at the big picture before we get bogged down in the little things.

Thinking wholistically, about all areas of our lives, can help us move forwards in a positive direction.

Integrate Don’t Segregate – Plants work well in diverse systems the same is true of people too. Planting polycultures (guilds of plants that work together) is just one example of how this principle works in the real world.

And as well as applying this in the garden, we can also apply it to communities, groups or organizations. Sustainability is something we achieve together through collaboration and co-operation it’s not something we do alone.

Use small and slow solutions – Every journey begins with a single step. Whenever we try to do too much too soon, it’s easy to become overwhelmed and though big changes can bring big benefits, they bring bigger risks too. Making small, incremental changes is the best way to move towards sustainable change.

For example – don’t start a farm, try a small windowsill garden. Don’t overhaul your entire shopping philosophy change things one ethical purchase at a time.

Use and Value Diversity – Diversity reduces vulnerability to a variety of threats and takes advantage of the unique nature of the environment in which it resides. Just as ecosystems work best when filled with a greater variety of different plants and animals, so human society functions best when a variety of different people are represented.

In our garden, home, and our life in general, it’s a good idea to promote and value diversity in all its forms.

Use Edges and Value the Marginal – Sustainability is about making use of all the resources that we have at our disposal. Whether we’re talking about land use, workplaces, homes or society in general, making use of all we have involves valuing fringes and fringe elements.

This might be as simple as using a neglected corner of our outside space to grow more food, or something more abstract, like thinking outside the box.

Creatively Use and Respond to Change – Finally, change is an inevitable part of life. It’s important to remember that permaculture isn’t just about now, but about the future. We design for change, understanding that things will alter over time. The changing seasons, changing attitudes, our changing climate… how we respond to these changes will shape sustainable progress in the years to come.

These principles are a starting point for an understanding of permaculture and can begin to give us an idea of how we can translate thought to action, and transition to a more ethical and truly sustainable way of life.

Each principle can be thought of as a door that opens into whole systems thinking, providing a different perspective that can be understood at varying levels of depth and application.

People and Permaculture –

Permaculture uses observation of nature to create regenerative systems, and the place where this has been most visible has been on the landscape. There has been a growing awareness though that firstly, there is the need to pay more attention to the people care ethic, as it is often the dynamics of people that can interfere with projects, and secondly that the principles of permaculture can be used as effectively to create vibrant, healthy and productive people and communities as they have been in landscapes.

Besides permaculture practitioners who study and learn about permaculture and consciously use permaculture to live in a more sustainable way, there are many people who practice permaculture without realizing it concerned environmentalists, organic gardeners, conservationists, land-use planners, urban activists, recyclers, indigenous peoples and anyone working toward creating a sustainable human civilization. The reason for this is that the philosophy of permaculture draws on a lot of ideas and practices that have been around for a long time.

The terms ecological design, sustainable design, applied ecology or green design are other terms that describe the basic philosophy of using nature as a model to foster sustainability. The difference between these approaches and permaculture is their scope and focus. Permaculture draws on these systems and incorporates them into a broader framework. Permaculture is a comprehensive system that can be applied to all aspects of one’s life although food production remains an important focus. As mentioned earlier, it is a dynamic, living philosophy that is continuing to evolve.

 

Information Sources:

  1. ethical.net
  2. permaculturenews.org
  3. permaculture.co.uk
Categories
Agriculture Philosophy

About Permaculture

“Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted & thoughtless labor; of looking at plants & animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system.” – (Bill Mollison)

By thinking carefully about the way we use our resources – food, energy, shelter, and other material and non-material needs, it is possible to get much more out of life by using less. We can be more productive for less effort, reaping benefits for our environment and ourselves, for now, and for generations to come.

This is the essence of permaculture the design of an ecologically sound way of living in our households, gardens, communities, and businesses. It is created by cooperating with nature and caring for the earth and its people.

Permaculture is not exclusive its principles and practice can be used by anyone, anywhere:

  • City flats, yards and window boxes
  • Suburban and country houses/garden
  • Allotments and smallholdings
  • Community spaces
  • Farms and estates
  • Countryside and conservation areas
  • Commercial and industrial premises
  • Educational establishments
  • Waste ground

Permaculture encourages us to be resourceful and self-reliant. It is not a dogma or a religion but an ecological design system that helps us find solutions to the many problems facing us both locally and globally.

It has many branches including ecological design, ecological engineering, regenerative design, environmental design, and construction. Permaculture also includes integrated water resources management that develops sustainable architecture, and regenerative and self-maintained habitat and agricultural systems modeled from natural ecosystems.

The term permaculture is a contraction of the words “permanent,” “agriculture,” and “culture.” Although the original focus of permaculture was sustainable food production, the philosophy of permaculture has expanded over time to encompass economic and social systems.  It is a dynamic movement that is still evolving.  For example, some practitioners are integrating spirituality and personal growth work into the framework of permaculture.

The term permaculture was coined by David Holmgren, then a graduate student at the Tasmanian College of Advanced Education’s Department of Environmental Design, and Bill Mollison, senior lecturer in Environmental Psychology at the University of Tasmania, in 1978. It originally meant “permanent agriculture”, but was expanded to stand also for “permanent culture”, since social aspects were integral to a truly sustainable system as inspired by Masanobu Fukuoka’s natural farming philosophy.

Besides permaculture practitioners who study and learn about permaculture and consciously use permaculture to live in a more sustainable way, there are many people who practice permaculture without realizing it concerned environmentalists, organic gardeners, conservationists, land-use planners, urban activists, recyclers, indigenous peoples and anyone working toward creating a sustainable human civilization. The reason for this is that the philosophy of permaculture draws on a lot of ideas and practices that have been around for a long time.

The terms ecological design, sustainable design, applied ecology or green design are other terms that describe the basic philosophy of using nature as a model to foster sustainability. The difference between these approaches and permaculture is their scope and focus. Permaculture draws on these systems and incorporates them into a broader framework. Permaculture is a comprehensive system that can be applied to all aspects of one’s life although food production remains an important focus. As mentioned earlier, it is a dynamic, living philosophy which is continuing to evolve.

Permaculture design emphasizes patterns of landscape, function, and species assemblies. It determines where these elements should be placed so they can provide maximum benefit to the local environment. Permaculture maximizes useful connections between components and synergy of the final design. The focus of permaculture, therefore, is not on each separate element, but rather on the relationships created among elements by the way they are placed together; the whole becomes greater than the sum of its parts. Permaculture design, therefore, seeks to minimize waste, human labor, and energy input by building systems and maximizes benefits between design elements to achieve a high level of synergy. Permaculture designs evolve over time by taking into account these relationships and elements and can evolve into extremely complex systems that produce a high density of food and materials with minimal input.

The design principles, which are the conceptual foundation of permaculture, were derived from the science of systems ecology and the study of pre-industrial examples of sustainable land use. Permaculture draws from several disciplines, including organic farming, agroforestry, integrated farming, sustainable development, and applied ecology. Permaculture has been applied most commonly to the design of housing and landscaping, integrating techniques such as agroforestry, natural building, and rainwater harvesting within the context of permaculture design principles and theory.

Permaculture’s central theme is the creation of human systems that provide for human needs, but using many natural elements and drawing inspiration from natural ecosystems. Its goals and priorities coincide with what many people see as the core requirements for sustainability.

Permaculture tackles how to grow food, build houses and create communities, and minimize environmental impact at the same time. Its principles are being constantly developed and refined by people throughout the world in very different climates and cultural circumstances.

The real difference between a cultivated (designed) ecosystem and a natural system is that the great majority of species (and biomass) in the cultivated ecology is intended for the use of humans or their livestock. We are only a small part of the total primeval or natural species assembly, and only a small part of its yields are directly available to us. But in our own gardens, almost every plant is selected to provide or support some direct yield for people. Household design relates principally to the needs of people; it is thus human-centered (anthropocentric).

This is a valid aim for settlement design, but we also need a nature-centered ethic for wilderness conservation. We cannot, however, do much for nature if we do not govern our greed, and if we do not supply our needs from our existing settlements. If we can achieve this aim, we can withdraw from much of the agricultural landscape, and allow natural systems to flourish.

Vegan permaculture (also known as veganic permaculture, veganiculture, or vegaculture) avoids the use of domesticated animals. It is essentially the same as permaculture except for the addition of a fourth core value; “Animal Care.” Zalan Glen, a raw vegan, proposes that vegaculture should emerge from permaculture in the same way veganism split from vegetarianism in the 1940s. Vegan permaculture recognizes the importance of free-living animals, not domesticated animals, to create a balanced ecosystem. Soil fertility is maintained by the use of green manures, cover crops, green wastes, composted vegetable matter in place of manure.

We have abused the land and laid waste to systems we never need have disturbed had we attended to our home gardens and settlements. If we need to state a set of ethics on natural systems, then let it be this:

  • Implacable and uncompromising opposition to further disturbance of any remaining natural forests, where most species are still in balance;
  • Vigorous rehabilitation of degraded and damaged natural systems to stable states;
  • Establishment of plant systems for our own use on the least amount of land we can use for our existence; and
  • Establishment of plant and animal refuges for rare or threatened species.

Because permaculture is a comprehensive, dynamic system it can be practiced in different ways and at different levels. To help us begin to use permaculture in our life, the rest of this course will present (1) the ethics – the philosophical core of permaculture, (2) some principles – guidelines for applying permaculture, (3) strategies – goals to help us focus as we apply permaculture, and (4) techniques – concrete ways that we can apply permaculture.

We believe we should use all the species we need or can find to use in our own settlement designs, providing they are not locally rampant and invasive.

 

Information Sources:

  1. permaculturenews.org
  2. heathcote.org
  3. permaculture.co.uk
  4. wikipedia
Categories
Agriculture Philosophy

History Of Permaculture

Permaculture is a process, continually rethought and built upon. It does not belong to anyone person or rely on one charismatic leader. However, certain insightful individuals are important to the history of permaculture and to the future of the movement. This list is far from complete and will continue to grow as new names innovate with permaculture principles.

The term permaculture was coined by David Holmgren, then a graduate student at the Tasmanian College of Advanced Education’s Department of Environmental Design, and Bill Mollison, senior lecturer in Environmental Psychology at the University of Tasmania, in 1978. It originally meant “permanent agriculture”, but was expanded to stand also for “permanent culture”, since social aspects were integral to a truly sustainable system as inspired by Masanobu Fukuoka’s natural farming philosophy.

It has many branches including ecological design, ecological engineering, regenerative design, environmental design, and construction. Permaculture also includes integrated water resources management that develops sustainable architecture, and regenerative and self-maintained habitat and agricultural systems modeled from natural ecosystems.

Mollison has said: “Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted and thoughtful observation rather than protracted and thoughtless labor; and of looking at plants and animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system.”

In the 1970’s Mollison and his student David Holmgren wrote and published some books explaining his ideas. In the 1980s he published his design manual and started teaching permaculture design courses to spread his ideas around the world. By the 1990s permaculture had started spreading throughout the US, although it’s more well-known in other countries around the world. To this day, it’s continuing to grow as a global grassroots movement and people primarily learn about it through permaculture design courses and workshops that generally happen outside of academia.

David Holmgren is best known for his influential work, Permaculture: Principles and Pathways Beyond Sustainability (2002). Unlike many permaculture books that focus primarily on agricultural design, Holmgren’s book is an in-depth look at how sustainable systems function and how we can apply these lessons to our current culture. His theories are firmly rooted in the understanding that we are reaching peak energy. Holmgren lays out a system for us to live and thrive within nature’s limits.

Several individuals revolutionized the branch of permaculture. In 1929, Joseph Russell Smith added an antecedent term as the subtitle for Tree Crops: A Permanent Agriculture, a book which sums up his long experience experimenting with fruits and nuts as crops for human food and animal feed. Smith saw the world as an inter-related whole and suggested mixed systems of trees and crops underneath. This book inspired many individuals intent on making agriculture more sustainable, such as Toyohiko Kagawa who pioneered forest farming in Japan in the 1930s.

In Australian P. A. Yeomans’ 1964 book Water for Every Farm, he supports the definition of permanent agriculture, as one that can be sustained indefinitely. Yeomans introduced both an observation-based approach to land use in Australia in the 1940s and the Keyline Design as a way of managing the supply and distribution of water in the 1950s.

Holmgren noted Stewart Brand’s works as an early influence to permaculture. Other early influences include Ruth Stout and Esther Deans, who pioneered no-dig gardening, and Masanobu Fukuoka who, in the late 1930s in Japan, began advocating no-till orchards and gardens and natural farming.

The definition of permanent agriculture as that which can be sustained indefinitely was supported by Australian P. A. Yeomans in his 1964 book Water for Every Farm. Yeomans introduced an observation-based approach to land use in Australia in the 1940s and the keyline design as a way of managing the supply and distribution of water in the 1950s.

Among some of the more recognizable names who received their original training within Mollison’s Permaculture Design Course (PDC) system would include Geoff Lawton and Toby Hemenway, each of whom have more than 25 years experience teaching and promoting permaculture as a sustainable way of growing food and providing for human needs. Simon J. Fjell was a Founding Director of the Permaculture Institute in late 1979 and a teacher of the first Permaculture Design Course, having first met Mollison in 1976. He has since worked internationally and is currently listing a major social enterprise on NASDAQ.

By the early 1980s, the concept had broadened from agricultural systems design towards sustainable human habitats. After Permaculture One, Mollison further refined and developed the ideas by designing hundreds of permaculture sites and writing more detailed books, notably Permaculture: A Designers Manual. Mollison lectured in over 80 countries and taught his two-week Permaculture Design Course (PDC) to many hundreds of students. Mollison “encouraged graduates to become teachers themselves and set up their own institutes and demonstration sites. This multiplier effect was critical to permaculture’s rapid expansion.”

Because permaculture is a comprehensive, dynamic system it can be practiced in different ways and at different levels. To help us begin to use permaculture in our life, the rest of this course will present (1) the ethics – the philosophical core of permaculture, (2) some principles – guidelines for applying permaculture, (3) strategies – goals to help us focus as we apply permaculture, and (4) techniques – concrete ways that we can apply permaculture.

 

Information Sources:

  1. permadomia.com
  2. thecarrotrevolution.com
  3. wikipedia
Categories
Sports

History Of World Cup Football

Football is a very favorite and enjoyable game almost in every country of the world. Football is played in a large playground. It is played at a professional level all over the world, and millions of people regularly go to football stadium to follow their favorite team, whilst millions more avidly watch the game on television. A very large number of people also play football at an amateur level. In many parts of the world football evokes great passions and plays an important role in the life of individual fans, local communities, and even nations; it is therefore often claimed to be the most popular sport in the world.

There are many worldwide international competition of football. One of the major international competitions in football is the FIFA World Cup. Over 190 national teams compete in qualifying tournaments within the scope of continental confederations for a place in the finals. The finals tournament, which is held every four years, now involves 32 national teams competing.

FIFA (/ˈfiːfə/ French: Fédération Internationale de Football Association, English: International Federation of Association Football, Spanish: Federación Internacional de Fútbol Asociación; German: Internationaler Verband des Association Football) is a non-profit organization which describes itself as an international governing body of association football, fútsal, beach soccer, and efootball. It is the highest governing body of football. Football is likely the most popular sporting event in the world, drawing billions of television viewers every tournament.

The FIFA World Cup is organized every four years. The first world cup was organized in Uruguay, 1930. Thirteen nations participated in it for the first time. Uruguay won the World Cup defeating Argentina in the final match. The inaugural edition, held in 1930, was contested as a final tournament of only thirteen teams invited by the organization. Since then, the World Cup has experienced successive expansions and format remodeling, with its current 32-team final tournament preceded by a two-year qualifying process, involving over 200 teams from around the world.

The world’s first international football match was a challenge match played in Glasgow in 1872 between Scotland and England, which ended in a 0–0 draw. The first international tournament, the inaugural British Home Championship, took place in 1884. As football grew in popularity in other parts of the world at the start of the 20th century, it was held as a demonstration sport with no medals awarded at the 1900 and 1904 Summer Olympics (however, the International Olympic Committee has retroactively upgraded their status to official events), and at the 1906 Intercalated Games.

Unfortunately, the 1942 and 1946 World Cups were not organized for World War II. Unlike Olympic football, World Cup teams are not limited to players of a certain age or amateur status, so the competition serves more nearly as a contest between the world’s best players. Referees are selected from lists that are submitted by all the national associations.

During World War II, FIFA struggled to keep itself afloat, and it had no financial or personnel resources with which to plan a peacetime tournament for when hostilities ended. When the war ended in 1945, it was clear that FIFA would have no hope in a single year of planning and scheduling a 1946 World Cup. In fact, FIFA’s first meeting was on 1st July 1946 around the time the 1946 World Cup would ordinarily have been played and when it planned the next World Cup for 1949 no country would host it. The major international tournament in 1946 was the 1946 South American Championship in which Argentina beat Brazil 2–0 on 10th February 1946.

The trophy cup awarded from 1930 to 1970 was the Jules Rimet Trophy, named for the Frenchman who proposed the tournament. It was originally simply known as the World Cup or Coupe du Monde, but in 1946 it was renamed after the FIFA president Jules Rimet who set up the first tournament. This cup was permanently awarded in 1970 to then three-time winner Brazil (1958, 1962, and 1970), and a new trophy called the FIFA World Cup was put up for competition.

After 1970, a new trophy, known as the FIFA World Cup Trophy, was designed. The experts of FIFA, coming from seven countries, evaluated the 53 presented models, finally opting for the work of the Italian designer Silvio Gazzaniga. The new trophy is 36 cm (14.2 in) high, made of solid 18 carats (75%) gold, and weighs 6.175 kg (13.6 lb). The base contains two layers of semi-precious malachite while the bottom side of the trophy bears the engraved year and name of each FIFA World Cup winner since 1974. The description of the trophy by Gazzaniga was: “The lines spring out from the base, rising in spirals, stretching out to receive the world. From the remarkable dynamic tensions of the compact body of the sculpture rise the figures of two athletes at the stirring moment of victory.”

This new trophy is not awarded to the winning nation permanently. World Cup winners retain the trophy only until the post-match celebration is finished. They are awarded a gold-plated replica rather than the solid gold original immediately afterward.

Categories
Sports

Football Is My Favorite Game

A game is an activity involving one or more players. Games are played primarily for entertainment or enjoyment, but may also serve as exercise. Everyone in this world has their own favorite games, so do I. My favorite game is football. I often play this with my friend in the evening. I like this game because it is exciting and challenging.

The football field is 120 yards long and 80 yards wide. The two-goal posts are placed at the two ends of the field. The field marked by boundary lines on four sides. The game is played between the two teams. Each team has eleven players. Among the players of each team, there is one goalkeeper, two full-backs, three half-backs, and five forwards. There is a referee. He conducts the game with a whistle.

A ball is placed at the center of the field. The players on each side take positions on either side. As soon as the referee blows the whistle, the ball is kicked off and the play starts. Each team tries to score a goal against the other. The game usually lasts for ninety minutes with an interval of 10 minutes. It is a ball game played on a rectangular grass field with a goal at each end. The objective of the game is to score by maneuvering the ball into the opposing goal. The winner is the team which has scored the most goals at the end of the match.

Football is played at a professional level all over the world, and millions of people regularly go to football stadiums to follow their favorite team, whilst millions more avidly watch the game on television. A very large number of people also play football at an amateur level. In many parts of the world, football evokes great passions and plays an important role in the life of individual fans, local communities, and even nations; it is therefore often claimed to be the most popular sport in the world.

No player except the goalkeepers is allowed to touch the ball with his hands during the continuation of the game. If one of the players of a team passes the ball through the goal post of the opposite team, the team is said to have scored a goal. The team that leads in the number of goals is declared the winner. The referee conducts the game according to specific rules. There are also four linesmen in the game who stands in the corners of the field to assist the referee. The game is divided into two parts of 45 minutes each. There is an interval of 15 minutes between the two halves. In the case of knock-out games, the extra time and at last tie-breaker is allowed if no result is reached within the given 90 minutes.

There are much worldwide international competition of football. One of the major international competitions in football is the World Cup organized by Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA). Over 190 national teams compete in qualifying tournaments within the scope of continental confederations for a place in the finals. The finals tournament, which is held every four years, now involves 32 national teams competing.

There are many merits of the game. It develops the qualities of discipline, generosity, cooperation, carefulness, brotherhood, comradeship, etc. It also helps to improve the health of a player. Because it is a good means of taking physical exercise. It has some demerits too. Many students spoil their studies in their craze for football. Sometimes it creates quarrel among the players and spectators. It often becomes the cause of an accident. Because it is one of the risky games.

Football is undoubtedly a popular game. All classes of the people-old and young love this game very much. It is full of the thrill for both the players and the spectators. Sometimes the players enjoy the game more than the spectators. In a word, we can say that it gives us immense joy and pleasure.

Categories
Philosophy

Bioethical Issues

Typically, Bioethical Issues are addressed from many different disciplines. People contribute to the bioethics discussion drawing on expertise and methods from the sciences, social sciences, and the humanities. Professionals working in the field of bioethics include philosophers, scientists, health administrators, lawyers, theologians, anthropologists, disability advocates, and social workers. People may teach, do research, and treat patients in the clinical setting or work to change laws or public policy. The issues of bioethics are at the intersection between medicine, law, public policy, religion, and science. Each field contributes important insights, resources, and methodologies, and efforts to think about or make changes to practices and policies that raise ethical concerns are often strongest when they draw on resources across disciplines. The Showcase submission formats include some commonly used formats to present bioethics-related proposals or findings.

The term Bioethics (Greek bios, life; ethos, behavior) was coined in 1926 by Fritz Jahr in an article about a “bioethical imperative” regarding the use of animals and plants in scientific research. In 1970, the American biochemist Van Rensselaer Potter used the term to describe the relationship between the biosphere and a growing human population. Potter’s work laid the foundation for global ethics, a discipline centered around the link between biology, ecology, medicine, and human values. Sargent Shriver, the spouse of Eunice Kennedy Shriver, claimed that he had invented the word “bioethics” in the living room of his home in Bethesda, Maryland in 1970. He stated that he thought of the word after returning from a discussion earlier that evening at Georgetown University, where he discussed with others a possible Kennedy family sponsorship of an institute focused around the “application of moral philosophy to concrete medical dilemmas.”

Bioethics is commonly understood to refer to the ethical implications and applications of the health-related life sciences. These implications can run the entire length of the bench-to-bedside “translational pipeline.” Dilemmas can arise for the basic scientist who wants to develop synthetic embryos to better study embryonic and fetal development but is not sure just how real the embryos can be without running into moral limits on their later destruction.

Once treatments or drugs are in clinical trials involving human subjects, a new set of challenges arise, from ensuring informed consent, to protecting vulnerable research participants to guarantee their participation is voluntary and informed. Eventually, some of these new approaches exit the pipeline and are put into practice, where providers, patients, and families struggle with how to best align the risks and benefits of treatment with the patient’s best interest and goals. The added costs of new therapies inevitably strain available resources, forcing hard choices about how to fairly serve the needs of all, especially those already underserved by the health care system.

Examples of topic areas that have been the focus of bioethics for a long time are organ donation and transplantation, genetic research, death and dying, and environmental concerns.  New developments in science and technology have focused attention on topics such as assisted reproductive technologies, neuroethics (ethical issues around brain imaging and testing), and nanotechnologies (using small particles to deliver medicine or other medical treatments).

Social and legal issues –

Many of these philosophical questions, however, they are answered, have significant social and legal dimensions. For example, advances in medical technology have the potential to create disproportionate disadvantages for some social groups, either by being applied in ways that harm members of the groups directly or by encouraging the adoption of social policies that discriminate unfairly against them. Accordingly, questions of discrimination in bioethics have arisen in a number of areas. In one such area, reproductive medicine, recently developed techniques have enabled parents to choose the sex of their child. Should this new power be considered liberating or oppressive? Would it be viewed positively if the vast majority of the parents who use it choose to have a boy rather than a girl? Similar concerns have been raised about the increasing use of abortion as a method of birth control in overpopulated countries such as India and China, where there is considerable social and legal pressure to limit family size and where male children are valued more highly than female children.

In the field of genetics, the use of relatively simple tests for determining a patient’s susceptibility to certain genetically transmitted diseases has led to concerns in the United States and other countries that the results of such tests, if not properly safeguarded, could be used in unfair ways by health-insurance companies, employers, and government agencies. In addition, the advent of so-called “genetic counseling” in which prospective parents receive advice about the chances that their offspring will inherit a certain genetic disease or disorder has allowed couples to make more informed decisions about reproduction but also has contributed, in the view of some bioethicists, to a social atmosphere considerably less tolerant of disability than it ought to be. The same criticism has been leveled against the practice of diagnosing, and in some cases treating, congenital defects in unborn children.

Research on the genetic bases of behavior, though still in its infancy, is controversial, and it has even been criticized as scientifically invalid. Whatever its scientific merits, however, it has the potential, according to some bioethicists, to encourage the adoption of crude models of genetic determinism in the development of social policies, especially in the areas of education and crime prevention. Such policies, it is claimed, could result in unfair discrimination against large numbers of people judged to be genetically disposed to “undesirable” forms of behavior, such as aggression or violence.

This last point suggests a related set of issues concerning the moral status of scientific inquiry itself. The notion that there is a clear line between, on the one hand, the discovery and presentation of scientific facts and, on the other, the discussion of moral issues the idea that moral issues arise only after scientific research is concluded is now widely regarded as mistaken. Science is not value-neutral. Indeed, there have been ethical debates about whether certain kinds of research should be undertaken at all, irrespective of their possible applications. It has been argued, for example, that research on the possible genetic basis of homosexuality is immoral, because even the assumption that such a basis exists implicitly characterizes homosexuality as a kind of genetic abnormality. In any case, it is plausible to suggest that scientific research should always be informed by philosophy in particular by ethics but also, arguably, by the philosophy of mind. Consideration of the moral issues related to one particular branch of medicine, namely psychiatry, makes it clear that such issues arise not only in areas of treatment but also in matters of diagnosis and classification, where the application of labels indicating illness or abnormality may create serious disadvantages for the individuals so designated.

Many of the moral issues that have arisen in the health care context and in the wake of advances in medical technology have been addressed, in whole or in part, in legislation. It is important to realize, however, that the content of such legislation is seldom if ever, dictated by the positions one takes on particular moral issues. For example, the view that voluntary euthanasia is morally permissible in certain circumstances does not by itself settle the question of whether euthanasia should be legalized. The possibility of legalization carries with it another set of issues, such as the potential for abuse. Some bioethicists have expressed the concern that the legalization of euthanasia would create a perception among some elderly patients that society expects them to request euthanasia, even if they do not desire it, in order not to be a burden to others. Similarly, even those who believe that abortion is morally permissible in certain circumstances may consistently object to proposals to relax or eliminate laws against it.

A final class of social and legal questions concerns the allocation of health care resources. The issue of whether health care should be primarily an individual or public responsibility remains deeply controversial. Although systems of health care allocation differ widely, they all face the problem that resources are scarce and consequently expensive. The debate has focused not only on the relative cost-effectiveness of different systems but also on the different conceptions of justice that underlie them. The global allocation of health care resources, including generic forms of drugs for life-threatening illnesses such as HIV/AIDS, is an important topic in the field of developing world bioethics.

Bioethical Issues in Pandemics –

Influenza pandemics which occur with remarkable, if unpredictable, regularity raises important bioethical issues that need to be examined as part of countries’ pandemic planning, said Benjamin Berkman, a faculty member in the Department of Bioethics at the U.S. National Institutes of Health, during a brown bag talk on January 27 at the headquarters of the Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization (PAHO/WHO).

Berkman, who has served as a consultant for WHO on the ethical and legal aspects of public health interventions for pandemic influenza, said pandemics raise special concerns, including questions about the allocation of limited supplies of vaccines and antivirals among different population groups, the obligation (or not) of health workers and other essential personnel to report for duty during pandemics, and whether or not wealthier nations have the responsibility to make vaccines and antivirals available to developing nations at a lower cost or despite limited supplies.

Berkman noted that absent a clear domestic or international consensus on many key bioethical issues related to pandemics, more discussion was needed before any new pandemic breaks out.

“The magnitude of the risk is such that it demands a discussion about global equity,” he said.

Many religious communities have their own histories of inquiry into bioethical issues and have developed rules and guidelines on how to deal with these issues from within the viewpoint of their respective faiths. The Jewish, Christian, and Muslim faiths have each developed a considerable body of literature on these matters. In the case of many non-Western cultures, a strict separation of religion from philosophy does not exist. In many Asian cultures, for example, there is a lively discussion on bioethical issues. Buddhist bioethics, in general, is characterized by a naturalistic outlook that leads to a rationalistic, pragmatic approach.

In Africa, their bioethical approach is influenced by and similar to Western bioethics. Some are calling for a change, and feel that indigenous African philosophy should be applied. The belief is that Africans will be more likely to accept a bioethical approach grounded in their own culture and that it will empower African people and give them dignity. In Chinese culture and bioethics, there is not as much of an emphasis on autonomy as opposed to the heavy emphasis placed on autonomy in Western bioethics. Community, social values, and family are all heavily valued in Chinese culture, and contribute to the lack of emphasis on autonomy in Chinese bioethics. The Chinese believe that the family, community, and individual are all interdependent of each other, so it is common for the family unit to collectively make decisions regarding healthcare and medical decisions for a loved one, instead of an individual making an independent decision for his or her self.

 

Information Sources:

  1. bioethics.msu.edu
  2. paho.org
  3. britannica.com
  4. bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu
  5. wikipedia