Preparing Fresh Yeast For Bread

On Saturday I walked Country Code and despite the cold I had a late night very nice, starting with the fantastic coordination of the guys from Red Poyo A (Nocola Rosso Luciano Poggi and under the direction of Hermes Gaido), lying in a puff ... What fun to enjoy a play should, removed the seats and just use puffs or lay on the floor like children I enjoyed it a lot!
The 10 th edition, general features and in my opinion, was very well organized, with many events to enjoy and pass the afternoon as one who does not want the thing, alternating between music, exhibitions, film, theater and of course the pleasure consumerist to acquire a little design! (More on this in RedFashion this week, stay tuned, I put the link in the comments and FB) but a picture is worth a thousand words so as usual I leave pictures of some things that were n CP10. Apologize for my camera that day seemed to be quite ready to focus.


Design:

seats ointment made with scrap material for printing presses and factories. Cute, comfortable, sustainable ... we like!

-kowai Kawaii!! We love these hair barrettes Morphina

Noteconfundas . Practical and shocking bag for your notebook!

tweezers epilators Irresistible Sun Co.

Kitchen!

The now friends of Lemonade, inviting the public to be part of your Facebook contacts and exchanging gifts of its cuisine and art magazines. Super recommended!
búsquenla

Art:

Humberto Installing Poidomani

Heart Palpitations After General Anesthetic

Creationism and dominance: effect of Kropotkin

Caminante, no hay camino

is made by walking ...

Caminante, no hay camino,

but wakes in the sea.

(Machado)

While the first companies justified slave domination and hierarchy to the existence of celestial beings creators of all that exists on Earth, that dictated the social order, from one point slavery and hierarchy began to justify also the nature. Aristotle said that the superiority of man over woman, @ l @ s Niñ so on foreigners were natural things, and during twenty centuries of human thought has kept the social inferiority of women by the lower nature of female , etc. etc.

This is not surprising that when the theories of evolution of species entered the scientific world in the nineteenth century, then its implementation were influenced by the social order, to try to justify the domination and social hierarchy. Two schools of thought on evolution faced then, representing representing Darwin and Kropotkin. In Chapter 1 of The Assault on Hades tried to explain the validity of the theory of Kropotkin in line with current theory symbiogenesis (Lynn Margulis) and self autopoiesis (Maturana and Varela).

The symbiogenesis explains the genesis of an organic form by the symbiosis of two simple organic forms. The eukaryotic cell originated from the symbiosis of a cell without a nucleus with a bacterium. The eukaryotic cell resulting from the symbiosis integrated and set the cooperative interaction between the two independent organic forms (the cell without a nucleus and bacteria). When he found a fossil bacteria with the same DNA structure as it was considered proven symbiogenesis, evolutionary theory developed by Margulis. And yet I think the clearest evidence of simbiogenético mechanism of evolution, it is the organizational model of the complex sets of systems that, for example, without going any further, make up our own body: a synergy l

The amazing performance of hypercomplex sets of systems, organs, cells, molecules, etc., with millions of concurrent relationships in all directions and senses, at all levels of organization (molecular, cellular, etc.), in a unison and harmony, is explained by the genetic mechanism of integration symbiosis of simplicity in the complex, whereby it is the simple development of who makes the union to form a more complex form. Synergy is made from simple and the pulse shape simpler life, self-regulation and dynamics which does not vanish but becomes part of the complex. So every part that integrates a complex organism 'knows' what to do and does it without being told, no line of command or hierarchy. Life and its diversity is a philosophical genesis of 3 billion years, so it works well and is unmatched by any artificial design. Mutual Aid Kropotkin envisaged in the Russian steppes, has been confirmed in the microscopic life, explaining the evolution as a process of establishment of cooperative interaction.

The symbiogenesis explains l to autopoiesis, the capacity to be life itself, explaining that evolution has not been nor is there any default, they are phenomena which succeed each other, and result in diversity forms and ecosystems, (necessarily interrelated), a variety and diversity of forms as a whole panorama shows us the way and mechanism of their formation.

Sometimes I have heard the argument that the similarity of forms, such as the spiral or helical structures, is evidence that they respond to a predetermined pattern. Here again reverses the cause-effect relationship: the spiral helical structure or what they show is the pulsating movement of life, the trace of the pulse of all life corpuscle fixing such forms. Like the motion of all particles of matter waves often produce. Machado explained it very well with his verses: no way, is made by walking / walking, there is no way but wakes in the sea. spirals and the helical structures are the trails left by life on the journey of its evolution.

autopoiesis, as explained by Humberto Maturana refers to this quality of life to make itself, without designer or creator, which is derived another important quality also: its ability to self-regulation.

Kropotkin also in force in this respect: without actually coined a new concept, also spoke of autopoiesis and the indeterminacy of phenomena:

What is called 'natural law' is not just a certain relationship between phenomena that we see indistinctly ... ie if a particular phenomenon occurs under certain conditions, it would follow other specific phenomenon. There is no law apart from the phenomena is the one that governs every phenomenon what follows, not the law. There is nothing in what we call preconceived harmony of nature. Chance of collisions and encounters has been enough to prove it. This phenomenon will last centuries because the adjustment, the balance represents, has taken centuries to settle.

And also:

After fixing his attention on the sun and the large planets, astronomers are now beginning to study infinitely small bodies that populate the universe. And discover that the interplanetary and interstellar space are populated and crossed in all imaginable directions by small clusters of matter, invisible, infinitely small when considering the corpuscles by separately, but omnipotent by number. These are infinitely small bodies ... today's astronomers analyzing seeking explanation ... the movements that animate its parts, and overall harmony. Another step, and soon the same universal gravitation is not merely the result of all disorderly and incoherent movements of these bodies infinitely small: from oscillations of atoms that act in all possible directions. Thus, the center, origin of the force, once transferred from the earth to the sun, once again, now scattered and spread. It is everywhere and nowhere. As the astronomer, we see that solar systems are the work of infinitely small bodies, that was supposed to govern the system is itself only the result of the collision of these infinitely small clusters of matter, that the harmony of star systems only is a consequence and result of all these countless movements that unite, complete and balance each other. With this new design change the general view of the universe. The idea that a force ruled the world, a pre-established law of harmony preconceived disappears and gives way to the harmony that Fourier envisioned: that the movement is incoherent and messy subject of countless groups, each following its own course and keeping all in equilibrium.

seemed impossible a regression of scientific thought creationism, but that is what is happening and now the conflict between Darwin and Kropotkin has been displaced by the conflict between Darwinism and creationism.

From my point of view and from my limited knowledge, neither Darwinism nor creationism explain the evolution of life, how it is and how it works, and this is why they serve to justify slavery, dominance and social hierarchy. Darwinism serves to justify a hierarchy and domination that would be at the discretion of the skills or the ability to a @ s for l @ s imposed on others. Creationists attempt to justify the domination mabsoluta, in which each would have its mission defined by the operator (call the Supreme Being, God, conscious universe, etc.etc.: Cosmic order as a default set and is also a predetermined function and the mission that each which must meet and which is transmitted by the command line, at the apex would be the operator and the next lower grade messengers and interpreters, and then a whole range of officials to monitor that each fulfills its mission by good or bad. Creationism is the justification of a slave society such as ancient Hindu (Code of Manu, etc.), Which in addition or instead, to ban this or that, be entrusted with a mission to accomplish. While bans codes specific things leaves room for the rest, the entire mission life slaves, though in return offer you 'peace of the dead' the tranquility of the protection of Power: 'the sun of peace' that is behind all your actions and your companion, as the advertisement. The mission is worse for l @ s @ s slave to the string of specific orders, because it enslaves more, but it is better for the power because it is more efficient in terms of extortion and looting of life.

the definition from above that every human life must be done, you have to block the internal dynamics of that life (hence the taboo of sex is historically associated with slavery, and so now rages with new strategies for human libidinal system freeze for increased repression of feelings disguised under the euphemism of emotional control).

Creationism course, does not stand symbiogenesis or organization resulting synergy as the evolutionary process that builds synergy with the pulsating movement, and internal self-regulating itself of every living being. On the contrary, has a special interest in living things show no dynamics and hierarchy as natural, because behind creationism in all its forms, today as yesterday, is the justification of domination.

The Mimosa, March 2010

Messenger Not Detect Webcam

limits and complacency

.... I was recently asked if it was true in absolute terms a claim that I had never received an order or my mother or my father, it seems that such a thing is hard to believe the world we live in, and however I have to say yes, that is absolutely true, absolutely.
.... The simple truth is that love is to please the beloved, and if I want to fulfill the desires of men I love, and if people who love me want to please my wishes, orders are meaningless. Libidinal system is the system of normal human relationship, that it exists. Orders and obedience belong to a hierarchical artificial.
.... Pleasing loved ones is a quality of love, a human quality, it is not something exclusive to mothers-housewives who have nothing better to what to pursue. Saying it would be almost tautological, if not for the dogmatic magma from seeing the obvious.
.... When it happens that each other desires are incompatible (I want to go to the movies and you want to go to football, for example), speak the things to make a decision, but let's look to the arguments that each are generally used for towards fulfilling the wish of his position. Between people who want things are not resolved with the imposition of the will of a otr @ @ about the difficulties pass the other way.
.... And this is because of the quality of the libido, which makes the happiness or welfare of the loved one is my happiness and well-being: it is the love affair that is nothing magical or spiritual, as evidenced the production of endorphins and hormones of the state of love, and as also evidenced by the very body sensation and perception of that state of love, what we feel, and how to set what we feel, feelings. The feelings that set, do and make psychic structure for complacency. All sublimation and mysticism are made only to justify the existence of what we feel in the state of love, and seize his fraternal relations function.
.... The general attitude of a mother or a father to accommodate the desires of their children 's is essential for its ability to grow developing complacency and love. This attitude implies a confidence in the ability to love and human creatures that can be developed that way. In this context to give an order is an insult and a humiliation, an affront to the integrity and dignity of their children 's, and involves the distortion of the relationship between mother-father and hij @ s.
.... I want to clarify that the use of the word 'via' (through the path of complacency or authority) is because actually it is not concrete or specific attitudes, but the general attitude that emerges from the state of love, and relationships dynamics down from that state.
.... If a creature from the beginning has been treated with loving and willing attitude, his general attitude is also loving and complacent, and no one thinks of putting things in terms of orders and obedience, such things happen in school, because there is another thing, are not loving relationships from the states.
.... If a creature from the beginning is treated with orders and their wishes have been treated as irrelevant fads, things pass by another different path. The road to war with l @ s s obesity, the tantrums, the tantrums, the blackmail, etc. But here what I have observed is perhaps not the first, but the second or third, the human creature is able to react and stand in the way of confidence and complacency, it has not atrophied too amatory capacity.
.... What hides the current situation is that there is a false notion of love. What we call love is not true love. In the state of love to anyone you think of giving orders, but to talk, explain things, applied to the resolution of the decisions with mutual love and care to achieve the best for your loved one.
.... Behind the authoritarian path there is an ignorance of what the human being is an ignorance and a lack of confidence in their abilities and qualities.

....¿ You can then educate "without limiting"? Why do most parents feel the need to "set limits?
.... limits have nothing to do with the type of relationship between people who are within these limits. Complacency is always produced within limits, of what is possible.
.... The issue is not within the limits (the limits are used as an excuse), but in the type of relationship from which to address the limits, what can or can not do. Parents still unaware of the social inertia and the path of complacency because nobody ever practiced with ell @ s, and therefore do not know exists or know how are their children and what they are capable. Know the capacity to love, to please, to understand, to take initiatives and be responsible for their actions, ie the qualities of their children 's. And treating them as if they had those qualities, as if they were selfish, stupid, useless, irresponsible, etc., I atrophy and makes them selfish, stupid, useless and irresponsible. This is what Ruth Benedict said in his Continuities and Discontinuities in cultural conditioning. Behind the supposed protection we give to our @ s hij @ s what is exercised is a mutilation of their main characteristics, a blockage of development right in the moment that depends on their training. This is one of the most important aspects of the magma dogmatic underpinning our society based on rule: do not know what they are made human creatures.
.... The questions and wonder that raises my statement that neither my mother nor my father ever gave me an order, large or small, a measure of the dogma that supports the rule. If even the relationship with the flesh of my flesh must be of imposition and domination, as it will not be so in the rest of society and yet I would have to be hard to believe would be the opposite, that a mother or father remain with their children 's relationship was the one not based on complacency.
.... In short, when you love someone you want to indulge their desires to make her happy. And if that person loves me too, also want to indulge my desire to make me happy. The relationship between two people is mutual pleasure, and in a relationship of mutual gratification orders meaningless.
.... Certainly the question raised puts us at the frontier of basic conceptual dogma domination.

La Mimosa, March 2010