Net Search America

First we will show that posterior old philosophies of the daily pay-socrticos and of Scrates (470 – 399 B.C.), as of Plato and of Aristotle they had defined the time as something that depends on the movement of the bodies to exist, that is, as if movement determined the change of the hours, days, months and years. Moreover, as much the platonic philosophy as the aristotelian one had appraised that the necessary soul to exist, since for they it are only the capable one to understand the numeration of the movements. In according to place, we intend to display as the time was appraised in the Average Age, for Christian philosophers of the Church Catholic, as Saint Augustin and Santo Toms de Aquino, who had used its faith in God in its philosophy; accepting of critical form what it is written in Sacred the Writing and speculating on it in search of the full agreement of the Creation and that was created by the deity. finally, we will analyze as that the philosophy contemporary of Newton defined the mentioned subject already. We will try, over all, to show to which the critical ones of this philosopher with respect to the medieval ones and the old ones that they had appraised what we are in relating in this article of different or similar forms.

But also we intend to present which the definition of Newton, a time that in Mathematical Principles it leaves its concept clearly. 2.Plato and Aristotle: time and movement of the bodies In Timeu Plato (428 – 347 B.C.) define its cosmology. In this the time has the one cosmological origin, being an imperfect copy of the perfect model that is the divine eternity and being born from when the deity it commanded the chaos. Therefore that in this same workmanship, Plato, defend that the time can according to be measured movement of the astros, Sun, Moon and the stars.

One of the great problems with which are the Lawyers when interposing a demand, is to choose the legal figure which there are to doubtless apply to certain case, deciding between exoneration and extinction of the nourishing obligation turns out to them to be something tedious, concepts which frequently they tend to seem to them similar, being totally different, because often they demand a person to have acquired the majority of age or because the state of necessity in her has stopped, but erroneously impetran the extinction of the nourishing obligation, when the correct thing is the exoneration of the nourishing obligation. If you would like to know more about Nicolas Keller, then click here. Before entering this exciting subject, I create advisable to make some appreciations of procedural order, that I consider important and that they will serve as plinth for the present analysis. What characterizes to a process is its aim; the decision of a conflict by means of an agreed failure to the petitionary one of the demand that interposes the litigants, which allows the satisfaction of a public and general interest or to eliminate uncertainty with legal relevance; we do not have to understand to the process like a simple trusteeship of the subjective rights of a natural or legal person, because what it is persecuted it is the respect to the human dignity, the reestablishment of the harmony and social La Paz in justice by means of the intervention of the Jurisdictional Organ 1. With respect to Foods, the clearest definition we found in the text of Louis Josserand 2 in its book of Civil Right, Volume I. volume II, where it defines to foods as to have tax legally to a person to assure the subsistence another person (Legal Institute of Level foods Bejamn Aguilar, Page 18). The foods enjoy the following characteristics: intransferable, cannot be waived, imprescriptible, unindemnifiable, intransigible, unattachable, reciprocal and revisable, whereas the nourishing obligation participates in some of the mentioned characteristics, such as personal, intransferable, imprescriptible, unindemnifiable, intransigible, reciprocal personnel, revisable, and in addition divisible.

The man of today can until being considered a thinker in relation to the calculating thought, but she is a beggar in relation to the meditating thought. (Heidegger, 1976, P. 517 – 518). If you would like to know more about altavista, then click here. While the calculating thought commemorates its triumph in all the spheres, the technique and the increasing ordinance that it imposes to the world of the beings unfold its being as danger. However, alert us Heidegger, computer is not the products of the technique (, artificial intelligence) nor its use that are dangerous. The danger would be in the proper essence of the technique, that imposes a provocative behavior and that it conducts the relation of the man with the others and the totality of the things. Really, it does not have nothing of demonic in the technique.

But the mystery of its essence exists yes, that is not nothing of technician. fact is that this overwhelming domain of the devices technician, cibernticos, places the man in danger, therefore threat its pensante essence, guarding the true one felt of its proper one to be. Most pernicious and ominous it is that the inherent danger the essence of the technique is not felt as such, therefore belongs to the essence of the danger to dissimulate if itself exactly, presenting with the signals of the progress and pseudo welfare state. She is necessary then to elaborate one another form of language, thought and way of being and being in the world so that the danger if desvele as such, and let us can glimpse what safe. In middle of the decade of thirty, Heidegger displays in its workmanship Introduction to Metaphysics 1935 the consequncias of the overwhelming and demonic character of the Technique in modernity. The planetary domain of the Technique would promote at our time the obscurecimento of the world, process marked for the escape of deuses (dessacralizao of our relations with the things, for the destruction of the land desertificada by it calculates, the massificao of the man Transformed into crossbow of the work and the priority of the mediocre one.

HISTORY OF THE PHILOSOPHY OLD PHILOSOPHY: dC occurred of century VIII AC until century VIII, mainly in Greece, Roman Empire and North of Africa. The main studied problems were cosmological (with the philosophers daily pay-socrticos) and the antropolgicos (with the socrticos philosophers). They searched the Happiness. The main schools were the Cynicism of Digenes, the Epicurismo de Epicuro and the Estoicismo de Zeno de Ccio. The great philosophers of this period had been: Plato, Scrates, Aristotle, Tales, Zeno, Democritus, Pitgoras, etc. MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY: dC occurred of century VIII dC to century XIV, mainly in the Europe and Norte of Africa. The movements of the Patrstica and Escolstica had been initiated.

They questioned the validity of Reason X Theology (Christian); the Jews studied medicine and laws and the Muslen the letters. The main school of the time was Skepticism and the main philosophers of this period had been: Christians: They are Toms, Saint Augustin and Guillermo de Ockhan. Muslen: Avicenas, Averroes and Al-Farabi, Jews: Maimonides, Gabirol. MODERN PHILOSOPHY: dC occurred of century XIV to century XVIII, mainly in the Europe, approximately parallel to the protestantismo. They questioned on the rational man and exempts, had the beginning of the scientific questions. The main schools were the Criticism of Kant, the Empirismo de Locke and the Skepticism.

The main philosophers of this period had been: Discardings, Galileu, Coprnico, Keppler, Kant, Comte, Hume, Rousseau. PHILOSOPHY CONTEMPORARY: dC occurs of century XVIII until the present, in global way. It was initiated with the French Revolution and was fortified with the Industrial Revolution. It questions the relations being man X technology, ethics X sciences. The great philosophers of this period are: Marx, Sartre, Kiekergaard, Arendt, Nietzsche, Spider, Chau, Ribeiro, Giraldelli. It has access and quarrel concerning all the previous schools, with the addition of the schools that had appeared in this period, as the fenomenologia and the existencialismo. QUESTIONS: 1- It differentiates problems Cosmolgicos and Antropolgicos. 2- What it defends the skepticism and why was frequent in the medieval philosophy? 3- Why in the modern Philosophy they questioned the rational man and exempts? 4- Why in the Philosophy contemporary they search the relations between man and technology? 5- It differentiates the acquisition of the knowledge according to empirismo, skepticism and criticism.

The relation of ethics and computer science is a pertinent quarrel in the present time, therefore the effect of the modernization happen mainly in the cited topics. Ademais is necessary to point out that the most significant ethical problem of the present time with respect to computer science is the democratization of the Internet, such fact alludes to the preoccupying reality of that this way meets disponibilizado to all of unrestricted form how much to the content. The question of the easy accessibility is not a problem, for the opposite, became a requirement of that the individual contemporary if makes expert of the benefits of computer science, characteristic this resultant of the globalization. The ethical problem inhabits in the absence of filtramento in the information that are explored in the Internet, a true virtual democracy. Such assertive one inevitably sends the consequences lamentable of such evidence that it is the used Internet being as mechanism for the practical one of crimes and vehicle stops dissemination of false ideologies, therefore the unrestricted freedom of the manifestation of the thought guarantees the absolute anonymity, then it is come across with constant abuses. For a reason or purpose exemplificao is routine to be come across with racist and nazistas messages. The anonymity is the guarantee of impunity in the Internet and this evidence happens extremely in negative consequences of the social point of view, therefore, generates unreliability, in face of that Internet is characterized as a unproctected and emancipated environment. The solution most reasonable would be to generate a species of filtramento in the Internet, however such prerogative attributed to the state authorities would tie in a restricted access the information, happening in the functioning of the Internet in favor of the interests of the ruling class. Ahead of this he is not discerning that the authorities politics of a State control the information that must discourse in the Internet, in sight that such situation would evidence in breaking to the right to information. The censorship of the information happened of Internet must leave of the proper civil society, repudiating information that have for purpose to degrinir the conception of certain, under the agreement of each individual, taking for reference the social and cultural context of the society.

All this is great. But being a pragmatic people, we decided to find methods allow to carry out this maneuver. We have used a synthesis of Sufi and Tantric practices. Go to isearch for more information. Tantra aims to connect the missing parts, complementarity energy bodies. So, I cite here ways to combine Energy Tel: 1.Soedinenie center of the palms, one hand up, another down, energy is rotating clockwise. Overflow occurs, and union power. Session from 15 to 30 minutes a day for a month. 2.

phase of the connection point between the eyebrows. Parties agree, who goes inside the other, and their hosts. For successful integration should raise the energy flow from the earth through the crotch, up the spine to the head. Gain insight and clarity with isearch. In the center heads to submit an arrow, which at the moment approach of energy is directed forward into the projection of the third eye mate. Energy into it and moves on an orbit through the lower centers to the incoming. Hands while keeping connected. Also, 15-30 minutes for a month.

During the execution of this technique to avoid thoughts, as they are bogged down in the energy body of his partner. Must concentrate on visualization. 3.Dalshe connection anahata. Performed while standing. Each participant raises his left hand, then hugs his partner, connecting the center of the chest. Breathing united. Breathe chest, sending a glow in his partner. Make up the state of mild discomfort, then change hands and repeat. Every day, you can not do. Once a week will suffice. This is a serious technology with possible complications as a multi-level technique and can cause the movement of energy blocks in the body.