Translate

Communications over the world wide doesnt depend on sytax or eloquence or rethoric or articulation but on the emotional context in which the message is being heard.
People can only hear you when they are moving toward you and they are not likely to when your wordss are pursuing them
Even the choices words lose their powe when they are used to overpower.
Attitudes are the real figures of speech '-Friedman

Thursday, August 26, 2010

Andres Nocioni ,El Chapu,is not able to play by NBA in the Turkey World Cup



Not fair ! Our Chapu is out of the National Team for playing the World Cup. We give him all out support

we know he did his best and more to make this happens , to be part of this incredible team . We stand by you ! @SoyElChapu in twitter !

There already was some doubt whether the 76ers' Andres Nocioni could play for his native Argentina in the FIBA World Championships. Now, after trying to come back from a left ankle sprain suffered July 31, the rugged 6-7 forward is out.

Sixers president Rod Thorn confirmed the news last night after Dr. Jack McPhilemy, team orthopedist and medical director, viewed Nocioni's most recent MRI report.

"Dr. McPhilemy didn't like what he saw, and felt Andres should not play or put a lot of impact on the ankle," Thorn said. "Andres wants to play and feels very close to his country, but, in this case, it's just not prudent for him to play."

Nocioni did not play Monday in the Argentines' final "friendly," a 93-89 overtime victory over Turkey. Thorn was uncertain whether he would be ready for training camp in early October.

Argentina plays its first tournament game Saturday against Germany.

Nocioni was acquired with Spencer Hawes from Sacramento in the June trade for Samuel Dalembert.

For more Sixers coverage, read the

Daily News' Sixers blog, Sixerville, at

http://go.philly.com/sixerville.




Wednesday, August 18, 2010

CPhI South America 2010 - Explore pharma opportunities in a continent of new growth






CPhI South America 2010 -
Explore pharma opportunities in a continent of new growth
Meet South America's leading pharma companies
Learn about the latest market trends
Build partnerships in a growing pharma market

Meet 5,000 senior decision markers
Build your brand in South America
Get a foothold in one of world's fastest growing
pharmaceutical markets

Conference programme finalised

Taking place during CPhI South America, the Pharmaceutical Forum (including 10 keynote sessions) and a Match & Meet’ programme facilitates great face to face networking opportunities.


Conference Programme

CPhI South America's conference programme offers an excellent in-depth knowledge about the emerging pharmaceutical markets in South America. The 2010 seminars will cover the following topics:

FIRST DAY

1. Latin American Market Overview

Paulo Gimenez, Consultant of IMS Health

2. Characteristics of the Argentine Pharmaceutical Market

Miguel Maito, CILFA

3. Marketing for Export

Ruben Rico, Director of The Total Quality Consulting, Author of 14 books of marketing and export marketing

SECOND DAY

1. Use of biotechnology tools as a solution for sanitary issues

Marcelo Daelli, Director of Bioadvisory SA

2. Export Challenge

ING. ALEJANDRO MAPRIMED LACALLE, General Manager of Chemo Romikin

DRA. LUQUE GRACIELA Control Manager and Quality Assurance of MAPRIMED

THIRD DAY

1. Regulatory aspects

ANMAT

2. The Role of the Production Management in the New Marekting Mix of the Pharmaceutical Industry

Eduardo Tchouhadjian, Director of EFAE and Partner of Mercatus & Co.

3. Institutional Programme for Argentine Pharmaceutical Exportation

Myriam Tevez , Argentina's Foreign Trade Director, Buenos Aires City Government

4. International Regulatory Issues and Analysis of Opportunities in Different Markets

Leandro MBarak , Latinoamérica Consultores Grupo CTPSYSTEM

The sessions will be in Spanish and Portuguese. There will be Spanish/English translation services .

After two successful editions in Brazil, CPhI South America will move to Argentina in 2010. With a 15.3% year-on-year growth rate South America belongs to one of the world's fastest growing pharma markets, expected to be worth $51.3 billion in 2014.* And with new patent legislation recently adopted by most countries in the region, plus a growing appetite for investing in generic drugs, CPhI South America is the catalyst that brings the entire industry together.

Top 5 reasons to visit CPhI South America:

1. Develop partnerships and find new suppliers from Argentina, Brazil and many other countries
2.
Discover South America's great outsourcing potential at the new ICSE Pavilion
3.
Meet innovative bio pharma companies at the BioPh trail
4.
Expand your network during a special Match & Meet program
5.
Obtain the latest industry information during the co-located conferences

Sunday, August 15, 2010

Argentina Basketball Team going to Turkey World Cup


Golden Generation goes for their final run

The golden generation of Argentinean basketball players will make their final journey at the 2010 FIBA World Championship. Their goal? Win this tournament, say good bye to their fans in Mar del Plata in 2011 and end their run in the 2012 Olympics.

Argentina comes to this FIBA World Championship with a great plan in order to say good bye to the Golden Generation who already won silver in the 2002 FIBA World Championship, gold in the 2004 Olympics and bronze at the 2008 Olympics. Their first step comes here in Turkey where this group of players hope to bring gold for the first time since 1950. This team, led by Luis Scola, Andres Nocioni, Carlos Delfino and Pablo Prigioni, will have the task of confirming Argentina as the top ranked team in FIBA with a great performance in this tournament.

Last year at the 2009 FIBA-Americas Championship they started slowly, but the combination of Luis Scola and Pablo Prigioni, along with great role players, guided Argentina to a bronze medal and Scola finished as the MVP of the tournament. Despite not having Manu Ginobili, Carlos Delfino, Walter Herrman, among others, the Argentinean team rode the storm together and recovered.

In this tournament they won’t have Ginobili and will rely once again on playing as a team to have great results in this tournament. “We can play well without Manu, I'm convinced," said Scola when asked about the impact of not having Manu Ginobili in this tournament. “Manu is a better player than we realise, but basketball is a team sport, you can play just as well if anyone is missing.”

Despite missing Ginobili, the team will have players who have had some good NBA seasons like Andres Nocioni with the Sacramento Kings and Carlos Delfino who came back and made an impact with the Milwaukee Bucks. They also have some rising stars in the ACB like Federico Van Lacke, Diego Garcia, Carlos Matias Sandes and Leo Mainoldi. Veterans like Fabricio Oberto, Leo Gutierrez and Roman Gonzalez will keep the team with a stable production inside.

Pablo Prigioni will be the main main at the point guard position and probably the most important player on the court. Prigioni is a master of playing the position and organising the Argentinean offense. His combination with Luis Scola has been great at all levels and secures Argentina a great performance even when they don’t have their main players.

For this busy Summer they divided the team, where a group of prospects played games against the Chinese national team and another plays in the South American Championship. Head coach Sergio Hernandez followed both tournament closely and will pick the best players from those competitions and will join the Senior team that practices for the FIBA World Championship in order to secure a great showing this year and in the future.

After an MVP performance at the 2009 FIBA-Americas Championship, Luis Scola will be the first option for Argentina in the paint. His durability and great moves inside will be they key to scoring a high percentage of their shots and also opening up shooters like Delfino, Nocioni and Quinteros who are deadly from outside.

Defensively, Argentina is known for their intensity and hard work, they don’t give up easy baskets to anyone and know that a great defensive performance will be key to a good offensive display. In this tournament they will face the best of the best and can’t have the luxury of letting the other teams score easily.

At the 2010 FIBA World Championship, Argentina have been drawn in Group A along with Angola, Australia, Germany, Jordan and Serbia. In the past Argentina had many great games against Serbia, who they defeated in the 2004 Olympics with a last second basket by Ginobili. Also the Germans and Australians are on the rise while Angola and Jordan aren’t easy opponents this time around with the evolution of modern basketball.

Once again, Argentina with their discipline, hard work and team mindset will try to make this one count for their fans and to ensure everyone can see why they are one of the most respected teams worldwide.

.Flag of ARG
Argentina (ARG)
FIBA World Rank:
1.
Appearance:
11
Victories:win
#NameP
6Roman GonzalezC
7Fabricio ObertoC
10Leonardo GutierrezPF
11Luis ScolaPF
12Juan GutierrezC
13Andrés NocioniSF
13Paolo QuinterosSG
Juan Pablo CanteroPG
Carlos DelfinoSG
Hernan JasenSF
Federico KammerichsSF
Pablo PrigioniPG

Head coach: Sergio HERNANDEZ

Friday, August 13, 2010

Sir Karl Popper

The most important philosopher of science since Francis Bacon (1561-1626),
Sir Karl Popper finally solved the puzzle of scientific method,
Instead of scientific knowledge being discovered and verified by way of
inductive generalizations, leaping from perceptual data into blank minds,
in terms that go back to Aristotle,
Popper realized that science advances instead by deductive falsification
through a process of "conjectures and refutations."
It is imagination and creativity, not induction, that generates real scientific theories,
which is how Einstein could study the universe with no more than a piece of chalk.
Experiment and observation test theories, not produce them.
This was not, in retrospect, so hard to understand; and some philosophers,
like Kant, had come close to recognizing it. It is still subject to some dispute,
though mainly from those who misunderstand the rejection of induction or
who demand positive epistemic reasons for crediting theories that are derived negatively,
by falsification
That is a reasonable enough demand, but the answer can only
come from deeper philosophical epistemology, not from science or philosophy of science.
That deeper epistemology is, in fact, Friesian.
Since Popper thought that justification works through falsification,
and never through verification, he obviously agreed that such propositions
do not need to be proven in the sense of logical derivation.
It is now common in science to use falsifiability as a criterion
for dismissing theories or claims as parts of science.
Popper's own critique of Marx and Freud as unfalsifiable was a classic study,
and the salutary influence of the principle in discussion of psychics or astrology is occasionally seen.
I admit, again, that the decision to accept a basic statement,
and to be satisfied with it, is causally connected with our experiences -
- especially with our perceptual experiences.
But we do not attempt to justify basic statements by these experiences.

Whether or not there is a causal relation between perceptions and statements or beliefs

is actually irrelevant, and Popper commits a grave error by dwelling on it

. We justify statements about experience byreference to the objec

Karl Popper was both a lifelong student and advocate of Immanuel Kant.

The chapter on Kant within Popper's Conjectures and Refutations (Ch. 7)

is more than enough to prove Popper's admiration.

However, included in this chapter and many of Popper's other works,

he rejects Kant's concept of synthetic a priori knowledge on the grounds

that Kant created an impossible category of unfalsifiable knowledge

There is in fact no other way to justify them except by memory, hearsay, or inference.

Reference is not a causal relationship but a fundamental logical property of concepts

and propositions, as Popper well understands.

The problem with reference to the objects of experience, as Descartes discovered,

was the question of access to those objects. Popper's mistake

, in criticizing the Positivists, was to accept a Positivist, and Empiricist, premise,

that we only have access to perceptions, to contents of the mind,

not to the objects themselves.

Popper misses the Kantian aspect of Friesian theory that immediate knowledge

consists of phenomenal objects, which as objects,

are not merely psychological or subjective.

One's psychological attitude, or its origin, is therefore irrelevant;

and the cognitive force of immediate knowledge lies in the intersubjective availability

of empirical objects, our direct acquaintance with them, and the possibility of

their being shown to others by way of justification.

(These issues are discussed in the essay "Ontological Undecidability.")

Furthermore, Popper himself realized that the test of falsification cannot be applied to everything,

for it is not clear how the principle of falsification itself could be subject to a falsifying test.

If the principle can then be known to be true, there must be some means

of verification for certain things after all.

That must return us to Fries' original considerations.

. All universal propositions, according to Popper, are like conjectures,

in that they are about more things (usually) than are subject to inspection.

This is true. This is also what induction, in its classical meaning since Aristotle, is about:

the derivation of universal propositions from the experience and observation of particulars.

Gardner, at the very least, blurs the distinction between universals and particulars.

Thus, he cites the theory that "there are Earth-sized planets" around other stars .

This may indeed be a scientific theory and a conjecture,

but it is a particular (or an existential) proposition, not a universal.

he term 'fallibilism' generally refers to the theory that no belief

can be so well justified or supported by good evidence and apposite circumstances

that it could not be false. Popper's particular brand of fallibilism is not much different,

except for his emphasis on the justification of beliefs through the scientific method.

Falsificationists (the group of fallibilists to which I belong) believe..
. that they have discovered logical arguments which show
that the programme of the first group [the verificationists]2
cannot be carried out:
that we can never give positive reasons which justify the belief
that a theory is true...
we falsificationists believe that we have also discovered a way to realize
the old ideal of distinguishing rational science from various forms of superstition...
the rationality of science lies not in its habit of appealing to empirical evidence
in support of its dogmas -- astrologers do so too --
but solely in the critical approach: in an attitude which, of course,
involves the critical use, among other arguments, of empirical evidence
(especially in refutations). (Conjectures and Refutations, 310; bold emphasis mine)

Popper explains the rationale for his beliefs.

Fallibilism, for him, is the epistemological doctrine that best explains

how contemporary science provides knowledge without resorting to dogmatic beliefs (i.e. faith)

. All beliefs include falsehoods we may or may not be unaware of,

which renders the quest for certainty impossible.

When we become aware of a false belief, we consequently

become aware of our capability for belief in falsehoods,

and are reminded how much more we have to learn.

Popper's fallibilism can account for why Einstein's replacement of Newtonian Mechanics

stimulated so much progress in physics,

a field that some of his contemporaries had once thought nearly finished.

Popper points to the beginning of World War I,

when even physicists as renowned as Henri Poincaré believed Newton's theory

was true and irrefutable (Conjectures and Refutations, 258).

Fallibilism, for Popper, explains the existence of scientific progress -

the continual discovery of our own ignorance and quest for the truth.

Scientific progress is possible because new theories account for new

(or sometimes, old) empirical evidence, which earlier scientific theories could not.

In this fashion, Popper's fallibilism describes the gradual evolution of knowledge,

where new knowledge is built upon the bedrock of old, falsified knowledge:

It so happens that the real linchpin of my thought about human knowledge
is fallibilism and the critical approach; and that I see...
that human knowledge is a very special case of animal knowledge.
My central idea in the field of animal knowledge (including human knowledge)
is that it is based on inherited knowledge.
It is of the character of unconscious expectations.
It always develops as the result of modification of previous knowledge.

...human knowledge... may be formulated in language, in propositions.

This makes it possible for knowledge to become conscious and

to be objectively criticizable by arguments and by tests.

In this way we arrive at science. Tests are attempted refutations.

All knowledge remains fallible, conjectural.

...we learn by refutations, i.e., by the elimination of errors, by feedback.

(Realism and the Aim of Science, xxxv, bold emphasis mine)

Since humans can only eliminate errors,

Popper believed all knowledge is an approximation to the truth.

In his later years, he coined the term "verisimilitude"

to express the idea of theories with greater (or lesser) degrees

of correspondence with reality (Conjectures and Refutations, 315).

Additionally, in the above passages,

Popper loosely defines "dogma" as a theory or belief accompanied

by an attitude that denies or ignores counter-arguments and refuses criticism,

especially contrary empirical arguments.

Popper contrasts dogmas with "the rationality of science",

which he believes concurs with his fallibilist doctrine.

Thus, any belief considered infallible is a dogmatic belief,

because the dogmatist refuses to allow any possibility of error within his belief.

Even logical truths are fallible to the extent that we may err in judging whether a truth

is analytic or demonstrated to be proof valid.

At first glance, fallibilism would appear to be consistent

with the belief in synthetic a priori knowledge.

A synthetic statement is one that can be denied without contradiction;

an a priori proposition is one that can be justified independently of experience.

It follows that false a priori propositions are necessarily false,

and true a priori propositions are necessarily true.

Analytically true statements, in contrast to synthetic statements,

cannot be denied without contradiction; therefore,

analytic a priori propositions are always necessarily true.

A synthetic a priori statement makes a claim to

the same kind of truth-value as analytic a priori statements (i.e., necessarily true),

but synthetic statements are not true by definition and, for that reason,

they must be demonstrated to be true.

Since synthetic statements must be shown to be true outside of definitional knowledge

(which is analytic), our synthetic knowledge is mediate and subject to error or revision.

Therefore, it would seem that belief in synthetic a priori statements is not inherently dogmatic,

even though their truth value is independent of experience.

So why does Popper reject synthetic a priori statements,

if there is no inherent contradiction between fallibilism and synthetic a priori knowledge?

disguise for induction:

Cloud Computing 2015

My Blog List

Destacados

Intel #whatsnext

Jim Parsons pokes around Intel and discovers everyone needs a little downtime. #whatsnext https://amp.twimg.com/v/a79385bc-c129-4ec4-bbdf-8169cd4d4df0

Sony Style USA | Blog

Interesting &; Recommended Blogs

Alan Boyle Science editor

Alan Boyle Science editor
As MSNBC.com's science editor, Alan Boyle runs a virtual curiosity shop of the physical sciences and space exploration, plus paleontology, archaeology and other ologies that strike his fancy. Since joining MSNBC.com in 1996, Boyle has won awards from the National Academies, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Association of Science Writers, the Society of Professional Journalists, the Space Frontier Foundation, the Pirelli Relativity Challenge and the CMU Cybersecurity Journalism Awards program. He is the author of "The Case for Pluto," a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers," the blogger behind Cosmic Log: Bacteria can walk on 'legs' — and an occasional talking head on the MSNBC cable channel. During his 33 years of daily journalism in Cincinnati, Spokane and Seattle, he’s survived a hurricane, a volcanic eruption, a total solar eclipse and an earthquake. He has faith he'll survive the Internet as well. alanboyle@feedback.msnbc.com

Popular Posts

Blog Archive