Posts Tagged ‘nature’
Nature Conservation Society: How to cross the border of toxic shoes – shoe industry
Thursday, December 9th, 2010Evolution/religion: an Integrative View of Nature, Faith and the Human Mind
Sunday, October 31st, 2010?
Evolution? N / religious? N
A comprehensive look at the nature, faith and the human mind
By Robert DePaolo
Freud described? history as a series of race wars, which means that intolerance? and? has always been equivalent to a non-malleable virus infect the entire company? to? human
It is a moot point. Critics may say that man can? and usually have learned their way out of racial prejudice as a result of the exhibition? ny the interaction? n with, and dependence on people of other races. For example, in? Recent times the population? N blacks and other minorities? As racial? increase in pa? Western countries, the rendering? No support in war and industry and strengthening the esp? national spirit in the arts, sports and literature.
On the other hand, supporters argue that embedded in the c? Say gene? Human tico? a trend is not as malleable to protect and preserve the collection gene? local tico, and hostility-what? extra “or” m? s good character? stico of all groups of primates – including Homo sapiens.
Some studies seem to support this thesis, in particular the work of Wilson and Wrangham, (2003). Their results agree with one of the fundamental principles of psychology? A group evolutionary primitive behavior genes dedicated to the preservation? No priority? in comparison? n with the philosophy? to develop equitable rules of interaction? n office in the most? a society? democratic? tico.
In t? Terms of human experience, “extra, or” should not be based on race. You can? based on differences in language, ethnicity, g? nero and any n? number of real distinctions and superficial. It ’ss? What the differences f? SICAS between races makes the process of discriminating between “us” and “them” instead perceptually and emotionally cheap.
Even with distinct racial traits, “foreign bias” right? by no means inevitable. Seems to be one of the two options provided by the human brain. As Perry (2008) and Schultz & Cromwell (2003) have suggested, the size or the brain, particularly in the vast regions of the cerebral cortex (a section? No less influenced by primal urges and m? S? Concerned with learning and integration? No new associations and concepts) provides checks and balances of our instincts m? s? l? base line. In fact, the theory? To Freud on the separation? No ego of identification? N of impulse control may have their correlates physiol? Gicos in the frontal cortex.
In this context, perhaps, despite Freud, right? career, but the capacity? on human-to distinguish between objects and people, including virus pol really? politico-social. In reality? This process, often referred to as the DISCRIMINATION? N learning? pi? a coin with two sides of a virus? why? when it comes to making distinctions, that component of the mind can? used for good or ill, for example, to chart the course of history, pol? policy and discoveries cient? Ficosa, leading to social progress and the decentralization? n.
That all elements of society both good and bad, productive and destructive? come from the human mind? a tautology? it requires no further treatment. On the other hand the way the mind works is invited? to control? why? the brain / mind? a flexible structure in virtue? its composition? n gene? policy and functional, you can? take any n? number of possibilities? behavior and attitude. In reality? As Market (2008) suggested? The human brain as a kind of bimodal body moves back and forth between the cognitive processes discriminatory and inclusive.
Since the evolution? N the human brain? occurred in the context of a life arbor-tail style that perception? n inclusive, a capability? figure-ground (stereoscopic? itch) visual differences and correct memory for visual rarities and ac? LINE FANTASY between? trees, which tend to focus on the whole com? No ideas. In this sense, the model of the primate brain has provided us with a weakness of integrative thinking. On the other hand, the? Last Review of On? N the brains of primates, providing new channels to facilitate walking upright seems to have led to a bifurcated human mind, with a frequency of left-right motor sequences that require separate inhibition? N the excitation? n. This process? been converted to other functions and has led to a strengthening of the capacity? DISCRIMINATION? n and attention? n. While all creatures can learn to distinguish between est? Mules, AC tuned ability of competitors /? to separate and integrate the experience seems to play an important role in the development of th is personality? and human culture.
You can? see the action? n of mind bimodal in almost all activities? human. For example, the ability? Circuit B wait while the circuit? can not s? allowed it? the Inuit to walk upright, but describe 12 different types of snow. Meanwhile, the fact that humans can experience together can weave the rest of us to realize that snow? is a qu? mica and configuration? n? s? the water temperature in a different state.
? Qu? seems to come and go between convergence and divergence in our actions, thoughts, beliefs and prayers, and perhaps the course of human history? determined in part by cu? l of these two trends? stressed? in support of society? at any given time.
E ‘has clearly played a role in pol? U.S. policy. For example, the evolution? N pol party? Law? was in part real and illusory – the need? group distinctions often imperative pr? practicalities of the “philosophy? to the party.” Despite its origin in the Dem Party? Democrat-Republican Party of Jefferson, who helped? in? scope of agriculture and industry (as evidenced in the writings of Jefferson on moral principles), which was held? in possibility? and the moral agnosticism are not mutually exclusive, the current Republican Party has taken a very strong religious mentality? and defends the cause of the industry. Meanwhile, dem? Democrats … Dixiecrats, who in the early days they? become an albatross around the collective neck of hours VOTE? n purports to be the? unique part really sensitive to the situation? n of the minor? ace. The fact that members of both parties compete with fervor during the elections on the basis of decisions pol? Seemingly clear policies and the Legacy of thought suggests that prevailed in the same discriminatory? Recent times.
If unnecessary distinctions result group? be interfered with? ass to be mild to the evolution? No society? Americans (as accurately predicted by James Madison and Voltaire) such artificial distinctions between so-called traitors were the main religions.
According to a not? the mind so? involved, you can? to argue that there are significant differences between the beliefs of Jews, Christians and Muslims – to make a few thousands of years of hostilities? seem superfluous, if not est? ask, or that the contrasts are so? major disputes over territory and the doctrine was inevitable anyway.
The part of the mind will? A corner in the fact that the three religions are pr? Just about id? Init.d moral premises. For instance, in reading the Bible and the Quran? No conclusion was that the Ten Commandments are an element b? Musician of the three religions. While Christian and Jewish interpretations? As involving a formulation? N slightly different, all ten laws are morally and functionally id? ICT in both cases. For example, the first element in both interpretations refer you to put “non c ‘? Gods in front of me.”? Interestingly, both the version? No Jews? Oh Christian, that are derived from? Exodus and Deuteronomy, alluding to the fact that loyalty? God? for having “brought the people of the land of Egypt.” The people involved in that incident, Mois? S, Aar? Ny et al. were, of course, totally Jewish? to, despite their resentment should be fed pagan worship in the desert, not ten? a ning? n inter ? s real change in the Jewish faith? to, as it was Jes ? s?.
However, over time a common belief system and way of life has given way to the circuit, regardless of profit, leading to the persecution? N of the Jews who, even with different rituals, which was held? essentially the same beliefs as Christians, who were persecuted.
La? Only difference outstanding between Juda? Sm and Christianity? Jes? S, of course, was the complaint? “To be God (if that was his credence), the majority? To the Jews during the Communist era was considered blasphemy. But even this distinction? N? Rather dubious, since it? Jes? S? Often prophets referred to as Isa?, and Jerem as? as, and in fact, their role models. He stressed? that room? to have ascended to heaven, reborn and goes beyond l? usual limits of mortality? . While com? na most? to the Jews hold views m? s similar to the prophets – and indeed David.
A? N m? S? Interestingly, given the propensities? N of mind for integration? Ny DISCRIMINATION? N, are the similarities between Islam and the? Judeo-Christian policy. Y ‘know the prophets are Muslims, in general, the same men and women, worshiped by Jews and Christians. For example, Muslims adhere to the words and deeds of Abraham – “. Ibrahim, “consider that they call Jes? S, which they call” Eisa al-Masseh “a prophet. They honor the legacy? Mos’, which they call” Musa “, right?, Which they call”, right? “And Isaac, who is called” Ishak “, and seem to take you to Sea? a, the mother of Jesus? s? (Maryam in? rabe) in regard to Christians or Jews or even m? s.
Although there Alusi? N directly to the Ten Commandments in the Quran? No, Muslims also? N adheres to the Ten Commandments, although with some minor modifications. For example, in “Al-Isra ‘(The Night Journey) The Cor? N (47:19) says:” There is no m? S God but God “in 14:35 which says:”? My Se? Or, The pac is a land? Chart and protect am? and my children from worshiping? idols. “Tambi? N there are references to not take the name of Se? Or in vain, to join Sabater (though on Friday?), To honor their parents, the abstention? N of adultery, murder and stealing and coveting? s the wife of your pr? Jimo and perjury.
One possible distinction? N between the Bible and the Quran? N can be seen in a formulation? N slightly different from the fundamental. While the Old Testament says: “Do not kill? S” he says in the Qur? N 17: 33: “Do not kill? S unjustly.”
This subtle difference may? To justify the mentality? current intention? n nihilistic Islamic extremists? monkeys for cos? time to exterminate the infidels and the Israelis? is in the West? It seems unlikely, especially since? Some Bible scholars say that in the Old Testament, a distinction? No similar between murder and killing? impl? also quoted? n – on the grounds that the Jews created? an it was necessary to kill both for defense and Conservation? n of the tribe.
With this in mind, perhaps the story? less function? No time and place of the mind. The Crusades, the current conflict in the Middle East, the war on terror s? As a series of plays in the theater of life, staged by actors, as Shakespeare remained, but by a calcium, proteins myelin, water and information? n containing vessel known as the human brain during the per? ll in which the discriminatory aspect of the mind has taken center stage.
Thousand years later? S …
A As the conflict between Christians, Jews and Muslims has continued in modern times we have a lawsuit m? Sym? S? dispute between advocates of evolution? ny people of faith. Once m? S, the question will? To ask if this? a distinction? n real or anthropocentric? centrally located, and if, as with the old and the New Testament and the Quran? No, the similarities outweigh the differences.
I would suggest such a possibility?, And do so in order to make comparisons between Dec? Logo, Al-Isra and theory? To the selection? N natural.
integrating idea? that the mandate biol? cal revolves around the survival of the individual and the group seems to agree with laws relating to these religious texts. To understand c? Mo merely requires a reduced registration re-categorizating ny from the commandments in two major bio-moral laws. Marrying an altruistic (social survival, improvement), the behavior or restrictions, the other dedicated to the creation? N jer structure? Anarchic, the regula? N why these behaviors and retention systems? N can ? is required and travel time.
To process, the group’s survival and, by inference, the protection? N cohesiveness? N gene? Local policy required among members. The same cooperative behavior is observed? in a group of lions and wolves also improves survival? n are beneficial to humans. By the laws which forbid? Ben theft, murder, adultery, and Bramante, interpersonal conflicts? improvement, thereby reinforcing? cohesiveness? n the group. It leads to a din? Mica m? S? strong esp? spirit de corps among members, giving impetus to behavior that provide strong and shelter to the m? sd? bills, especially as regards the protection? ny care outside their offspring.
In a sense, the bio-moral, the Bible and the Quran? No, text is bright, especially with respect to a feature that characterizes all groups of primates – the alpha male / fen? Female phenomenon. While the position? N dominant? often seen as a bad thing – especially for those living in a society? democratic? policy actually works in the world of primates. dominant males protect members of the group and maintain order through the issuance? No unilateral decisions have? last word on resolution? No conflicts. The reason? N this work? on the basis of information? n din? mica. If all members of a group and I was born? of a conflict, for example in the area, would not have? to any base that reduce stress n that? of the destruction? No mutual. Gen? Cally speaking, be? To an unfortunate trend. Since each state has a presumption? N to have credence equal to? Area can s end? It be? To a bloody victory of one party over another.
? Interestingly, the way this can? To develop? by a member of the alineaci? n of m? s? supporters of their rivals, providing an advantage num? rich in the battle. At the point where the USC? victorious, the fact that room? many followers you have to do
definition? n a l? der – as? the creation? n of a hierarchy? a, in each case. Consequently, in the world of primates and perhaps in the world of mam? Mammals in s?, Hierarchical? As, no s? It working but perhaps an inevitable byproduct of the socio-mathematical? Tico
The problem with humans? that while there is a tendency toward hierarchy? as (testimony of our worship? n of movie stars, athletes and m? musicians), also? n we have a vision? nm? s? egalitarian, perhaps? in s? itself a product of evolution? n human. It stems from the fact that our big brains can? evoke many instruments, inventions, ideas and art settings? rubberized no alpha male or female just can? be sufficient. ? Qu? our species seems to require a lot of alpha.
This creates a potential moral dilemma. In particular, if the power? compartmentalized so that certain individuals protect us from certain risks, but not in others – as an agent of polic? a against a heart surgeon? No – there? ? Referee imperative to protect us from major life problems or issues that can not be one person? solve. Adem? S there? The conflict can be powerful in a way that can gross? kill C? sar. In such circumstances, continuation? N, m? Maximum absolute authority? ? Qui? N can? decide on questions of conflict and prescribing behavior and values to all in the midst of this dissipation? n power m? Maximum? Even if the solution? N becomes the target m? S abstract, there must be someone to create and enforce such laws. In other words, the combination? N of social conflict and the inevitability? survival approach to serenity? social complex society? humans probably always need a “transcendent? referee.”
? Qu? taken to its extreme l? cal, the evolution? n the human brain of a hierarchy? a brain-based and less egalitarian primates inexorably drive? aa a faith in God and need?.
At first glance this finding may? To alter the atheists and religious followers: the first because it? God wants us to be the spiritual realm of bio-natural, as the second? suggests that never arrive? to a point in our evolution? No society in which we abandon the belief in someone? No kind of God
In reality? none of the groups that m? s concern? This set of possibilities?. First,? Why? ? impossible to know whether the selection? n natural? contrary to God’s plan, or if maybe God in his wisdom? to us given the same laws that nature has created, also? n happens to favor the survival of the? only species capable of religious thought. Suggest that there? a contradiction? n inherent between the idea of a God and the theory? to the selection? n be natural? to suggest that God calls us to act in ways that do not coincide with a world that? he himself created?.
As for atheists, perhaps nature? all there is? that c “?. However, even if not? were true nature require? to a base jur? indicates, a fund now easier than ever to be matter and energy? a formed by the heat, without a known plasma as egg c? cosmic. In other words, if one believes in a Creator? diff? easy to conceive of a universe began? the transition? not the size of a pin or your extension? No current have not been subjected to kind of process of creation? n. Even if there is not enough God in human form, a principle that many religions (including Christianity, probably – that sees God as a trinity of at least two people et? inmates) have always respected . This means that a regulatory imperative, creative alpha-component (eg a particle of superstrings or constant that alg? nd? rotten? to be called part macula “El”) does not exist and can not ? work its wonders, that transcends the rest of nature? guess it depends? of? what? side of the brain was at stake at any time.
REFERENCES
Cromwell and Schultz (2003) Effects of differential expectations Reward Magnitude
activity? Primate neurons in the striatum. Journal neurophysiologist? To 89: 2823-2838
Freud, S. (1960) The Einstein-Freud correspondence, Einstein on Peace, Nathan O. H & H, Norden (ed), New York, Schocken Books 186-203.
Jefferson’s religious beliefs, the investigation? ny collections, Research Department Montecello? n in August 2007
Market, E (2008) Plasticity? neural and cognitive: From maps Minds. Bolet? N of psychology? A, vol. 134, n 1109-137.
Perry, B. (2008) the aggression? N? and violence: the experience of neurologist? a. School. com 1-2.
Cor? N: 47:19
Cor? N: 14:35
Cor? N: 17:33
Wilson, M. & R. Wrangham. (2003) intergroup relations in chimpanzees? S?. Review of On? N of Anthropology? To 32: 363-392
Great Expectations: The Basis of Frustration in Human Nature and Beliefs
Sunday, August 22nd, 2010This document is the issue of trust, but it has nothing to do with a story by Charles Dickens. Forgive me if I have this here for a search engine, as it may, in fact, tried to Dickens. I’ve always been fascinated by the “frustration” as an observer, a target and a source of it. In my review of psychology in my opinion, is the frustration of three elements: our expectations, our beliefs about reality and our reactions. Psychologists call the “frustration” as our response to the variation between what we expect and our concept of what is, literally, spending. For example, if we expect our supervisor praised us for our work, and he or she says something cynical about actually answered in the negative. Our response can be physical, mental or emotional, or a mixture of all three. This reaction is known as “frustration.” The level of our frustration is directly proportional to the variation between the strength of our expectations and scope of the current failure to meet expectations. If there was a great expectation of a particular outcome, it will be impossible if the result occurs. On the contrary, if the end result is, can be frustrated. The higher the initial expectations, the greater the frustration if not done. When you do not expect any results, or have a reduced expectation did not find much frustration when they occur. Obviously, if you are able to stay away from the expectations of experience, you can stay clear of frustration. It is important to understand this principle, as many cases as in this example, we have no control over the results of our circumstances. Unfortunately, yes, you can not avoid the expectations, because expectations are the result of our need to understand how the world works. We have to take some “control over our environment and recognize what is expected is actually a prerequisite for this process. Our environment is not always benign, and our expectations allow us to respond appropriately to protect us. By way of example, it is possible hear someone say: “I did through that situation, because I knew what to expect.” This is a dilemma: we need to feed the expectations of being able to cope with our natural environment, but those expectations often create frustration. Two patterns core can help reduce frustration in the face of this dilemma of human nature: Have realistic expectations. Understand the distinction between needs and expectations. There is really built in the relationship between the two. The mere fact that real we want something not create a risk that we get. If we want to minimize frustration, we must have the correct understanding of the factors and then click the appropriate steps to get what you want. If you base your expectations on variables not recognize or can not or will not handle, you increase your chances of frustration. This is particularly critical in human society. When we set our expectations of people in our assumptions about their ideals or beliefs and thinking for us, the frustration risk. When we stop telling people we expect from them, we are in danger of frustration too. When we expect rational men and women magically fully grasp the ideals, philosophy and behavior, we’re almost destined to be systematically frustrated. It is unreasonable to base our expectations of others on the basis that they believe and how we respond.
Engel’s philosophization of the physical and biological sciences neglected the human-based sciences in his dialectics of nature
Friday, May 21st, 2010I will confine myself here to discuss the dialectics of nature Engel, two chapters of his book, which contains nine articles, which has evolved 80% of the content in and around science, through which the dialectic of the two objects living and non-living were discussed and tried to apply the principles of science in the mix of scientific and philosophical way to convince readers of all sectors worldwide
1) Introduction
2) Dialectic
3) basic form of motion
4) Measure the labor movement
5) heat
6) Electricity
7) Kant tidal friction and stretch-Thomson in the rotation of the Earth and the lunar attraction
The role of work in the transition from ape to man
9) natural science and the spiritual world.
. Of course I was able to ignore basic human humanities, which most other sciences of their time out of their increase, for reasons unknown. This book could not be seen in the world without Karl Marx without which Engel identification can not be considered separately, as said many times
.
In my previous writings, because Frederick Engel deviate from the concept of Karl Marx, the dialectic of nature? In describing the true story of the doctors in a remote
Villa was only to say that the subject has experienced only a right of action in modern times where ordinary people want to know more of the comments related only. Engle was actually a student of science and its strong association with scientists
It was no secret and open to all who were familiar with their contributions to help Karl Marx at that time.
In reality, the dialectics of nature, a series of articles was incomplete, the lifetime of both Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Much later, was conducted in German in English in 1925. Karl Marx had some small difference in fundamental prepositions “foreign” elements of these articles for the support of the application as Engel had in mind at that time
. In fact, I was thinking about writing a book about science and its performance relative to other contemporaries as an equal, but unfortunately it was not possible for a couple of unique in the world that has greatly contributed to the poor as a light in the hands to live with dignity and respect.
I do not because all the acts of the individuals themselves are not as similar as possible in all repeated action, if asked to repeat the same conditions and in the same situation without changing the objects linked to the practical idea of how behavior and the social sciences or in other words, if someone knocks on the validity of adding the word “science” for the humanities, are different from each of its secondary branches, main branches beyond its divisions of topics, namely, physical sciences, life sciences and the humanities, not moving further into its branches and sub-branches in depth. For answers to simple questions that follow what I like to say that all the answers very important bifurcate the issues in the dialectics of nature into two main branches for the living and nonliving first
.
1) A person can hit all six in 12 balls, at least?
2) You can do any good spinner entire team continuously in two or three years?
3) Can a man sign the card in the same way without any difference?
4) Why not take the injured to hospital in an accident of the ground?
5) Why did not reach all prisoners in all the cases registered by police in all states?
6) Why not vote for a candidate to all citizens in all democratic countries in the world?
7) Why do Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have contributed all their assets in the past?
What was the need to Osama bin Laden to leave their rich life and why to participate in war games with the powerful forces of the United States and its allies
9) Why did Saddam Hussein, with his uncompromising stance against U.S. forces and was killed, along with thousands of thousands of people on both sides?
10) Why 1. 5 million Cambodians lost their lives in war.
Answering all these questions, the mind must be used only for humans but not non-living things in nature. Why are some contradictions in human society. The first of these was the man and nature. Nature has its own contradictions, with all its elements that play a key role in shaping that any new development. In nature, the players are important, fire, water, forests, soil, temperature and rain falls
. On the other hand, wild animals, poisonous insects, animals and friendly way elsewhere. Humans and their descendants of origin, development, have another party. Each party and its branches including its components and the players never play elsewhere as a flexible set of merging all its rules. In essence, where players from that particular field has its own set of laws and principles for the various acts to play within your circle. When players are different rules and laws also differ from the previous field.
So the principles of physics and chemistry is not a single set of laws. At the same time, biology, astronomy and mathematics not a single set of law because his players are different and their rules are different from another branch of law. The unique set of planetary laws, human beings have the dominant role in shaping the nature to change conditions such as global warming and climate change
. The effects and influences of human acts is the consolidation of men throgh or through the mechanism of changing conditions on the planet. To change the laws of any branch that has the role of internal actors know if the software programming language specific to a particular job is enforceable and enforced. No other software is allowed to carry out work in other Windows-only
The smooth flow of goods are developed by one or two people with his knowledge of the issues and found that these soft wares are useful for making money in the global market through your company or just for themselves.
In addition, computers were invented and developed for the convenience of the works of the people. “Therefore, who invented and developed all soft products useful for the world market, as well as for themselves.. Here’s another question , Charles Babbage, who was the idea behind the invention of computers and the same idea was materialized through just Eckert and Mauchly. Now most people are using computers in the world. It seems that the world teams are doing all the work and humans are the next and were guided by computer
. From a distant look on man-computer, which is common to understand that human beings are dependent on computers and computers are the driving force for humans. And those who are writing the history of contemporary society in the future, so I really could write what they saw from the outside. As in the case of Engels’s writings on the dialectics of nature. By means of the invention and write something new in today’s society is common to write the past, corresponding to the visible elements to their logical conclusions, but only think and write
.
The fundamental and important question in the name of Marxism, dialectics of nature, if Marxism, in which the whole structure is raised by other contributors to the development of Marxism, Lenin, and after Moa. But all these contributions are not formed only in the name of Marxism, but all these “isms” were up in philosophization same structure in a form, including all persons and their collaborators.
The following is the set of laws, Engel took the writings of Hegel, and described his performance in his book.
“Y” then the history of nature and human society that the laws of dialectics are distracted. Because they are only the most general laws, these two aspects of historical development as well as thought itself, and in fact can reduce the top three.
1) The law of transformation
2) The interpretation of the law
3) The law of negation of negation ”
These laws basically extracts from the writings of Hegel and the way it was applied to the dialectics of nature has been described in detail. Here I reference in the description of the laws of man with comparison of other physical and biological entities and add the other topic clearly relevant to separate the human laws of the laws of things that do not occur in nature. At the same time, nobody should have any objection to the description of the laws of all science and where the laws of human beings and human nature are discussed, it is the duty of everyone to change over human beings List laws in all the sciences “Maximum Interest humans are seriously damaged by the belief that human laws are very scientific and based on science that will save human society for peace and prosperity in the law of universal brotherhood with all aspects of the rights guaranteed by the Charter humans. Here are the following statements on the issues between them to prepare a universal set of laws common to both non-human humans in the name of dialectics of nature
.
“But they have raised for the first time in its universal validity of a general law of development of nature, society and thought, will always remain a place of historical importance. And these men have done for years the quantity and quality to become the “one another, not knowing what they did and then have to be content with Moliere’s M. Jourdain, who had spoken prose all his life without some form of Inking”
It is clear that Engel has stated that these laws are general laws of development of nature, society and thought and played in his statements already made by all the sciences with the names of the makers of their knowledge.
In his article, “the basic form of movement” has taken in principle Helmhotlz Descartes law of conservation of force, the right of Kant and Kant’s theory of cosmology-Lap-lace in passing its laws to men with its laws of science
.
It could be understood that the dialectic is demonstrated by the results of our experience of nature, so far all the opposite pole are generally determined by the interaction of the two polar opposites to each other, the separation and opposition these poles exists only with your unit and connect the other and vice versa, the interconnection exists only in his separation and unity in the opposition. ” This shows that the two opposites of the mutual connection and unity in their opposition speaks directly to the company and people everywhere in the communist world. This type of direct application to the society by the communist parties around the world in a very mechanics of the basic historical mistakes what I understand about the dialectical nature Engel should be adjusted and applied to human philosophy based on Marxism, although things based on Marxist philosophy nonliving physical, biological, chemistry, philosophy, mathematics, astronomy and non-living things driven by the dialectics of nature Engel.