From John Milbank’s Theology and Social Theory, page 398:
If, indeed, there are no objective standards of truth and goodness, as nihilism claims, then every act of persuasion is in fact an at of violence. Yet, on the other hand, Christianity does not claim that the Good and the True are self-evident to objective reason, or dialectical argument. On the contrary, it from the first took the side of rhetoric against philosophy and contended that the Good and the True are those things of which we ‘have a persuasion’, pistis, or ‘faith’. We need the stories of Jesus for salvation, rather than just a speculative notion of the good, because only the attraction exercised by a particular set of words and images causes us to acknowledge the good and to have an idea of the ultimate telos. Testimony is here offered to the Good, in a witnessing that also participates in it. This commitment to a rhetorical, and not dialectical path to the Good opens out the following implication: only persuasion of the truth can be non-violent, but truth is only available through persuasion. Therefore truth, and non-violence, have to be recognized simultaneously in that by which we are persuaded. Without attachment to a particular persuasion — which we can never prove to be either true, or non-violent — we would have no real means to discriminate peace and truth from their opposites.And from Pope Paul VI, Dignitatis Humanæ:
An abstract attachment to non-violence is therefore not enough — we need to practice this as a skill, and to learn its idiom.
Truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth, as it makes its entrance into the mind at once quietly and with power.
Nonviolence is not only an ethic about power but also an epistemology about how to let the truth speak for itself.Posted by AKMA at March 27, 2003 12:15 PM | TrackBack
The most basic duality that exists with variables is how the programmer sees them in a totally different way than the computer does. When you're typing away in Project Builder, your variables are normal words smashed together, like software titles from the 80s. You deal with them on this level, moving them around and passing them back and forth.
Posted by: Walter at January 13, 2004 04:13 AMEach Stack Frame represents a function. The bottom frame is always the main function, and the frames above it are the other functions that main calls. At any given time, the stack can show you the path your code has taken to get to where it is. The top frame represents the function the code is currently executing, and the frame below it is the function that called the current function, and the frame below that represents the function that called the function that called the current function, and so on all the way down to main, which is the starting point of any C program.
Posted by: Richard at January 13, 2004 04:13 AMWhen Batman went home at the end of a night spent fighting crime, he put on a suit and tie and became Bruce Wayne. When Clark Kent saw a news story getting too hot, a phone booth hid his change into Superman. When you're programming, all the variables you juggle around are doing similar tricks as they present one face to you and a totally different one to the machine.
Posted by: Rook at January 13, 2004 04:14 AMLet's see an example by converting our favoriteNumber variable from a stack variable to a heap variable. The first thing we'll do is find the project we've been working on and open it up in Project Builder. In the file, we'll start right at the top and work our way down. Under the line:
Posted by: Denton at January 13, 2004 10:27 AMBeing able to understand that basic idea opens up a vast amount of power that can be used and abused, and we're going to look at a few of the better ways to deal with it in this article.
Posted by: Wilfred at January 13, 2004 10:28 AMLet's see an example by converting our favoriteNumber variable from a stack variable to a heap variable. The first thing we'll do is find the project we've been working on and open it up in Project Builder. In the file, we'll start right at the top and work our way down. Under the line:
Posted by: Walter at January 13, 2004 10:28 AM