The theory of knowledge has a long history. It’s begins with church fathers, and scholastics. Appealing to God as the source of all knowledge, and to scriptures as its proof.
Then, the followers of skepticism – Hume, rationalism – Descartes, empiricism – Locke, were less prepared to believe in simple truths. Modern thinkers grew increasingly tired of philosophy instead pursuing a strict scientific realism in schools of pragmatism, positivism, and materialism.
Whether looking for answers in religious belief or by seeking for rational explanations trough observation, humans have always been thriving to learn more about what’s out there.
This paper explores the possibility of a Social Contract attuned to the technologies of the Information Society as a central tool in the abolition of contemporary slavery.
Two hundred and one years have passed since the trade in slaves was abolished in the British Empire with those dealing in slaves subjected to a fine of one hundred pounds (Parliament of the United Kingdom, 1807). Sixty years ago this December the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations expressed in plain words the fundamental and inalienable rights held by every human being around the planet; universal in each nation and in each culture it made freedom from slavery a fundamental human right. Three years ago at the 2005 World Summit the Assembly introduced a new concept of a moral imperative (known as the Responsibility to Protect) for countries to protect their own people from exploitation, and to help those in need in fellow countries (United Nations General Assembly, 2005).
Broadcast media have in recent years increasingly been criticized for a perceived decrease in the quality of information they provide, broadcast tabloidization, irrelevance, and more generally for the concentration of ownership (Bromley, 2001, p. 2).
However there are more optimistic alternative models (Goh & Foo, 2007, p. 137) with implications towards better quality information and an increasingly meaningful discourse accessible to more and more people.
These views could be broadly described as being in the realm of social media, and generally advocate using technical innovations such as the Internet to engage people in a more transparent conversation. As a superior model of communication, social media will increase mediation quality and lead to benefits in several areas over the traditional broadcasting model.
I cannot afford a car. Don’t have a license to drive one. No fan of air pollution -- in the cities. Do not enjoy the noise. Like cars though. But wish they were zero-emission, and silent. (Video after break).
I do enjoy driving.
We never had a car and no-one in my family drives. Always lived in the center of the city. Walking distance. Cities like Stockholm, Barcelona, Paris have public bicycles. No need for parking space. Stuck in traffic, no. Apparently ants never have traffic jams.
My office is wireless. I need my laptop and Wi-Fi. I live close to school. Like reading books in public transport. Like drinking, means no driving anyway. Driving is dangerous, terrorism is less common than traffic accidents.
But maybe I buy a car. Once I can afford one. When cars have become tech-advanced. Flying cars.
I recently started tracking my sleep using YawnLog. It has been surprising how well I sleep. But also how few dreams I can remember. There are only a few days in a month where I really remember what I’d dreamed.
This list does not pretend for any scientific method. I’ve merely hand-picked the categories into which people have put their causes on Facebook using the Causes application.
Facebook: if you can provide any further statistics, this would be helpful.
I like that the statute is made of glass and looks kind of transparent. There’s free wireless Internet for everybody. And kids can skate, ride and bike, and just hang around. Pretty cool.
