C 2013 National Technology And Science Press: Fill & Download for Free

The best. Judge by yourself. Follows a presentative list of randomly chosen frequent participants in the show. There are much more (at least a few dozens of distinguished experts in various disciplines of politics, economy and such).Vladimir Zhirinovsky. The Russian ultranationalist politician and leader of the LDPR party (Liberal Democratic Party of Russia). "…a showman of Russian politics, blending populist and nationalist rhetoric, anti-Western invective and a brash, confrontational style";Gennady Zyuganov. The Soviet and Russian politician, chairman of the Council of the Union of Communist Parties - CPSU (c 2001 ). Doctor of Philosophy, author of several books, as well as publications in the press;Sergei Mironov. The Russian political and state figure , deputy of the State Duma of the VI convocation and 7 convocation , head of the faction of the "Fair Russia" in the State Duma, chairman of the Council of the Chamber of Deputies of the "Fair Russia "- a member of the Bureau of the Presidium of the Central Council of the Party (2011-2013). The Chairman of the Supervisory Board of the Union of Russian Airborne Troops.Dmitry Kulikov. The Russian political scientist and publicist, political consultant[ source is not specified 289 days], a specialist in Ukraine. Expert of the State Duma Committee on CIS Affairs and Relations with Compatriots[ source not specified 289 days]. Film producer, TV and radio presenter.Vyacheslav Nikonov. Soviet and Russian historian, writer, political scientist, statesman and politician, grandson of VM Molotov, deputy of the State Duma of the VI and VII convocations of United Russia, chairman of the Committee for education and science. Doctor of Historical Sciences, Dean Faculty of Public Administration of Moscow State University.Sergei Zheleznyak. Russian statesman, politician, manager. Member of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs since October 5, 2016.Yevgeny Satanovsky. Russian Orientalist and economist, one of the leading experts in politics and economics in Israel, as well as other countries of the Middle East [1]. Founder and President of the Center for Science " Institute of the Middle East " (formerly the Institute for the Study of Israel and the Middle East). Candidate of Economic Sciences, Professor. The third president of the Russian Jewish Congress (2001-2004) [2]. Member of the expert group on improving legislation in the field of freedom of conscience and religious associations of the expert council of the State Duma Committee for the Development of Civil Society, issues of public and religious associations.Sergei Mikheev. Russian political scientist, leading expert of the Center for Political Technologies. Director of the Institute of Caspian Cooperation. The head of the expert-consultative Council under the Head of the Republic of Crimea.Alexei Pushkov. A Russian state and public figure. Candidate of historical sciences, political scientist, professor of MGIMO. The honorary doctor of the Moscow Humanitarian University. Journalist, author and presenter of the analytical program " Postscript " on the TV channel " TV Center ". Honored Worker of Culture (2004)Maria Zakharova. Russian diplomat and director of the Information and Press Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation (official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation ), since December 26, 2017. Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Envoy 1 class (2017) [3] [4]. Candidate of Historical Sciences.Karen Shakhnazarov. Soviet and Russian filmmaker, producer and screenwriter. Director General of the Mosfilm studios.Ariel Cohen. The principal of International Market Analysis. PhD., MALD International Relations, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.Dimitri K. Simes. President and CEO of The Center for the National Interest and publisher of its foreign policy bi-monthly magazine, The National Interest. Simes was selected to lead the Center in 1994 by former President Richard Nixon, to whom he served as an informal foreign policy advisor and with whom he traveled regularly to Russia and other former Soviet states as well as Western and Central Europe. Served as chairman of the Center for Russian and Eurasian Programs at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he was also a senior associate. Earlier, he was the director of the Soviet and East European Research Program and a Research Professor of Soviet Studies at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) of the Johns Hopkins University. Prior to his work at SAIS, Simes was a senior research fellow and subsequently the director of Soviet Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition to teaching at SAIS, Simes taught at the University of California at Berkeley and Columbia University.What I dislike there? Nothing to dislike. But I do think that English subtitles would do a great job to rise at least a little bit the education level of the Western public, especially the American folk, which is distinguished by its miserable state of literacy in everything concerning Russian politics and culture.

As someone who does research on atheism, I would offer that I'm relatively highly qualified to answer this question.The question was why atheism is increasing (and I will limit my response to the American case), not whether or not it is. The data across multiple sources would show that it is, in fact, increasing, although slowly; I would consider this a point that does not need to be argued (although it could be demonstrated rather easily).But as for why, no one knows why atheism is increasing in America, or if the trend will continue. There are various theories; in fact, a contrary case could also be made that religion is simply changing, or that other indicators evince increasing vitality for religion or that secular growth is not strong/will not last [1; 19, chapter 3].I can offer you five theoretical reasons, backed by research. Bear in mind that these explanations are not necessarily either mutually inclusive or exclusive, nor is this list meant to be exhaustive; I was trying not to make this entry so long that people wouldn't read it.No.1 Political Backlash (Values Conflict)Offered initially by Hout and Fischer in a 2002 paper [2], this view implies that the increase in atheists is likely part of the larger increase in those who have “No Religion”, referred to as the “Nones”. Because they find that the shift from a religious preference to no religious preference does not characterize political conservatives, but only political moderates and liberals, they offer that the larger shift to no religion is a political response to the Religious Right. I infer that the growth of atheism becomes more plausible inside the political atmosphere which drove the rise in Nones (see reason number 5). Robert Putnam (mentioned further below) also noted in his co-authored volume American Grace [3] that a values conflict that emerged across 1960 to 1990 is responsible for multiple “shocks” across American society that result in the rise of the Nones as well; these shocks, in this case, are centered on conflict over social values, particularly as they relate to sex, sexuality, and drug use.Hout and Fischer also refer to delays in marriage. One of the conventional pieces of wisdom in the sociology of religion is that data often show a “return” to religion or church for those young couples who bear children; this is referred to as a “life cycle” effect and depends upon demography. Because modern American populations are putting off marriage and childbearing until later, we are seeing a lag with respect to return to religion. However, taking the political backlash into account, it is possible that more and more people will not return to religion or the church even after marrying and having children, as the lag means them spending more time outside of institutionalized religion (see also point number 5, about generational displacement, which keys into this).No. 2: Broad Social DisengagementIn 2001, Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam published Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community [3]. His central thesis meant to show the key indicators of the strength of American community and civil life had weakened over time (e.g. number of social ties to other people). In 2005, sociologist William Bainbridge published an article examining the social ties of atheists [4]. His abstract read:Data from a large, four-language web-based questionnaire, supplemented with data from the General Social Survey, allow us to explore possible sources of Atheism, notably the hypothesis that lack of social obligations encourages disbelief in God. The analysis is rooted in the compensator theory of religion, first proposed twenty-five years ago, but it incorporates a recent addition: the distinction between primary and secondary compensation. Social obligations make secondary compensation important, because it substitutes a compensator for a reward that a person is obligated to provide to another person. The data show that Atheism is indeed more common among people whose social obligations are weak. The analysis also traces connections between Atheism and the demographic fertility collapse that has been occurring in most advanced industrial nations, suggesting that secularization might best be understood in the context of declining social obligations.This analysis has been contradicted since its publication [18], yet it is still worth considering when we wonder about the rise of atheism.No. 3: SecularizationSecularization has a long and conflicted history in the sociology of religion, with a research focus dating back to the 1950s [5]; it has also gone under a great number of revisions and caveats along the way. In a crude way, it can be summarized as saying that modernity is antithetical to religion. Immediately we can see that whether this relationship is true will depend upon how we define and/or measure “modernity” (and “religion” for that matter).[As an important side note, secularization theory was highly contested by the rise of Rational Choice Theory of religion, inaugurated by Rodney Stark and William Bainbridge in 1987 [6]; it was contested prior to 1987 by other theorists and researchers, but RCT largely is a response to the various inadequacies of secularization theory when it comes to explaining religious change.]In 2004, Norris and Inglehart published Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide [7], which introduced what came to be known as the Existential Security Thesis (also sometimes called the existential security framework; closely related to the personal security hypothesis/uncertainty hypothesis). The linchpin observation made from this book was that the countries which tended to perform well on indices of societal well-being also tended to be lower down on religiosity spectrums, and vice versa (i.e. poor societal well-being, high religiosity). EST was essentially a modified, updated version of secularization theory. It posited two axioms: a security axiom, and a cultural traditions axiom. George Brian Nicholson, in his Master’s thesis on EST [8], provides the following sufficient description:The security axiom reflects the idea that “societies around the world differ greatly in their levels of economic and human development and socioeconomic equality—and consequently, in the extent to which they provide their people with a sense of existential security” (Norris and Inglehart, 2004, p.217). Facing more illness, disease, higher child mortality rates, political unrest, and providing less education, for example, marks these societies. The divide between rich and poor countries continues to increase. Thus, countries with less security will have more of a need for religion. The cultural traditions axiom reflects the underlying influence of a country’s religious or cultural heritage on the ideological views of the citizens. This adds a qualitative entity to their secularization theory...the authors summarize their overall secularization argument: “The theory … argues that the erosion of religious values, beliefs, and practices is shaped by long-term changes in existential security, a process linked with human development and socioeconomic equality, and with each society’s cultural legacy and religious traditions” (Norris and Inglehart, 2004, p.53).Any attempt to examine societal or state health and its relationship to indicators of religiosity falls into the scope of EST.Another poster here mentioned the EST work of Gregory Paul. He published an article supporting EST in 2005 [9]; his article’s claims and conclusions were rebutted to some extent in the same journal the following year [10], with the article’s authors saying:This rejoinder addresses Paul’s thesis, analysis, and conclusions in terms of the various methodological assumptions and frameworks used to deploy his study. It is the opinion of the authors that once all of the methodological issues are considered, Paul’s findings and conclusions are rendered ineffectual. In closing, various suggestions are offered in the hopes of advancing Paul’s hopes for “future research and debate on the issue” of comparative analysis of religiosity, secularism, and democratic social health.Furthermore, Gregory Paul also does not have any credentials that would regard him as a social scientist, social theorist, or even as a researcher of religion. He is manifestly an anti-theist [11], which renders his work suspect.No. 4: Internet UseCheyne and Britton, in an unpublished manuscript ostensibly dated 2010 [12], say:The internet has changed many things, including the world of atheists and other nontheists. Prior to the advent of the internet, such people were relatively isolated, possibly able to find a few books such as Bertrand Russell’s “Why I am not a Christian” at the local library, but with little material to stimulate any incipient irreligion unless they lived in major centres. It is likely the internet, even more than works by Dawkins, Hitchens, and the others or, rather, the interaction between the two that has created what has been called, for better or worse, the “new atheism.” Much has been written about the characteristics of the new atheists and much of this has been based on the writings of a few highly visible atheists. Little is known about the depth or breadth of such views. In addition to the direct effects of such writings, it is the chatter on the internet about such books and the rise of atheist blogs such as Atheist Planet, Pharyngula, and many others that is creating a sense of community among nonbelievers, doubters, and sceptics. Hence, we thought it timely to investigate the characteristics of the people connected, however peripherally, to this new internet communityAnd then there is Downey's popular paper about the relationship between Internet use and no religion [13], which would show how Internet use contributes to a decline in religious affiliation, although this is very likely not a direct effect on disaffiliation itself but co-occurs with other factors that perhaps are. See also Smith and Cimino's 2012 article [17] which discusses specifically the role of the Internet, online atheist communities, activism, and identity formation.See also new work by Paul McClure [20], who finds that “internet use is associated with increases in being religiously unaffiliated and decreases in religious exclusivism. At the same time, I find that television viewing is linked to decreases in religious attendance and other time-related religious activities, but these outcomes are not impacted by Internet use. To explain these disparate findings, I argue that the Internet is fundamentally different from previous technologies like television and thus impacts religious beliefs and belonging but not time-related religious activities.”No. 5: Generational DisplacementMerino’s work [14] suggests that a cohort effect is in play; the rising number of atheists is explained mostly by the generational increases via demography. This would comport well with the fact that the increase in the number of atheists has been slow and gradual.​​However, other research [15] would show that the nonreligious, including atheists, compared to religious denominations and traditions, demographically perform poorly when it comes to generating/retaining their numbers across time. Still, counterbalancing for these two items might yet allow for atheism to increase slowly over many years.​​In summary, many things contribute to the rise in atheism. Phil Zuckerman, despite his association with Gregory Paul and his own manifest anti-theism, has produced some work worthy of consideration. Notably, apostasy and "no religion" are not to be equated with atheism per se, however, some apostates do go on to become atheists. Below is a quote from my own work, referencing Zuckerman's book Faith No More: Why People Reject Religion [16]:Zuckerman (2011, chapter 10, pp. 151-169) interviewed 87 apostates (individuals who had left or rejected their previous religious tradition or affiliation but who may or may not have become atheists/agnostics), some of whom eventually became atheists, and pinpointed “the nine most typical, most pervasive, or most often mentioned reasons given by apostates in accounting for their rejection of religion (p. 153).” These reasons broadly fell into the following categories: parents; education; misfortune; other cultures/other religions; friends, colleagues, lovers; politics; sex; Satan and hell; and malfeasance of religious associates. Zuckerman, adding the caveat that “reasons are not necessarily causes”, distinguishes between subjective reasons and objective causes; that is, any one of the various factors may increase the likelihood of apostasy but would not be, in and of itself, a cause for the rejection of one’s religion. He concludes that “a variety of life circumstances, personal experiences, and/or social dynamics (p. 165)” underlie the likelihood of apostasy.EDIT (April 27, 2017). A few months ago, Richard Flory had a piece in Observer, about factors driving the nonreligious rise. It was so compelling, I had to add his insights here. To summarize:First, traditional authority structures, including religious ones, have been flattened through access to knowledge. As a result, everyone and no one is an authority, which reduces the need for traditional authorities of any sort.Second, fewer Americans view important social institutions – such as religious organizations, corporations and government – as having a positive impact in society.Third, religion has a bad brand. From sex scandals across different religious traditions to the increasing association between evangelical Christianity and the political right, religion per se has taken a beating.[I think this one is especially important] Fourth, increasing competition for people’s attention from work, family responsibilities, social media and other activities means that religion loses out to more pressing commitments.Finally, personal choice is a bedrock feature of American culture. Individuals choose professional affiliations, diets, club memberships and myriad other associations, with religion being one more affiliation that is “chosen” by adherents.__________[1] Stark, R. (2015). The triumph of faith: Why the world is more religious than ever. Open Road Media.[2] Hout, M., & Fischer, C. S. (2002). Why more Americans have no religious preference: Politics and generations. American Sociological Review, 165-190.[3] Putnam, R. D., Campbell, D. E., & Garrett, S. R. (2012). American grace: How religion divides and unites us. Simon and Schuster.[4] Bainbridge, W. S. (2005). Atheism. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion, 1.[5] Page on iasc-culture.org[6] Stark, R., & Bainbridge, W. S. (1987). A theory of religion (Vol. 2). New York: Lang.[7] Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2011). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide. Cambridge University Press.[8] Nicholson, G. B. (2006). Cultural Zones and Existential Security: A Cross-national Examination of Secularization Theory (Master's Thesis, University of Georgia).[9] Paul, G. (2005). Cross-national correlations of quantifiable societal health with popular religiosity and secularism in the prosperous democracies. Journal of Religion & Society 1(7).[10] Mach, T. S., Moreno-Riano, G., & Smith, M. C. (2006). Religiosity, Secularism, and Social Health: A Research Note. Journal of Religion and Society, 8.[11] THE SCIENCE OF RELIGION by Gregory S. Paul[12] Page on arts.uwaterloo.ca[13] [1403.5534] Religious affiliation, education and Internet use[14] Merino, S. M. (2013). Irreligious socialization? The adult religious preferences of individuals raised with no religion. Secularism and Nonreligion, 1, 1-16.[15] Page on pewforum.org[16] Zuckerman, P. (2011). Faith no more: Why people reject religion. Oxford University Press.[17] Smith, C., & Cimino, R. (2012). Atheisms unbound: The role of the new media in the formation of a secularist identity. Secularism and Nonreligion, 1(1), 17-31.[18] Hunter, L. A. (2010). Explaining atheism: Testing the secondary compensator model and proposing an alternative. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion, 6.[19] Hood Jr, R. W., Spilka, B., Hunsberger, B., & Gorsuch, R. (1996). The psychology of religion: An empirical approach. New York: Guilford Press.[20] McClure, P. K. (2017). Tinkering with Technology and Religion in the Digital Age: The Effects of Internet Use on Religious Belief, Behavior, and Belonging. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. DOI. 10.1111/jssr.12365

I have cleared UPSC prelims 2017–18–19 consecutively as full time working professional in a heavily loaded industry. Before starting the full swing prelims preparation, I made detailed notes from UPSC past year papers starting from 2013. It helped me to narrow down my reading materials and aligning into the demands of the exam. Start playing with the questions with curiosity and love, then it will be an addiction play.Check out the following onesCSE Prelims 2018, Set-C, Question-46When the alarm of your Smartphone rings in the morning, you wake up and tap it to stop the alarm which causes your geyser to be switched on automatically. The smart mirror in your bathroom shows the day's weather and also indicates the level of water in your overhead tank. After you take some groceries from your refrigerator for making breakfast, it recognises the shortage of stock in it and places an order for the supply of fresh grocery items. When you step out of your house and lock the door, all lights, fans, geysers and AC machines get switched off automatically. On your way to office, your car warns you about traffic congestion ahead and suggests an alternative route, and if you are late for a meeting, it sends a message to your office accordingly.In the context of emerging communication technologies, which one of the following terms best applies to the above scenario?(a) Border Gateway Protocol(b) Internet of Things(c) Internet Protocol(d) Virtual Private NetworkIn the first instance, this question looks difficult. Because it is lengthy and it contains too many technology-related terms with complicated options. Many candidates avoided this question in 2018. In the real examination’s Stress, we will be hard-pressed for the time and the candidates will be looking for quick shots and tend to minimise the negative marks.But believe me, this is one of the easiest questions asked in 2018. If you are a regular reader of the Science and Technology section of THE HINDU Newspaper, You can easily arrive at the (b) Internet of Things in the first reading only.Key takeaways:Read the S&T with curiosity;Not all questions come from NCERTS and PT-365 modules;In the examination hall, you should be utterly Calm and Composed; Even if you become slightly anxious, there are chances you may tick option D. Because it also looks same if you are not aware of computer-related terms.Practice Comprehension reading – it may help for CSAT as well as paper 1.Next question: prelims 2018, set-c, Q-41With reference to the Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS), consider the following statements: 1. IRNSS has three satellites in geostationary and four satellites in geosynchronous orbits.2. IRNSS covers entire India and about 5500 sq. km beyond its borders.3. India will have its own satellite navigation system with full global coverage by the middle of 2019.Which of the statements given above is/are correct?(a) 1 only(b) 1 and 2 only(c) 2 and 3 only(d) NoneAnswer:If you are a religious follower of ISRO and its missions (a must for UPSC aspirants), you will clearly know what are the reasons for 3 satellites in Geostationary and 4 in Geosynchronous orbits. Statement 1 is correct, no issue.It is a well-established fact that ISRO doesn’t have that capacity to provide full global coverage by 2019. Our main is Defence and self-reliance in critical times, a lesson from the 1999 Kargil war. Hence statement 3 is wrong, no issue.But the trick is statement 2. In our long term memory, it is stored as 1500 km beyond borders. But in the real examination stress, our working memory overlooks the fact and assumes 5500 km must be true. Because we only get 72 seconds per question in prelims. Many, including myself, ticked option(b) ie, both 1 & 2 statements are true. And lost 2.66 marks.Next question: prelims 2017, Set-A, Q-55With reference to ‘National Investment and Infrastructure Fund’, which of the following statements is/are correct?1. It is an organ of NITI Aayog.2. It has a corpus of Rs. 4,00,000 crore at present.Select the correct answer using the code given below:(a) 1 only(b) 2 only(c) Both 1 and 2(d) Neither 1 nor 2Answer:Statement 1: we clearly know that NITI Aayog doesn’t handle funds. It is the basic difference between the planning commission and the NITI Aayog. Hence (a) is wrong. No issue.Statement 2: NIIF was a hot topic in 2016-17. It was announced in 2015-16 Budget and many countries started making MOUs with India throughout 2015-16-17.The trick was NIIF was limited (2016–17) to 40 thousand crores not 4 lakh crores. Many have lost 2.66 because of one 0 (zero).key takeaways:Play the number game with UPSC in a safe mode. I urge UPSC should ask more and more conceptually logical and argumentative questions. It should desist from these kinds of number deceptive questions because a civil servant is going to argue and administer for the causes, not become a bank cashier.Not all 100 questions in the Pre paper will be set like this. But we have to identify and categorise various types of questions and be prepared accordingly. Even while reading any particular topic in a newspaper or any study material, we should mentally draft what are the possible UPSC types of questions which could be drafted from this piece of information.ATB for Prelims 2020,Leave No Stone Unturned