Family Law Solutions Divorce Guide Free Download Of Divorce Guide: Fill & Download for Free

Harriet Martineau c1834, by Richard Evans. (Harriet Martineau - Wikipedia)In 1855, Harriet Martineau, aged 52, prepared to die of a heart condition diagnosed by her London physician. She hastily finished her autobiography and wrote her own obituary for The Daily News, the newspaper she had served since 1852, leaving a space for someone to enter the date of death when it finally occurred.[1] That date turned out to be 21 years later, in 1876. Over time, her fame declined. ‘I had no idea she was still alive even, much less contributing to The Daily News,’ admitted her near-contemporary, the actress Fanny Kemble, in 1874.[2] Martineau herself added not another word to her Autobiography (1877).[3]Best remembered today as a journalist, educationalist and early feminist sociologist, Martineau was also the author of an amazingly outspoken Autobiography. So far as journalism is concerned, she started young, published in all the leading periodicals, and could write about anything and everything, from China (past and present) to the fire hazards of crinolines. In 1852, The Quarterly Review joked:When she speaks of Continental politics, her proper post seems the Foreign Office; but when she touches on religious matters, and disposes of Presbyterian schism and Tractarian mummery, we are at a loss to say whether she should have been Moderator of the General Assembly or Archbishop of Canterbury.[4]In her heyday, however, when she first shot to fame in 1832, it seemed that everyone knew who Martineau was, and talked about her as an unlikely new celebrity: ‘the little deaf woman at Norwich’, as Lord Chancellor Henry Brougham nicknamed her.[5] How then, do we explain her extraordinary success, followed by decades of oblivion, and now, strangely enough, a new kind of popularity, especially with feminist critics and historians?Born in 1802 into an earnest, middle-class family in Norwich, Harriet was the sixth child of a bombazine manufacturer, Thomas Martineau, and his Newcastle wife, Elizabeth Rankin.[6] The Martineau family was of French Huguenot ancestry and professed Unitarian views.[7] Her adored younger brother, James Martineau (1805-1900), became a prominent Unitarian minister and philosopher the tradition of the English Dissenters,[8] and her older sister Rachel (1800-78) headmistress of a Liverpool girls’ school attended by Elizabeth Gaskell’s second daughter, Meta.[9] Her uncles included the surgeon Philip Meadows Martineau (1752–1829), whom she had enjoyed visiting at his nearby estate, Bracondale Lodge[10] , and businessman and benefactor Peter Finch Martineau.[11]Harriet Martineau's childhood home (Harriet Martineau - Wikipedia)Her ideas on domesticity and the "natural faculty for housewifery", as described in her book Household Education (1848)[12] , stemmed from her lack of nurture growing up. Although their relationship was better in adulthood, Harriet saw her mother as the antithesis of the warm and nurturing qualities which she knew to be necessary for girls at an early age, claiming her mother abandoned her to a wet nurse.[13]Her mother urged all her children to be well read, but at the same time opposed female pedantics "with a sharp eye for feminine propriety and good manners. Her daughters could never be seen in public with a pen in their hand." Her mother strictly enforced proper feminine behaviour, pushing her daughter to "hold a sewing needle" as well as the (hidden) pen.[14]By the time she was sixteen, she was forced to face and deal with increasing deafness, which she described as ‘very noticeable, very inconvenient, and excessively painful.’[15] Over time, Martineau would go on to lose her senses of taste and smell. She taught herself how to manage her handicap with the assistance of an ear trumpet, so that she could take in what she needed in unobtrusive ways.[16] She would be plagued by poor health for the remainder of her life, including two extended periods of ill-health, from 1839 to 1844, and from 1855 until her death.biography and bibliographyHer brother James introduced her to his college friend, John Hugh Worthington, to whom she became engaged, but the relationship was beset by doubts and difficulties and later came to an end when Worthington became seriously ill and eventually died.[17] Harriet writes in the Autobiography that despite her grief at his death, she was relieved when circumstances intervened to prevent their marrying.After her father’s death in 1826, followed by the collapse of the family textile business in 1829[18], Martineau, then 27 years old, stepped out of the traditional roles of feminine propriety to earn a living for her family. Too deaf to work as a governess, yet passionate about educating the public, she pitched herself into serious-minded journalism. Along with her needlework, she began selling her articles to the Monthly Repository, earning accolades, including three essay prizes from the Unitarian Association.[19] Her regular work with the Repository helped establish her as a reliable and popular freelance writer.Martineau began quietly enough, by submitting articles on religious themes to the Unitarian Monthly Repository from 1822.[20] But soon she developed the confidence to tackle the distinctly ‘masculine’ field of political economy. Aware that the textbooks on the subject were intimidating for nonspecialists, she wanted to explain to the public how and why economic laws worked as they did via a series of short tales, each set in a different kind of community.[21] Derived principally from Adam Smith’s TheWealth of Nations (1776)[22] , James Mill’s Elements of Political Economy (1821)[23] , and the theories of Thomas Malthus and David Ricardo, Martineau’s 25-volume series Illustrations of Political Economy (1832-4) was also inspired by Jane Marcet’s Conversations on Political Economy(1816), which showed her how to connect economic theory with the realities of people’s lives.[24] As she read Marcet’s book, Martineau recalls in her Autobiography, ‘groups of personages rose up from the pages, and a procession of action glided through its arguments, as afterwards from the pages of Adam Smith, and all the other Economists’.[25]Martineau’s social and geographical range in these tales was enormous, her characters including the aristocracy, an actress, trades unionists, Irish ‘Whiteboys’, workhouse inmates, clergymen, children, even a mob storming the Bastille in a tale called French Wines and Politics (1833).[26] Each Illustration ended with a ‘Summary of Principles’ – in the case of A Manchester Strike, on wages, population and ‘Combinations of labourers against capitalists’ – to ensure that readers who had lost themselves in the story remembered the takeaway message.[27]It remains difficult for modern readers to understand why her Illustrations were such a roaring success with the public. Even the teenage Princess Victoria loved them, though Martineau worried that she might be skipping the summaries of principles at the end of each tale.[28] Conditions at the time were febrile. Not only was there a dearth of significant imaginative literature in the early 1830s, but the country was also in a state of high anxiety, blamed on social unrest, the 1832 Reform Bill[29] , industrialisation, extreme poverty in expanding cities such as Manchester, and finally a cholera epidemic[30] .When Martineau was tramping around London, personally lobbying publishers to consider her work, she was repeatedly fobbed off, as she records in her Autobiography, with cries of ‘the Reform Bill and the Cholera’, as well as ‘the disturbed state of the public mind, which afforded no encouragement to put out new books’.[31]As it happened, her Illustrations addressed many of the same social concerns, including industrial strikes, wages, poverty and the Poor Laws, that supposedly made the country too preoccupied for fiction. When the publisher Charles Fox grudgingly accepted her proposal[32] , he suddenly found himself with a bestseller on his hands. Each volume in the series is thought to have sold about 10,000 copies.[33]While she was an instinctive sociologist, in that she retained a lifelong interest in people and social structures, Martineau first laid down her methodology in How to Observe: Morals and Manners (1838), a guide for travellers such as herself to other countries and cultures.[34] It was not for her just a matter of wandering randomly, open to impression: the traveller, she insisted, ‘must have made up his mind as to what it is that he wants to know’. [35] The traveller must also be disciplined and principled, and must judge what he finds according to its potential to provide happiness.This was by no means the end of it: Martineau was famous for one thing after another. If in 1832 it was for popularising the fundamental theories of political economy[36] , by 1838 it was for outing herself as an abolitionist in the American antislavery campaign[37] , and publicly adopting a protofeminist stance against the inequalities of the United States constitution. By 1845, however, it was for promoting the cause of mesmerism[38] , and in 1851, in collaboration with the freethinker and phrenologist Henry George Atkinson, for dismissing Christian theology in favour of an agnosticism based on a more scientific understanding of the human mind and body.[39]Page:Once a Week June to Dec 1863.pdf/557Martineau was travelling in Europe in 1839 when she fell ill and was brought to Newcastle to be treated nearby, by her medical brother-in-law, Thomas Michael Greenhow. Moving to lodgings in Tynemouth, she spent five years as an invalid, suffering from a prolapsed uterus and ovarian cyst. Fully expecting to die, she claimed to have been cured by mesmerism, on the basis of which she eagerly resumed work.[40]In the early 1850s, Martineau provided Dickens with a survey of manufacturing industries for Household Words[41] , followed in the 1860s by a whole series for Once a Week on what we would now call ‘health and safety’ in numerous professions, from maid-of-all-work to the steel grinder. Men’s health interested her no less than women’s, down to the details of a metropolitan police officer’s meat-heavy diet, or the advisability of ‘strenuous and varied bodily exercise’ (including the gym) for students, and those of other sedentary professions.[42]As an early feminist, writing about women at a time before the term was first used in its modern sense in the 1890s, Martineau was both outspoken and cautious. In this respect, she is similar to many of her contemporaries: anxious to dissociate herself (as she does openly in her Autobiography) from the notorious example of Mary Wollstonecraft, who was driven by personal circumstances to demand new freedoms for women. [43] Martineau instead emphasised the need for dispassionate, objective grounds for claiming women’s rights. Given her own immaculate personal life, she was more interested in employment opportunities than in sexual freedoms, though she did support divorce reform.[44]In How to Observe, Martineau noted that, while in the US women could earn money only by the traditional routes of teaching, sewing, factory work or other semidomestic occupations, France was the world leader in enabling women to be anything from shopkeepers to ‘professional accountants’, even editors of newspapers.[45] Much as she admired some US attitudes to women, she thought their treatment was comparable with that of slaves.[46] One section of Society in America (1837) is even headed ‘Political Non-Existence of Women’, in that women (like slaves) have to obey laws to which they have never consented, let alone helped to formulate.[47] She also blamed the ‘chivalry’ of US middle-class husbands who were determined to protect their wives from having to work.Her most important statement on employment for women, however, came in ‘Female Industry’ (1859), an extensive overview for The Edinburgh Review. In her characteristically incisive voice, Martineau opened her article by reminding readers that, although ‘we go on talking as if it were true that every woman is, or ought to be, supported by father, brother, or husband’, ‘a very large proportion of the women of England earn their own bread’.[48]Nonetheless, too few of the professions were open to them, and even where women did work (for example, as domestic servants) they rarely earned enough money to save for a comfortable retirement. While safeguarding her identity with a male persona[49] , despite the anonymity of the article (‘every man of us … Our wives’), Martineau’s solution was forthright and practical. The answer was to end male monopolies, and open up all trades and professions, from watch-making to medicine, to suitably qualified women.[50]Harriet MartineauThe final years of her active life were spent touring the Middle East, Ireland and Birmingham’s industrial centres, and writing regularly, not just for The Daily News, but also for many of the mainstream heavyweight Victorian periodicals, including The Edinburgh Review and The Westminster Review, as well as Charles Dickens’s Household Words.[51] Somehow she also found time to write The History of England During the 30 Years’ Peace: 1816-1846(1849-50)[52] , and make regular contributions to another periodical, Once a Week.[53]In her 60s, Martineau campaigned with Florence Nightingale for nursing reform[54]. In 1863, she used her platform at The Daily News to support the campaign against the Contagious Diseases Acts, which authorised the enforced medical examination in garrison towns of any woman suspected of carrying a sexually transmitted infection.[55]On the burgeoning campaigns for the vote, she was more reticent, but signed John Stuart Mill’s petition of 1866.[56]‘Nobody can be further than I am from being satisfied with the condition of my own sex, under the law and custom of my own country,’ she conceded in her Autobiography, but she believed the way forward was for women to ‘obtain whatever they show themselves fit for’. In due course, she argued, when the time was right, women would find their way into political life, much as they had done in other fields.[57]By then, she was confined to her home living a sound ecological life in Ambleside in the Lake District, organising a local building society, and educating her working-class neighbours on what she politely called ‘sanitary matter’.[58] Martineau ceased writing only at the very end of her life.Harriet Martineau, 1861 (Harriet Martineau | Wikiwand)Harriet Martineau died of bronchitis at "The Knoll" on 27 June 1876.[59] She was buried alongside her mother in Key Hill Cemetery, Hockley, Birmingham. The following April, at Bracondale, her cousin's estate, much of Martineau's extensive art collection was sold at auction.[60]By the time she died in 1876, there were few fields, other than the purely scientific, that she had not mastered and made her own. In 1877 her autobiography was published. It was rare for a woman to publish such a work, let alone one secular in nature. Her book was regarded as dispassionate, "philosophic to the core" in its perceived masculinity[61] , and a work of necessitarianism (a metaphysical principle that denies all mere possibility; there is exactly one way for the world to be)[62] .The question of Martineau’s originality remains key to any analysis of her lasting reputation and relevance to today’s debates on the causes she espoused across the middle years of the 19th century. There is a case for saying that, while she started out as a populariser, her two years in the US (1834-6) forced her to formulate her own opinions, not just on the slavery issue, but on women’s equality[63] ; a similar process occurred when she visited the Middle East (1846-7) and was appalled by the harems.[64]Visiting harems in Cairo and Damascus, she was dismayed, not just by the evidence of polygamy, but also by the women’s enforced idleness and brainwashed complicity in a custom she believed could never be eradicated from their country.[65] She called them ‘the most injured human beings I have ever seen’.[66]If anything, Martineau was quickly condemned by her first reviewers for being too outspoken on ‘unfeminine’ subjects, such as the ‘preventive check’ (an early form of contraception)[67] , and independently testing the morality and validity of institutions by measuring their practice against their professed principles.On the other hand, while interdisciplinarity is encouraged in today’s academic landscape, Martineau’s ability to flit from political economy to the history of India and to Auguste Comte’s Positive Philosophy, interrupted by brief forays into realist fiction – Deerbrook (1839) – and children’s literature – The Playfellow (1841) – could condemn her as a self-appointed amateur expert on just about everything.[68]After all, despite her above-average schooling for a middle-class provincial girl born at the start of the 19th century, Martineau was never formally trained in any discipline, and, as a woman, was barred from attending university. At the same time, academic disciplines were less rigorously demarcated than they are today, and it was not unusual even for men to pass seamlessly from one to another.[69] One only has to think of polymaths such as Charles Kingsley[70] , Sir Francis Galton[71] or William Morris, or to see the range of subjects covered by contributors to the serious periodicals, to acknowledge that the disciplines, in Martineau’s time, were less compartmentalised than they became.Harriet Martineau, 1882, (Davis Museum, Wellesley College)The one thing that links all her multifarious interests is her fascination with how societies work, and how they construct their communities, starting with the smallest unit, the family.[72] The first sections of her Autobiography show how angry she was about the way she was brought up, especially the lack of open, demonstrative affection between the parents and children.Many of these episodes still rankled years later when she used her own experiences in Household Education (1849), arguing that all members of a family should go through a shared learning process together, supported by mutual love and respect.[73] Making allowances for its more obvious datedness in terms of details (there is still mention of womanly ‘duty’ and naturally domestic tastes, alongside a real fervour for women’s education), much of what Martineau says accords with modern attitudes to bringing out the best in children and identifying their individual emotional needs.Here perhaps lies the clue to Martineau’s success. Although the lampoonists and satirists of the 1830s portrayed her as an angular bluestocking, devoid of feeling, what she actually did was humanise economic theory by creating characters and scenarios her readers could relate to.[74] One such character is William Allen of A Manchester Strike (1832), a thoughtful factory worker with a lame eight-year-old daughter and a tearful wife, whom we first see being bullied by the neighbourhood ‘scold’.[75] Within a few pages, Martineau has established a set of personal circumstances, much as Gaskell would do more than a decade later in Mary Barton (1848)[76] , followed by a narrative of interlocking cause and effect leading to Allen’s finishing up as a street sweeper.Although Martineau became an overnight celebrity with her Illustrations, she left no permanent mark on economic theory, nor did she make any kind of lasting difference to its application.[77] Perhaps this is inevitable for someone who never pretended to be an original economic theorist. As the Victorian literature scholar Deborah Logan argues in a Broadview Press edition of four selected Illustrations(2004), Martineau instead made an impact as a ‘cultural force whose influence extended far beyond the Reform Bill era’.[78]Harriet Martineau's name on the lower section of the Reformers memorial, Kensal Green Cemetery (Harriet Martineau - Wikipedia)Martineau broke the mould by making complex ideas accessible to a wider readership via entertaining stories that connected grand theories with personal circumstances.[79] While her delight in creating characters and human narratives gradually waned in favour of more direct campaigning for her favourite causes, she never lost her preference for example over theory, or (until her health gave out in 1855) for visiting places in person, so that she could see things for herself.In her early years as a writer, she advocated for free market economic principles in keeping with the philosophy of Adam Smith.[80] Later in her career, however, she advocated for government action to stem inequality and injustice, and is remembered by some as a social reformer due to her belief in the progressive evolution of society.What makes her career so remarkable was the number of times she made a fresh start on a new topic by mastering it for herself, from whatever information she could find to hand, and constantly updating her expertise so that her interventions might offer some practical support. Inevitably, some of these fields dated faster than others, but after a century of critical neglect, Martineau is now being widely reclaimed as a forthright thinker with a distinctive voice.Footnotes[1] Harriet Martineau[2] Frances Anne Kemble Facts[3] Online Library of Liberty[4] Harriet Martineau: gender, national identity, and the contemporary historian[5] "The Little Deaf Woman from Norwich"[6] Harriet Martineau[7] http://Martineau family - Wikipedia [8] James Martineau (1805 - 1900)[9] "Harriet Martineau and the transmission of social knowledge"[10] http://martineau%2C%20harriet%20%282007%29.%20peterson%2C%20linda%20h.%20%28ed.%29.%20autobiography.%20broadview%20press.%20p.%2049/[11] "Peter Finch Martineau" on Revolvy.com[12] Household Education by Harriet Martineau[13] http://Postlethwaite, Diana (Spring 1989). "Mothering and Mesmerism in the Life of Harriet Martineau". Signs. University of Chicago Press. 14 (3): 583–609.[14] http://Postlethwaite, Diana (Spring 1989). "Mothering and Mesmerism in the Life of Harriet Martineau". Signs. University of Chicago Press. 14 (3): 583–609.[15] biography and bibliography[16] biography and bibliography[17] Harriet Martineau (1802-76)[18] Harriet Martineau at The Armitt Museum and Library Cumbria[19] Harriet_Martineau,_Utilitarianism,_Social_Political_Philosophy[20] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://archive.org/details/monthlyreposito11unkngoog&ved=2ahUKEwitrIfCtv7jAhXSWc0KHS9aCuMQFjACegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw25voKcPjwPfwk_vJnS4EFt[21] Lana L. Dalley, “On Martineau’s Illustrations of Political Economy, 1832-34″[22] The Wealth of Nations — Adam Smith Institute[23] Online Library of Liberty[24] Online Library of Liberty[25] Online Library of Liberty[26] Family Fictions and Family Facts[27] Life and Labour in the Nineteenth Century[28] The benefits of a feminist in the family [29] Page on bl.uk[30] Why Half of New York City's Population Fled in 1832[31] Online Library of Liberty[32] A Tale of the Tyne[33] https://www.jstor.org/stable/41810454?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents[34] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.d.umn.edu/cla/faculty/jhamlin/4111/Martineau/Martineau.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiZ_eWSxP7jAhXNKM0KHd9VBgcQFjAKegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw1BPdEA2o2d-5JoaouBFBxP[35] A New Way of Thinking. The Sociological Imagination of Harriet Martineau (1802-1876)[36] Harriet Martineau[37] Harriet Martineau[38] https://www.jstor.org/stable/3174403[39] Letters on the laws of man's nature and development. By Henry George Atkinson ... and Harriet Martineau .. : Atkinson, Henry George, 1812-1890? : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive[40] Harriet Martineau (1802-76)[41] Household Words[42] Harriet martineau, health, and journalism[43] The Next Generation: Harriet Martineau’s Literary Reviews for the Monthly Repository[44] Harriet Martineau and the Birth of Disciplines[45] Harriet Martineau: A Brief Biography and Intellectual History[46] Was the suffragettes’ description of women as slaves justifiable? – Ana Stevenson | Aeon Essays[47] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://minerva.union.edu/kleind/eco024/documents/suffrage/martineau.doc&ved=2ahUKEwjc6ejl4f7jAhWDZ80KHYiuDasQFjAHegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw0pxhSk8KIj4EGHqhuF8sj_[48] Charles Petzold[49] Harriet Martineau and the Birth of Disciplines[50] Worlds are Colliding: Authorship, Gender, and Self-Formation in the lives of Harriet Martineau and Elizabeth Gaskell[51] Authorship, Gender and Power in Victorian Culture: Harriet Martineau and the Periodical Press[52] The history of England during the thirty years' peace : 1816-1846 : Martineau, Harriet, 1802-1876 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive[53] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://collections.mfa.org/objects/466016&ved=2ahUKEwjI_svsuv7jAhXDLs0KHf9LAuIQFjAKegQIBBAC&usg=AOvVaw3jsHOUho4etzkWT-KOf9Q-&cshid=1565651655164[54] A statistical campaign: Florence Nightingale and Harriet Martineau’s 'England and her Soldiers'[55] The British Contagious Diseases Acts (1864, 1866, and 1869)[56] John Stuart Mill and the 1866 petition[57] Online Library of Liberty[58] Online Library of Liberty[59] http://Harriet Martineau". Spartacus Educational. Retrieved 7 August 2019.[60] Mocavo and Findmypast are coming together[61] Harriet Martineau (1802–1876), from Unitarianism to Agnosticism[62] Necessitarianism - Wikipedia[63] https://www.jstor.org/stable/20083989?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents[64] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1018%26context%3Dsociologydiss&ved=2ahUKEwiUhbqKw_7jAhXNbc0KHVqvCt4QFjALegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1JX0aAArKimM96d6B4Sh0p[65] Harriet Martineau, Victorian Imperialism, and the Civilizing Mission[66] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D2385%26context%3Dthesesdissertations&ved=2ahUKEwiAt-uyxv7jAhWXQc0KHSxeCVMQFjAPegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw0tUaT949UUUamF2tsLJVFx[67] Encounters With Harriet Martineau[68] Harriet Martineau and the Birth of Disciplines[69] The Basics of Sociology[70] Charles Kingsley[71] Francis Galton[72] Harriet Martineau[73] Household education. By Harriet Martineau : Martineau, Harriet, 1802-1876 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive[74] https://www.jstor.org/stable/40347122[75] From 'Political' to 'Human' Economy: The Visions of Harriet Martineau and Frances Wright[76] Mary Barton: A Tale of Manchester Life (1848)[77] https://www.jstor.org/stable/3828901?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents[78] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amazon.com/Illustrations-Political-Economy-Selected-Tales/dp/1551114410&ved=2ahUKEwjIno_C1v7jAhWMWM0KHTdGDPIQFjABegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw3jAoTMGp8jYFpZr9Ov-UMm[79] Harriet Martineau[80] Harriet Martineau on the Theory and Practice of Democracy in America - Lisa Pace Vetter, 2008

Narcissists are usually high maintenance and high conflict spouses. When you’re divorcing a narcissist, however, “winning” often means simply coming out of your divorce alive!Narcissists also typically don’t care how long their divorce takes, or how much it costs. The more expensive and time-consuming it is, the easier it is for them to play the victim. Often, the longer your divorce takes, the more your narcissistic spouse feels she is winning.Here are ten steps you need to take when divorcing a narcissist.1. Hire an Experienced Divorce Attorney.Do NOT try to get divorced without an attorney! No matter what your spouse says in the beginning, your divorce is not going to be easy or amicable. You need your own lawyer to guide you through this! You also need to get an attorney who knows what he is doing! Hiring a lawyer who just graduated from law school three months ago simply because they will cut you a break on price is a bad idea! Hiring a shark attorney is also a bad idea! While you may think you need a super aggressive attorney to put your narcissistic spouse in her place, the truth is the opposite. Narcissists love conflict! They love to fight. An aggressive lawyer will fan the flames of the fire – at an enormous cost to you!What you need is a reasonable, realistic divorce attorney who can fight when he needs to and back down when doing that makes more sense. You need someone who will help you create a solid strategy, and then will help you execute that strategy step by step, one step at a time.2. Think for the Best but Prepare for the Worst.Don’t assume that the judge will see through your narcissistic spouse just because you do. Narcissists are charming. Your narcissist is going to charm the judge! Remember, you were drawn in by your narcissistic spouse’s behavior, too! You also want to be careful not to let yourself get sucked into blindly trusting your spouse, either in or out of court. While you don’t want to make your divorce harder by refusing to believe anything your spouse says, you also don’t want to get taken to the cleaners either. How do you walk the line between being paranoid and being careful? You start small, and you keep your eyes and ears open. Make a small agreement with your spouse. See if she keeps her end of the deal. Meanwhile, pay attention to what’s happening around you. Don’t just listen to what your spouse says. Watch what your spouse does. That will tell you much more.3. Document EVERYTHING!Narcissists lie ALL THE TIME. Do NOT assume that your narcissistic wife is going to tell the truth in court just because she swore to do so under oath! Also do not assume that if your spouse lies she is going to get caught, charged with perjury, and go to prison for the rest of her life. In the real world, that hardly ever happens. If you want to show that your narcissistic spouse is lying, you need to prove it! That means that you’ve got to document everything. Put all of your conversations with your spouse in writing. Use email and text messaging as much as possible. Both of those forms of communication leave trails behind. They will save you from getting mired in a “he said/she said” battle in court. Not only do you have to document your conversations, but you have to organize them as well. All the documentation in the world is unless if you can’t find the documents when you need them.4. Have a Plan.Part of what makes a narcissist’s tactics so successful is that she purposely does things to throw you off balance and make you question yourself. Divorce itself also throws you off balance and makes you question yourself. When you put those two things together, it’s often hard to keep your feet on the floor and stop your head from spinning. Setting your goals and making a plan to achieve them can keep you grounded. It points you in the right direction from the start. If you can make a plan for your divorce BEFORE you are up to your ears in craziness, you have a much greater chance of getting through your divorce in some rational way. (Of course, divorcing a narcissist rarely goes as planned. Even still, just starting with a plan puts you way ahead of the game!)5. Act, Don’t React.If you want to know how you can win when divorcing a narcissist, you start by keeping your own emotions under control. The more you react to your spouse’s craziness, the more your spouse wins.When your narcissistic wife does something outrageous, if you react by screaming, crying, raging or acting as an emotional basket case, YOU become the one who looks crazy. Don’t let yourself lose your cool in court, or go crazy in front of your kids.6. Prepare Yourself for a Marathon.Divorcing a narcissist usually takes a long, long time. Believe it or not, that’s not necessarily a bad thing! When you first start your divorce, things may not go well for you. Your spouse may charm the judge, the lawyers, your friends, and maybe even your family. She may convince everyone that she has been abused, victimized, and taken advantage of.Meanwhile, your spouse will paint you as a monster. But it’s hard to keep up that kind of an act forever. Eventually, your spouse’s stories will start to crack. If you have been documenting everything properly, you will be able to prove that your spouse is lying. When that happens, the tide may start to shift. Those who thought you were crazy may start to change their opinion. At the same time, staying the course for years can take a huge toll on you. That’s why you have to start with the idea that your divorce will probably be a marathon. Play the long game. Take care of yourself! You need to eat right, exercise, and try to get some sleep. Most of all, be kind to yourself. What you’re going through is rough! Don’t make it worse by beating yourself up for not being perfect.7. Create a Support TeamWhen you’re going through a difficult, high-conflict divorce, you need all the support you can get. You need people who will listen to you, support you, and help keep you sane. So, who should be on your support team? Start with good friends and family. You probably shouldn’t include your spouse’s family on your support team. It doesn’t matter whether they like you better. Blood is thicker than water. You don’t have to dump them. Just don’t count on them to be in your “inner circle” of support.A good support team should also include good divorce professionals. You already know that you need a good divorce lawyer. You also need a good therapist. But you may need other professionals as well.Your kids may need their therapist. Depending upon your circumstances, you may also want to enlist help for your kids from their teachers or counselors. If you have financial issues, you will probably benefit from having a financial planner. All of these people and more can help you get through your divorce in the best way possible. Remember, it takes a village.8. Create Ways for The Narcissist To “Win.”Remember, the narcissist needs to win. If you can get your ego out of the way and let her win, you win too. (Don’t forget: getting divorced from a narcissist can be a “win” itself. You end the craziness. You get to move on with your life.)This strategy has its limits. You can’t become a doormat or put yourself into financial ruin just to get divorced. But, if you get your own emotions out of the way, you can analyze your divorce from a business perspective. If “winning” costs you more in time, money, and heartache than whatever it was that you won, then you lost. If “winning” your divorce messes up your kids so badly that they need to be in therapy for the rest of their lives, then you lost.Sometimes, keeping the big picture in mind will allow you to let your narcissistic spouse “win” so that really, you do, too.9. Minimize Contact Between You and Your Wife.The less you have to see and deal with your spouse, the easier your divorce will be. The trouble is that your narcissistic spouse isn’t likely to waltz quietly into the sunset so you can have some peace.She will refuse to move out of the house. If you have kids together she will call and text you incessantly about your kids. She will also make every visitation exchange a challenge.To minimize the drama in your divorce you need to separate from your spouse as quickly as possible. Once you do, eliminate as much face-to-face and telephone contact as you can. Do everything via email and text.Also, keep a record of every email and text. You never know when the documentation you’re keeping will come in handy. If your spouse starts claiming that you falsified her emails, start using a parenting app like Our Family Wizard or CoParently.10. Make (and Enforce) Strong Boundaries.Personal boundaries are guidelines, rules, or limits that identify the ways that people must treat you. Narcissists usually have a problem respecting other people’s boundaries. That’s because their sense of self (and of self-worth) is so shaky that they often see others as nothing more than an extension of themselves. If you’ve been married to a narcissist, chances are that your boundaries started to blur in many ways. Establishing and enforcing strong boundaries with your narcissistic spouse during your divorce will start to separate you from your spouse. It will also help you save both your sanity and your dignity.The more you allow your narcissistic spouse to treat you badly during your divorce, the more painful your divorce will be. What’s more, if you continue to allow people to treat you like dirt, eventually the judge (and even your lawyer!) will start to lose respect for you. That makes it even less likely that you will get what you want and need out of your divorce.Divorcing a Narcissist is not Easy.Trying to win when divorcing a narcissist is challenging. It often makes you redefine what “winning” really means to you. “Winning” may end up being just getting through your divorce without going crazy. Or, it may mean doing your best to protect your kids so that you can raise them in a more positive environment.Whatever “winning” means to you, know that it is possible to get through your divorce from a narcissist with your dignity and your sanity intact. It won’t be easy – and you certainly won’t end up getting everything you want. But, with enough time, patience, and support, you can do it.These are excerpts from Caroline Foster’s new book Narcissistic Women. The Concrete Healing Guide for Abused Men: How to Handle a Narcissist. Divorcing and Co-parenting After a Destructive Marriage. Thriving and Dating Again After Narcissistic Abuse. - Kindle edition by Foster, Caroline. Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.You can Download the Audio Book Version of This Book for FREE Just by Signing Up for a FREE 30-Day Audible Trial. Click one link below to get started!Narcissistic Women - The Concrete Healing Guide for Abused MenCheck out this great listen on Audible.com. If you are a man dealing with a narcissistic woman, this book is for you. Additionally, if you are not sure whether your wife or girlfriend is narcissistic, you will find out. By listening to the information in this book, you will learn: How to rec...https://www.audible.com/pd/B08VYLHKPQ/?source_code=AUDFPWS0223189MWT-BK-ACX0-235679&ref=acx_bty_BK_ACX0_235679_rh_usBook CONTENTSCHAPTER ONE RECOGNIZING NPD1.1 What Is Pathological Narcissism?1.2 Inside the Mind of a Narcissist1.3 Types of Narcissism1.4 How to Recognize a Narcissist (Red Flags)CHAPTER TWO RELATIONSHIP WITH A NARCISSISTIC WOMAN2.1 Stages of a Narcissistic Relationship2.2 Differences between Narcissistic Men and Women2.3 Narcissistic Strategies of Manipulation2.4 Love Process with COVERT Narcissistic Women2.5 How Narcissistic Women Create ChaosCHAPTER THREE SOLUTIONS3.1 Signs of a Narcissistic Relationship3.2 How to Escape from the Narcissist’s Manipulation3.3 Talking to the Narcissist3.4 Influencing the Narcissist3.5 Living with a Female Narcissist3.6 How to Set Boundaries with Narcissists3.7 How to Decide to Leave a Narcissistic RelationshipCHAPTER FOUR NARCISSISTIC WIFE4.1 Narcissistic Wife4.2 Recognizing Financial Abuse4.3 How to Recover from Financial Abuse4.4 Divorcing a Narcissistic Wife4.5 Co-parenting with a Narcissistic Ex-wife4.6 Alienated ChildrenCHAPTER FIVE HEALING5.1 How Difficult It Is Being Abused by a Narcissistic Woman as a Man5.2 Narcissistic Abuse Syndrome5.3 Steps to Recovery5.4 Narcissistic Abuse Brain Recovery5.5 Self-Care and Stress Management5.6 Signs You Are Recovering from Narcissistic AbuseCHAPTER SIX NEVER AGAIN6.1 Understanding Yourself as an Empath6.2 The Unconscious Belief You Must Deal with to Break Free from the Narcissist6.3 Signs You Are Codependent and How to Overcome Codependency6.4 Why Men Don’t Leave Narcissistic Women6.5 Fantasies That Don’t Allow You Detach from the Narcissist after You Have Left Her6.6 How to Avoid Female NarcissistsCHAPTER SEVEN DATING AGAIN7.1 Can You Date Again Soon?7.2 How Is a Healthy Relationship Defined?7.3 Why Do You Sabotage Yourself by Choosing Toxic Partners?7.4 How to Change the Unhealthy Old Pattern of RelationshipsCONCLUSIONSNarcissistic Women. The Concrete Healing Guide for Abused Men: How to Handle a Narcissist. Divorcing and Co-parenting After a Destructive Marriage. Thriving and Dating Again After Narcissistic Abuse. - Kindle edition by Foster, Caroline. Religion & Spirituality Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.You can Download the Audio Book Version of This Book for FREE Just by Signing Up for a FREE 30-Day Audible Trial. Click one link below to get started!Narcissistic Women - The Concrete Healing Guide for Abused MenCheck out this great listen on Audible.com. If you are a man dealing with a narcissistic woman, this book is for you. Additionally, if you are not sure whether your wife or girlfriend is narcissistic, you will find out. By listening to the information in this book, you will learn: How to rec...https://www.audible.com/pd/B08VYLHKPQ/?source_code=AUDFPWS0223189MWT-BK-ACX0-235679&ref=acx_bty_BK_ACX0_235679_rh_us

http://edge.org/contributors/responses/what-will-change-everything 's 152 articles were summarized in about 152 sentences by http://www.freesummarizer.com/In the minds of many confused people, a single-celled human zygote, which has no nerves and cannot suffer, is infinitely sacred, simply because it is 'human'.Changing what it means to remember changes what it means to be.New studies show that these comprehensive lifestyle changes may change gene expression in hundreds of genes in only a few months "turning on" (upregulating) disease-preventing genes and "turning on" (downregulating) genes that promote heart disease, oncogenes that promote breast cancer and prostate cancer, and genes that promote inflammation and oxidative stress.As genomic information for individuals becomes more widely available via the decoding of each person's complete genome (as Venter and Watson have done) or partially (and less expensively) via new personal genomics companies this information will be a powerful motivator for people to make comprehensive lifestyle changes that may beneficially affect their gene expression and significantly reduce the incidence of the pandemic of chronic diseases.We're in the midst of an ongoing revision of our understanding of what it means to be human we are struggling to redefine humanity, and it's going to radically influence our future.Animal models are generally inadequate for chronic human diseases because the disease in animals is almost never quite the same as the human disease.Think about the potential for new generations of "smart" technologies, with the capacity to adapt, indeed to evolve and transform, in response to changing conditions.In addition to new technologies, we need a new consciousness, a new worldview, and new metaphors that establish a more harmonious relationship between the human and the non-human.Of course, the concept of "changing everything" makes no up-front value judgments, and I can envision evolution's net contribution as being either positive or negative, depending on whether the shift in human consciousness keeps pace with the radical expansion of new (and potentially even more exploitative) technologies.This powerful alliance of different technologies has provided not only a brand new way of producing, storing and retrieving information, but a giant network of ranking and rating systems in which information is valued as long as it has been already filtered by other people.Notice that this won't mean a world of collective ignorance in which everyone has no other chances to know something than to rely on the judgment of someone else, in a sort of infinite chain of blind trust where nobody seems to know anything for sure anymore: The age of reputation will be a new age of knowledge gathering guided by new rules and principles.Information technology has provided novel ways for brains to align across great distances and over time.What is game-changing is that only recently have researchers begun to frame questions about brain function in terms not of individual brains but rather in terms of how individual brains are embedded in larger social and environmental systems that drive their evolution and development.This new way of framing brain and cognitive science together with unforeseen technological developments promises transformational integrations of current and future knowledge about how brains interact.On the contrary, the humans who wrote those works had the same needs and desires that we have today, though the means of meeting those needs and of fulfilling those desires may have changed in some of the details.(This statement is certainly not meant to minimize the tragedy of the millions of lives lost in these catastrophes.) Though we worry about the possible dramatic effects that an anthropogenically changed global climate might have, humankind itself will survive such changes (because of its science and technology), though we cannot predict how many people might tragically die because of it.From this human perspective, the last "event" that truly changed everything was over some period of time around 50,000 years ago when evolutionary advances finally led to intelligent humans who left Africa and spread out over the rest of the world, literally changing everything in the entire world.We are here today as both a species and a society because of those gene changes and the natural selection process that over this long time period weeded out the bad changes and allowed the good changes to remain.With humans, artificial selection (selective breeding) was never a serious replacement for natural selection possibility, and as a result there have been no significant changes to the human species since its societies began.But now, with the recent great advances in genetic engineering, we are in a position to change the human species for the first time in 50,000 years.When selecting particular genes that we want while perhaps not understanding how particular gene combinations work, might we unknowingly begin a process that could change our good human qualities? Therefore, well before we understand how brains work, we will find ourselves able to digitally copy the brain's structure and able to download the conscious mind into a computer.If the computational hypothesis of brain function is correct, it suggests that an exact replica of your brain will hold your memories, will act and think and feel the way you do, and will experience your consciousness irrespective of whether it's built out of biological cells, Tinkertoys, or zeros and ones.Unless your simulated experiences change the structure of your simulated brain, you will be unable to form new memories and will have no sense of the passage of time.As of this moment, we have no neuroscience technologies geared toward ultra-high-resolution scanning of the sort required and even if we did, it would take several of the world's most powerful computers to represent a few cubic millimeters of brain tissue in real time.If it doesn't happen earlier, this level of AI will arrive once computers achieve the computational power to run real-time simulations of an entire human brain.Education, too, will fundamentally change, as engineers and cognitive sciences begin to leverage an understanding of brain code into ways of directly uploading information into the brain.From the Neolithic revolution to the information age, the major changes in the human condition none of them changing everything, needless to say have been consequences of new technologies.There is now a glut of new technologies in the offing that will alter the way we live more rapidly and radically than anything before in ways we cannot properly foresee.Many new technologies can provide new weapons or new ways to use old ones.One must hope that, in part thanks to the changes brought about by novel technologies, new forms of social and political understanding and action will develop to help address at the root issues that otherwise might give rise to ever more lethal conflicts.the concilience of the sciences of life and technology of artificial intelligence, advanced computing and software (including life programming a la Venter and possibly consciousness programming) towards the "cylon" creation; It is quite likely that we will at some point see people starting to make deliberate changes in the way the climate system works."Geoengineering" technologies for counteracting some aspects of anthropogenic climate change such as putting long-lived aerosols into the stratosphere, as volcanoes do, or changing the lifetimes and reflective properties of clouds have to date been shunned by the majority of climate scientists, largely on the basis of the moral hazard involved: any sense that the risks of global warming can be taken care of by such technology weakens the case for reducing carbon-dioxide emissions.But what I see as world changing about this technology is not the extent to which it changes the world.To live in a world subject to purposeful, planetwide change will not, I think, be quite the same as living in one being messed up by accident.Unless geoengineering fails catastrophically (which would be a pretty dramatic change in itself) the relationship between people and their environment will have changed profoundly.All climate change, whether intentional or not, has different outcomes for different regions, and geoengineering is in many ways just another form of climate change.And that intentional change in the relationship between people and planet might be the biggest change of all.The quantum world is a New New World far more alien and difficult of access than Columbus' Old New World.While discovery of the Old New World roughly doubled the land area available to humans, the New New World exponentially expands the dimension of physical reality.* (For example, every single electron's spin doubles it.) Our fundamental equations do not live in the three-dimensional space of classical physics, but in an (effectively) infinite-dimensional space: Hilbert space.Based on our new methods there was an explosion of new data from decoded genomes of many living species including humans.Just as Darwin observed evolution in the changes that he saw in various species of finches, land and sea iguanas, and tortoises, the genomics community is now studying the changes in the genetic code that are associated with human traits and disease and the differences among us by reading the genetic code of many humans and comparing them.Science is changing dramatically again as we use all our new tools to understand life and perhaps even to redesign it.As we learn from 3.5 billion years of evolution we will convert billions of years into decades and change not only conceptually how we view life but life itself.Though the grid system would be hard pressed to have the transformative power the World Wide Web (also developed at CERN), the jump in computational power that can be possible with processors coordinated the way that data currently is can have enormous transformational consequences.At the beginning of last century, the average life expectancy was 30-40 years, while the current world average life expectancy is almost 70 years.Right now, people don't easily grasp insidious environmental factors or subtle differences in health care that result in dramatic individual differences in the long term (approximately ten years of life between the wealthy and the poor living in the same country), but they will immediately grasp the beneficial effects of brain stimulation, and will demand not to be excluded anymore.One might suppose that, with all its zillions of transistors and billions of human minds, the world brain would be thinking some pretty profound thoughts.The wires "vibrating thousands of miles in a breathless point of time" are not just carrying messages between human minds, they are participating in the decisions of the world mind as a whole.For the world mind to truly perceive, it will need a way of sharing more general forms of knowledge, in a format that can be understood by both humans and machines.However, for the larger scale of human lifetimes, change for change sake is not a worthy mantra.Straightforward answers are found in these pages: Climate catastrophy, extra terrestrial life and asteroid collisions are interspersed with solutions 'from the lab': meddling with genes, conjuring up super intelligence and nano-technology, waiting for the singularity of hard A.I., fearing insurgent robots or clamoring for infinite human life span.While carniculture may not change everything in the same way agriculture changed everything, certainly it will transform our economy and our relationship to animals.There would be a strange Gulliver-like period of transition where giants would still live with the next smaller generations, but on a longer run, the planet might look very different and the change of scale in relation to animals, plants, lanscapes could generate completely new ideas perceptions, representations and ideas.Essentially, for this aggregating intelligence to communicate with humans for it to understand what we mean by a question or want by a request, it will have to become equipped with accurate models of the native intelligences that inhabit human minds.For decades, evolutionary psychologists have been devoted to perpetrating the great reductionist crime working to create a scientific discipline that progressively maps the evolved universal human mind/brain the computational counterpart to the human genome.If we understand our minds as we understand the physical world that will change everything.But if we are to take seriously the question of what will change "everything", then the candidate really has to be something that underlies all other changes, and hence my candidate remains understanding the mind.Whether the question is how we will deal with new life forms when we encounter them, or how we will design our lives as we prepare to live forever, or how we will generate the courage to stop environmental devastation, understanding the mind will change everything.Even at the current rapid rates of progress of current computer technology, with the computer components halving in size every two years or less, and computers doubling in power over the same time, quantum computers should not be available for forty years.I could tell you that quantum computers will drastically change the way the world works during our lifetime.The world was rich compared to its human population; there were new lands to conquer, new thoughts to nurture, and new resources to fuel it all.But suppose the feeling changes: that people start to anticipate the future world not in that way but instead as something more closely resembling the nightmare of desperation, fear and suspicion described in Cormac McCarthy's post-cataclysm novel The Road.It is obvious that many of the most powerful new technologies are likely to flow from biology, but one of the most game changing is likely to be neural control of devices.But neuro-transmitting by itself will be sufficiently game changing, and also will be a step along the way to a radically different world of computer mediated reality in every sense.But since it is the brain that experiences change, only changing the brain itself can possibly change everything.Changing the human brain is not new, when it is a matter of correcting psychopathology.But it will happen nonetheless, and it will change how humans experience the world and how they relate to each other in as yet unimagined ways.Computer Scientist, Yale University; Chief Scientist, Mirror Worlds Technologies; Author, Mirror Worlds; Machine Beauty Since the nineteenth century, its advocates have promised that science will explain everything in terms of physics and chemistry; science will show that there is no God and no purpose in the universe; it will reveal that God is a delusion inside human minds and hence in human brains; and it will prove that brains are nothing but complex machines.If such profound restatements of how the world works arose universally the last time we had a transition on the scale of that from biological evolution to cultural evolution, is it logical to think it is happening again as we move from cultural evolution to radical technological evolution? For instance, one could estimate the time people require to divide a number by 10; this value could then be subtracted from the time people require to find the mean of 10 numbers, with the idea being that the residual should indicate the time to add up the numbers.Of course, these radical adjustments may not happen, or not happen in time, and then climate will shift to either a chaotic mode or a different stable state with the carrying capacity for just a fraction of present humanity, and that will really change everything.And to know that the universe is teeming with life would make it far more likely that there is also intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.One way to start to think about this is to look at the last "change everything" innovation, and work back fifty years from it.So to me the challenge is to look at what we have now, some of which may be quite mature; other pieces of which may be only emerging; and to think of how they could combine in ways that will affect social and cultural processes in ways that will "change everything," which I take to mean: will make a big difference to the day to day life of many people.All these will change life in the Global South on scales and with values that they will swamp, from the perspective of a broad concern with human values, whatever effects lengthening life in the wealthier North will have.In such a world, biotechnology, nanotechnology, information technology, and manufacturing technology merge into a kind of universal technology of embodied information.The changing nature of kinship networks, such as the growth in blended families whether due to changing divorce patterns in the developed world or AIDS killing off parents in Africa has implications for the network of obligations and entitlements within families.Human knowledge changes the world as it spreads, and the spread of knowledge can be observed.If we could change the rules of the mind, we would alter our perception of the world, which would change everything (at least for humans).In each case, new observations revealed new physics, physics that went beyond the standard models physics that led to new technologies and to new ways of looking at the universe.Understanding that the outside world is really inside us and the inside world is really outside us will change everything.By understanding the mechanisms of how humans create knowledge, we will be able to break through normal human cognitive limitations and think the previously unthinkable.Understanding how our evolved machinery both helps and constrains us in creating knowledge, will allow us to create new knowledge, either by using our old mental machinery in yet new ways, or by using new and different machinery for knowledge-making, augmenting our normal cognition.When we study the mechanics of knowledge building, we are approaching an understanding of what it means to be human the very nature of the human essence.Brain scanning; genetic studies; antidepressant drug use; estrogen replacement therapy; testosterone patches; L-dopa and newer drugs to prevent or retard brain diseases; recreational drugs; sex change patients; gene doping by athletes: all these and other developments are giving us data on how the mind works and opening new avenues to use brain chemistry to change who we are and what we want.As the field of epigenetics takes on speed, we are also beginning to understand how the environment affects brain systems, even turns genes on and off further enabling us (and others) to adjust brain chemistry, affecting who we are, how we feel and what we think we need.Scientific ideas change when new instruments are developed that detect something new about nature.I believe these will be the most interesting times in human history (Remember the old Chinese curse about "interesting times?") Humanity will see, before I die, the "Singularity," the day when we finally create a human level artificial intelligence.That is, part of the computation is done in this universe by you and your part of the quantum computer, and the other parts of the computation are done by your analogues with their parts of the computer in the other universes of the multiverse.Quantum computer running an AI program, direct conversion of matter into energy, the ultimate rocket that would allow the AI's and the human downloads to begin interstellar travel at near light speed, depend on the same physics, and should appear at the same time in the future.We may not have enough people in the next twenty years to sustain the technology we already have, to say nothing of developing the technology allowed by the known laws of physics that I describe above.However, I remain cautiously optimistic that we will develop the ultimate technology described above, and transfer it with faltering hands to our ultimate successors, the AI's and the human downloads, who will be thus enabled to expand outward into interstellar space, engulf the universe, and live forever.The contraceptive pill "changed everything" for people living in parts of the world where it is available and the Internet "changed everything" for those of us who are connected.From the way individual people live their lives, to the way wealth and power are spread across the globe.It has always been not only the human way, but the way of all living things, to multiply and colonize new frontiers.There are so many possible solutions for the survival of humans (or posthumans) in solar orbit or on "inhospitable" planets that I expect we will find some way to make it work long before generational or faster-than-light voyages to faraway star systems; in fact, I expect it in my lifetime.Historical and futuristic speculation about events that change everything features time compression and overestimates the rate of cultural and psychological change.I think an inititiative that markets the virtues of science on every corner of the planet, with the same urgency as the basketball scouts on corners of street ball courts, would change the world.Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, first presented in the fall of 1915, and his earlier Special Theory of Relativity have changed very little of our day to day world, but they have radically altered the way we think about both space and time and have also launched the modern theory of cosmology.The way this is usually imagined is a process of human ingenuity creating wonderful technology as tools for human benefit, and with us in control.From this simple adjustment, seemingly miraculous at the time, a great transformation of the human mind took place, and so began the age of intense private study so familiar to us now; whose universities where ideas could turn silently in large minds.Well, if you think of the universe as everything, then something that changes the universe or at least changes our whole conception of it would change everything.It took until early modern times and the development of new technologies for a real "world-wide web" of societies to develop.These changes reflect brain changes.For most of human history babies and toddlers used their spectacular, freewheeling, unconstrained learning abilities to understand fundamental facts about the objects, people and language around them the human core curriculum.While brain cells are certainly capable of structural and functional changes throughout life, an extensive scientific literature has shown that plasticity in the nervous system is greatest early in development, during the so-called critical periods.That wall is the belief that genetic change happens at such a glacial pace that there simply was not time, in the 50,000 years since humans spread out from Africa, for selection pressures to have altered the genome in anything but the most trivial way (e.g., changes in skin color and nose shape were adaptive responses to cold climates).This was the period after the spread of agriculture during which the pace of genetic change sped up in response to the enormous increase in the variety of ways that humans earned their living, formed larger coalitions, fought wars, and competed for resources and mates.But whatever consensus we ultimately reach, the ways in which we now think about genes, groups, evolution and ethnicity will be radically changed by the unstoppable progress of the human genome project.I expected cancer and the flu and all illnesses to be cured, robots taking care of labor, the biochemistry of life fully unraveled, the possibility of recreating damaged organs in every hospital, the nations of the Earth living prosperously in peace thanks to new technology, and physics having understood the center of a black hole.We now face dramatic changes in the climate that require equally dramatic changes in our technologies connected with energy generation, farming, travel, and human life-style in general.In conclusion, I see the deep conceptual changes that are currently happening in biology as a prelude and accompaniment to the cultural changes that are occurring in culture, facilitating these and ushering in a new age of sustainable living on the planet.If these developments are not life changing enough, they will, in the longer-term usher in a new era in which our minds, the thing that we think of as "us", can become separated from our body, or nearly separated anyway.Discovering a counterexample or new ways to preserve information could be a real game-changer: one that alters our understanding of the fundamental laws of nature, transforms our concept of space and time, triggers a reconstruction of the history of the universe and leads to new prognostications about its future.This is a change that will create a livable world for the next generations, both in affluent societies and, especially, in the developing or not-even-yet-developing parts of the world.Just as we are beginning to learn that it is not "the" gene that controls what happens in our bodies, but rather the interplay of many genes, proteins, and environmental influences that turn genes on and off, we will learn how the interplay of various neural tissues, the chemicals in our body, environmental influences, and possibly some current unknowns, come together to affect how the brain works and that will change everything.(c) determine ways in which human and nonhuman brains function similarly and differently, whether human and nonhuman intelligences are distinctly separate or whether a measureable gradient exists, the extent of any overlap of function, and whether the critical issues involve modules or a constellation of inter-functioning areas that both match and are disparate.Neurology will change the game of human life drastically, as soon as we develop the tools to observe and direct the activities of a human brain in detail from the outside.A system of 10^5 tiny transmitters inside a brain with 10^5 receivers outside could observe in detail the activity of an entire human brain with 10^11 neurons.To make radiotelepathy possible, we have only to invent two new technologies, first the direct conversion of neural signals into radio signals and vice versa, and second the placement of microscopic radio transmitters and receivers within the tissue of a living brain.A society bonded together by radiotelepathy would be experiencing human life in a totally new way.The one development that really could change everything would be a radical, genetically programmed, alteration of human nature.But, while human beings continue to reproduce by having sex and each new generation goes back to square one, then every baby begins life with a set of inherited dispositions and instincts that evolved in the technological dark ages.To believe that anything "will change things" focuses one on the superficial surface of things, which indeed change all the time.And nothing, at the deepest level, therefore will ever change a postulated 'everything' not so long as we keep imagining possible "change" which only reinforces the psychic dwelling of our un-changing selves in a "future" that is always imaginary and beyond us.Because the human brain, like any physical organ, is a product of evolution, and since natural selection works without recourse to intelligent forethought, this mental apparatus of ours evolved to think about God quite without need of the latter's consultation, let alone his being real.Although cross-cultural communication for the masses requires translation techniques that exceed our current capabilities, the groundwork of this technology has already been laid and many of us will live to see a revolution in automatic translation that will change everything about cooperation and communication across the world.I believe that we will see within our lifetime the convergence of developments in artificial intelligence, knowledge representation, statistical grammar theories, and an emerging field computational anthropology (informatic-based analysis and modeling of cultural values) that will facilitate powerful new forms of machine translation to match the dreams of early pioneers of computation.If there is life in the universe, the form of life that will prove to be most successful at propagating itself will be digital life; it will adopt a form that is independent of the local chemistry, and migrate from one place to another as an electromagnetic signal, as long as there's a digital world a civilization that has discovered the Universal Turing Machine for it to colonize when it gets there.With computing power doubling every year or two cheap personal computers should match the raw processing power of the human brain in a couple of decades, and then leave it in the dust.As the fast evolving devices improve they will begin to outperform the original brain, it will make less and less sense to continue to do one's thinking in the old biological clunker, and formerly human minds will become entirely artificial as they move into ultra sophisticated, dispersed robot systems.Philosopher; Professor, Oxford University; Director, Future of Humanity Institute; Editor, Human Enhancement Arguably, human brain power is the chief rate-limiting factor in the development of human civilization.Given these considerations, it is possible that one day we may be able to create "superintelligence": a general intelligence that vastly outperforms the best human brains in every significant cognitive domain.All sorts of theoretically possible technologies could be developed quickly by superintelligence advanced molecular manufacturing, medical nanotechnology, human enhancement technologies, uploading, weapons of all kinds, lifelike virtual realities, self-replicating space-colonizing robotic probes, and more.Also, unless you are a vampire (and there were times in my past when I wished I were one) and thus beyond submitting to the laws of physics, you can't really escape the second law of thermodynamics: even an open system like the human body, able to interact with its external environment and absorb nutrients and energy from it, will slowly deteriorate.Though the generative capacity of the brain, especially the human brain, is spectacular providing us with a system for massive creativity, it is also highly constrained.In a nutshell, for the first time we have a science that enables us to understand the actual, the possible and the unimaginable, a landscape that will forever change our understanding of what it means to be human, including how we arrived at our current point in evolutionary theory, and where might end up in ten or ten million years.A method to eliminate 'pattern D' will lead to the most significant change ever in the way humans and therefore societies behave.I think he is wrong: the evolution of the biosphere, the economy, our human culture and perhaps aspects of the abiotic world, stand partially free of physical law and are not entailed by fundamental physics.In this open universe, beyond entailment by fundamental physics, we have partial lawlessness, ceaseless creativity, and forever co-dependent origination that changes the Actual and the ever new Adjacent Possible we ceaselessly self-consistently co-construct.Nothing we've done in the past couple of hundred thousand years has truly changed everything, so I don't see us doing anything in the future that would change everything, either.To encounter an other, whether a god, a ghost, a biological sibling, an independently evolved life form, or an emergent intelligence of our own creation, changes what it means to be human.Based on these experiments, social scientists soon recognized that the major unsolved problem of galactic colonization was the social psychological problem, How could humans live together for up to 52 years, raising children who would become the explorers of the blue planets? If by 'happen' we only think of personal and historical events, we miss the most crucial novelty the way that new things, new physical objects, devices and techniques, insinuate themselves into our lives.The Amish (a quaint static ripple whose way of life will never uncover the simplest new technological fix for the unfolding hazards of a dynamic universe) have long recognized that material culture embodies weird inspirations, challenging us, as eventual consumers, not with 'copy what I do', but a far, far more subversive 'try me.' Anyone who has worked with numerous young people over the years knows that some catch on quickly, almost instantly, to new skills or understandings, while others must go through the same drill, with little depressingly little improvement over time.Long before the computing capacity of a plug-in computer overtakes the supposed computing capacity of a human brain, the web encompassing all its connected computing chips will dwarf the brain.And because this synthetic intelligence is a combination of human intelligence (all past human learning, all current humans online) and the coveted zip of fast alien digital memory, it will be difficult to pinpoint what it is as well.