Podcasts about Oxford English Dictionary

Ever wondered what Dr. Deming really meant by "profound knowledge" — and how it can still transform your work today? In this conversation, Bill Scherkenbach shares with host Andrew Stotz lessons from Dr. W. Edwards Deming on profound knowledge, systems thinking, and why "knowledge without action is useless, and action without knowledge is dangerous." Tune in for wisdom, humor, and practical insights on learning, leadership, and finding joy in work. TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.2 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we dive deeper into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Scherkenbach, a dedicated protege of Dr. Deming since 1972. Bill met with Dr. Deming more than a thousand times and later led statistical methods and process improvement at Ford and GM at Deming's recommendation. He authored the Deming Route to Quality and Productivity at Deming's behest, and at 79, still champions his mentor's message, learn, have fun, and make a difference. Bill, how are you doing?   0:00:36.3 Bill Scherkenbach: Doing great, Andrew. How about you?   0:00:38.6 Andrew Stotz: I'm good. It's been a while since we talked. I took a little holiday to Italy, which was. I was out for a bit, but I'm happy to be back in the saddle.   0:00:48.9 Bill Scherkenbach: Dove in Italia?   0:00:51.3 Andrew Stotz: Yes.   0:00:52.5 Bill Scherkenbach: Where in Italy?   0:00:53.6 Andrew Stotz: Well, I went to Milan for a trade show in the coffee industry, and then I went to Lake Como and relaxed and oh, what a paradise.   0:01:03.2 Bill Scherkenbach: Beautiful. Beautiful. Yep.   0:01:05.0 Andrew Stotz: And, of course, always great food.   0:01:09.4 Bill Scherkenbach: Yep, yep, yep. Well, you have a chance to use the PDSA on improving your mood there.   0:01:16.6 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, it was just... The resort I stayed at was a tiny little place on the side of a hill, and the food at this tiny little place was fantastic. We just didn't want to leave. Every single meal was great. So I love that. Who doesn't love that?   0:01:34.4 Bill Scherkenbach: They didn't have a food cart in the background.   0:01:38.0 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. In fact, they didn't really open for lunch.   0:01:39.8 Bill Scherkenbach: Like what they do over here.   0:01:41.3 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, they didn't open for lunch. They only served sandwiches at 2pm so we had to hold out. But we still, the sandwich was so good. We just thought yeah, just wait.   0:01:51.3 Bill Scherkenbach: Early lunch. Yep.   0:01:53.3 Andrew Stotz: Well, you've got some interesting stuff to talk about today, and I'm gonna share the screen, and then I think we can kick it off from there. So let me see if I can get that up straight here. One second in. All right, so hopefully, you see a white screen that says profound knowledge. You see that, Bill?   0:02:16.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Yes, I do.   0:02:17.2 Andrew Stotz: All right, well, let's... Yeah, let's. Let's get into it.   0:02:23.2 Bill Scherkenbach: Oh, okay. I'll go from the bullets that I've got, and we'll hear from Dr. Deming and how he couched it in a little bit, in a few minutes, but he recognized that leaders would say they had the knowledge. Oh, yeah, we do SPC. We follow Deming's philosophy, we do that. But they really only knew the buzzwords. And to an extent, and I don't know how he came up with the word profound, but I do know in speaking with him that he intended it to be a degree of expertise that was beyond the buzzwords. Now, he said you didn't have to be an expert in it, but you had to know enough to be able to understand it and in fact, use it, as we'll talk about in a little bit. And knowledge obviously includes, as he said, an appreciation for a system and variation and knowledge and psychology. And as we'll hear in the audio, he also didn't really limited to that when he said there was there... His point, main point was that there are a whole bunch of interrelated subject matters that are very, very useful in managing your business or managing any organization.   0:04:17.1 Andrew Stotz: You know, I was thinking about that word profound. It's oftentimes wondering exactly what is meant by that. This is helpful to help us understand. It's, number one, about expertise. And I think the thing that I've always also felt is like, when you understand appreciation for a system, knowledge about variation, theory of knowledge and psychology, it, like things click, like it comes together, it's a whole. And that's the way I've thought about it. But that's interesting about the expertise aspect.   0:04:51.8 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. And that's something Don Peterson at Ford spoke about. He gave a very good talk to our leaders with Dr. Deming in attendance. And he said that a lot of you have said, "Oh, yeah, we already do this at Ford, " but you have to come to grips with a lot of you have been promoted for perhaps the wrong reason throughout your career, and you're gonna have to change. The change starts with us. So that was very impactful for Dr. Deming to listen to that.   0:05:32.7 Andrew Stotz: Yeah. And I just thought about the idea of profound action. Like, once you get this knowledge, does that mean that you're going to also, you know, the way that you do things is going to change substantially.   0:05:47.3 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. I mean, that's been a philosophical question. In one of the slides, I quote Confucius. About 2500 years ago, essentially saying knowledge without action is useless and the action without knowledge is pretty dangerous. But that's been consistent with Eastern and Western. Aristotle did the same thing, and Mid Eastern folks did it as well. Philosophers dealing with, yeah, we've got knowledge, but everyone agrees, at least in the good thinker role, that, that you've got to take action, otherwise it's useless. Okay, so we've got, and the subject matters, as I said, are not new. And he coalesced on four, but the general thought was that. And you've got to remember Dr. Deming was a classically trained physicist in the 1920s. And because of that a lot of, although it had been a few years, but they were very aware that everything started in the both, the eastern philosophies and western philosophies. Everything started with philosophy. Science wasn't a separate subject matter. And so everything was connected on how people should live, on how the stars move, a whole bunch of stuff. It all was philosophy. And these various subject matters evolved over the years.   0:07:50.6 Bill Scherkenbach: So even though he stopped it for his general intent was that a whole bunch of things are interconnected. If you go study these various subject matters.   0:08:05.1 Andrew Stotz: It's interesting because I attended the seminars in 1990, 1992 and then I went to Thailand and then I did other things and I didn't really keep up with it because I was in the financial world and doing my thing. And then I got The New Economics years later and there was this discussion about System of Profound Knowledge. And then I think about also going back to your previous discussions of what it was like being in a classroom with Dr. Deming when you first met him and studied with him. You know, that these things were going on. Obviously he had a deep understanding of variation. He definitely understood about the theory of knowledge from his scientific background. But I'm just curious, as you... It's interesting what you said, these things are not new. It's the way he brought them together. I just find that, that fascinating. How do you see that journey for him going from when you first met him to a very full formed concept or theory of profound knowledge at his later years?   0:09:15.3 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah, I think things just solidified or codified. I mean, when I first met him in '72 at New York University Graduate School of Business, he didn't have 14 Points. He didn't have the Deadly Diseases. So none of the stuff that were codified as he progressed. I mean the one thing that I've mentioned it a number of times, the most important thing I learned from him is that you never stop learning. And he epitomized that sense of continual learning in improving oneself. So he tried to learn from everyone. But, but yes, for instance, as I mentioned, he was a degreed physicist and ended up doing a whole bunch of. And that transitioned into statistics which was a relatively. Well, I'm going to say everything is relative. But new in operationalizing the use of statistics besides counting people and the experiments at Rothamstead for agriculture. I mean, that really was some of the... But the earlier stuff, yeah. Was helping their patrons gamble better.   0:11:02.0 Andrew Stotz: And so I often take comfort in your descriptions in the first episodes about how he hadn't put all of these things in place at the age of 72. And I think there's still hope for me, Bill, to figure it out and put together my grand thinking.   0:11:22.7 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. Oh, no, I understand. I mean, I'll be 80 in less than six months. But he really, he started out getting his foot in the water here anyway when he was 79 also. So there's a chance. There's a chance.   0:11:46.4 Andrew Stotz: There's a chance. All right, well, the next slide, you're talking about the connections.   0:11:51.6 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. Again, all the subject matters are, again, evolve from philosophy and they all are interconnected in many, many ways. So, yeah, if you could play what Dr. Deming's introducing, that might set the stage.   0:12:14.0 Andrew Stotz: Okay, let me play this audio. Hopefully it comes across. Okay.   [video playback] Dr. Deming: Let us begin our study of Profound Knowledge. Profound Knowledge. Provides a roadmap to transformation, not just change, but a roadmap to transformation. Nothing else will satisfy our needs. Not just change, a roadmap to transformation into a new state. The System of Profound Knowledge, appears here in four parts, all related to each other: first, Appreciation for a System. Which we shall study, we shall study a system, and soon, I won't keep you waiting. And Theory of variation and theory of knowledge and knowledge of psychology and add anything you please, sociology, anthropology, whatever you please. I present these four parts to Profound Knowledge. They are interdependent, they cannot be separated. One need not be imminent in any part of Profound Knowledge in order to make it, in order to understand it and apply it.   0:13:30.9 Andrew Stotz: That's quite a mouthful.   0:13:33.1 Bill Scherkenbach: Yes, it is. Yes, it is. What I've got to do is go back to the tapes and get the lead in and follow on to that. But yeah, that's how he introduced profound knowledge in his later seminars.   0:13:56.2 Andrew Stotz: So what would this have been? What, 1990, 1991, 1992?   0:14:03.8 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, probably, I would say, yeah, maybe '89.   0:14:10.6 Andrew Stotz: Okay.   0:14:11.9 Bill Scherkenbach: In there. Yeah.   0:14:13.8 Andrew Stotz: So I took out a little transcript of that and I want to just go through a couple quick points, if you don't mind. He starts off by talking about it's a roadmap to transformation, not just change. Why would he say transformation rather than just change?   0:14:38.6 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, he changed really, transformation. And he thought a metamorphosis would be better. There's a butterfly in there somewhere, but it needs change. And it's not just, I know he mentioned the western style of management, but in my travels, Eastern style of management is just as bad. And again, knowledge is, is literally encompasses space and time. Looking at the past, projecting or predicting the future, little space, great space. And when you look at Western philosophies or western style management, we have emphasized the individual. So restricted space and short term. And the eastern philosophy of management took a longer term viewpoint of things. And they said it's not the individual, it's the team, the family. In my opinion, you have to, everyone, no matter where you live in the world has to balance those two, being able to take joy in your work as an individual. To be able to take joy in your work as a member of the team. And, I mean, I've been asked years ago, how long would it take? And I would say, "Well, Deming says it'll take 30 years." So over here in the US it's going to take a long time, but it's not going to take a long time in Asia, it's only going to take them 30 years. So time is relative, so is space.   0:16:53.2 Andrew Stotz: And there's something else he said in here that if you could try to help me understand and help the listener understand it. He talks about, you know, he gives a summary, theory of variation, theory of knowledge, knowledge of psychology. And then he adds in this line, "add anything you please, sociology, anthropology, whatever you please." What does he mean by that?   0:17:16.6 Bill Scherkenbach: That's what I said before he came from the the school that everything started with philosophy and things broke off science and all of these various disciplines. What he's saying is he's gone to, his theory of profound knowledge is included these four. But the general message is any discipline is interconnected with each other. So you don't have to be restricted to these four. And you're going back to how knowledge was developed in the first place. And perhaps it could be full circle, although I'm not going to get bogged down with the potential of AI contributions. But you need to, you need to recognize that many, many subject matter are interrelated because they were spawned from the original Eastern philosophy and Western philosophy.   0:18:37.5 Andrew Stotz: And one last thing on this, he wraps it up with this statement that also, you know, particularly given his depth of knowledge of the subject, he said, "One need not be imminent in any part of profound knowledge in order to make it, nor to understand it and to apply it." Why do you think he had this need to explain that you don't really have to know this in super deep detail?   0:19:02.7 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, I think he was being off a little bit. The word profound scares a lot of people. And so there's again a balance. You need to go far beyond the buzzwords, but you don't need to be an expert in any of those fields in order to grasp and be able to in some cases, I think, contribute to them. So he's saying that he's trying to better explain or define the word profound.   0:19:48.8 Andrew Stotz: Yep. Okay, now the next slide is incredible. A lot of different things on here that you're showing. Maybe you can explain what you're getting across in this one.   0:19:57.9 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah, this is a MEGO chart. My Eyes Glaze Over. What I tried and I'm. I'm continually updating it. The different colors are from the fields of statistics, the fields of epistemology, psychology and systems thinking. And I'm linking a whole bunch of them together to show that there are similar thoughts in all four of these fields that contribute to a better understanding and use of all of them. Now the next slide, hopefully is more visible. It should be. I'm focusing on a stable process, which is statistical concept. Stable process means you've got by definition of Shewhart. There's a... Deming would call them common causes. When common causes are... When a process is stable, you're able to do design of experiments. Some of the enumerative methods work very, very well or with some degree of belief with a stable process. The red bead experiment was stable. Rule one and two of The Funnel. Stable process. Common causes in theory of knowledge. There's comment, well, I've seen that before or no, jeepers, I've never seen that that hooks up to some other special causes and statistics. There's a concept in theory of knowledge where you're talking about general providence or specific providence that the storm just, it hit everyone and pick out anyone in systems thinking you can only have a stable process if you have negative feedback loops and negative feedback.   0:22:40.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Again, I think I had mentioned in a previous discussion with you, negative doesn't mean it's bad. It just means it closes the loop and it seeks a stasis so, and that's the only way you're going to get. I'll simplify just about the only way you're going to get a stable process. There's a negative feedback loop in there somewhere. Stable process leads to long term thinking versus short term thinking, the theory of knowledge, empirical knowledge is never complete. Knowledge is theory applied over time. Stable process over and over and over again. The theory matches the data or what you predict, you then have knowledge. So the point is that, that there are a number of specific learnings. Well, for instance, let me see here, what's on. I have to adjust this. Okay. From psychology you've got what the psychologists call a fundamental attribution error. And that is mistaking who, as Dr. Deming says, who, who did it, who did it, did the people do it? Or did the system do it? Did the process do it? And in psychology, although it's in a different place, you've got following Rule 3 of The Funnel is a psychological term called complementary schismogenesis.   0:24:42.3 Bill Scherkenbach: And that's easy for me to say, going back to the Greek schism of split in genesis of a birth of a split. What that means is in psychology it's two people trying to one-up another. I've got this example. Well, I can do it. I mean, who, yeah, and the move or the musical Annie Oakley. Anything you can do, I can do better. So, psychology has observations and subject matters that they didn't have a clue. That was rule 3 of The Funnel. So my point in looking at all of these is that as you dig into things, they are interrelated. Now I haven't dug through anthropology or started. I've just restricted it to the four things Dr. Deming spoke about. But that would be a challenge to our listeners. If you really know some of these sciences, some of these bodies of knowledge, how are they connected? Okay. The aim of profound knowledge, he says, has to have an aim. Confucius in the East, Aristotle in the West, and in the Mid east, someone essentially said knowledge without action is useless and action without knowledge is dangerous.   0:26:51.0 Bill Scherkenbach: And Deming said the aim of a system, of his System of Profound Knowledge is action. And as we discussed previously, it's a transformation of Western, I think it's a transformation of Eastern and Western style of management. And he, the way he pronounced it was metamorphosis. And I will have to check the OED, Oxford English Dictionary. I haven't done that yet. But he has been 100% right in his pronunciation and usage of the English language. So as I said, there's got to be a butterfly in there somewhere. But he's talking about a major, major shift, major rebirth if you will, management. Systems theory. A lot of this is obvious and these are what he mentioned in his, not Out of the Crisis, but The New Economics. A network of interdependent components that work together to try and accomplish its aim. And, and he, and this I had mentioned earlier, I think that in his work. Well, I've got... Going back to some things, this is a 1954 speech he gave in Rome and this is a 1940 speech he gave. And because he was a Renaissance scholar, they were talking about a Systems View before it was popular.   0:29:06.5 Bill Scherkenbach: Everyone knows that he introduced the improvement on the old: design it or spec it, make it, try to sell it. And he introduced his expertise, sampling theory to be able to check on the customers and see what they think about stuff and be able to create a system of production instead of just one way through. Now. And I'm sure anyone who has read any of his books knows he spoke about the interdependence. He said in the example he gave was bowling. You just add up the scores. In the orchestra, you don't use a bunch of soloists, but they have to work together to be able to make sure that the result is what the composer, well, we don't know, I don't think what modes are intended.   0:30:28.9 Andrew Stotz: One of the things that's interesting about that orchestra concept is even, you know, it's a relatively complex system, but there's a score, there's a rule book, there's a play guide, here's what we're going to play. But sometimes with business there is no guide particularly, you know, you're running your own business relative, you know, you're focused on your own development of your own business. And it's not like you wake up every morning and there's a manual that says, "Here's what you do, here's what you play today." Which makes it that interdependence even more difficult and the need for communication and cooperation even more challenging. I have a client of mine that they've struggled to get the team to work together. But what I've also found is that they never sat down as a team and really had honest discussions consistently to try to break down the barriers and figure out how we're going to work together for this aim. So I'm curious about how do you look at business compared to, let's say, that orchestra example?   0:31:36.9 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, yeah, and Deming made that exact same point, at the far end of complexity or just about is business. They are far more complex and require far more interaction than the orchestra. Now, in trying to operationalize Dr. Deming's philosophy, I've tried to emphasize. And we've got a process to be able to create a vision and it obviously is followed by mission, values and question. We covered the physical, logical, emotional a few talks ago. But, but you have to... Top management has to have that vision that will include everyone in its and all sorts of voices in its creation. And then you have to have a way to be able to master that vision or make sure that that vision is operationalized. And that requires a whole bunch of feedback loops, if you will, systems thinking, a whole bunch of being able to work with people. And so it literally needs the application of profound knowledge from the management's perspective. You need to be able to operationalize your vision, not just come up with the vision and put it on the bookshelf.   0:33:34.5 Andrew Stotz: And the final bullet, says "the obligation of any component is to contribute its best to the system, not to maximize its own production, profit or sales, nor any other competitive measure." Oftentimes in the world of finance where I teach and I work, a lot of stuff, people think that the objective is to maximize profit, but the reality is the objective is to maximize value. And so when we look at, for instance, the value of a business, it's two components. Number one, the profit, which you could consider is kind of in the numerator. And then we reduce the profit by the denominator, which is risk. So think about it. If you were to invest money in two projects. One, you invest $100 in two projects, and one is very proven and you're very confident that this is going to work, and the other one is brand new, very possible it doesn't work. We would reduce the second cash flow and say, "Well, yeah, the amount we're investing is $100, but the reality is the cash flows may or may not hit." So we would reduce the value by the risk. And I try to help my young students particularly understand that it's an intricate balance of profit and risk. And if you overemphasize profit, you could be increasing the risk, which actually doesn't increase the value of the company.   0:35:07.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. And Dr. Deming had a similar statement saying that the cost of something doesn't mean anything. It's the value of what you get for the cost and value is determined by the quality. My look at systems theory, especially the obligation this last one is to contribute its best to the system. What many people forget is as I mentioned in the beginning, everything is defined as in space and time. And Bill Ouchi who wrote the book Theory Z stated that... And this is an eastern management concept that you have to have, I guess, corporate knowledge because in order for someone to say, "Okay, this department, I'm going to..." Well, for instance, lunches, the corporate lunch room will lose money so that the corporation can make. So the people would stay on site and be able to contribute more work. But that's in the longer term. And so if someone steps aside today to let someone else get the kudos or the credit, the corporation needs to remember that. He called it societal knowledge or memory. And if you ended up being saying, "Screw you, I'm taking what's owed to me, " that also will be remembered. So you have to introduce the dimension of time to any systems theory view. Time and space.   0:37:36.3 Andrew Stotz: You mentioned about... Oh, go ahead.   0:37:40.5 Bill Scherkenbach: No, it's a statistician's attempt at humor before Einstein. Yeah.   0:37:49.6 Andrew Stotz: You mentioned about metamorphosis and you mentioned about transformation and I was just looking it up and let me maybe if I'll read out what I found. "Metamorphosis is a biological stage based change. Like a caterpillar turning into a butterfly. It implies a natural structured process. Transformation is a broad change in form, character or condition. It can be physical, emotional or organizational. In short, every metamorphosis is a transformation. But not every transformation is a metamorphosis."   0:38:26.2 Bill Scherkenbach: Good point. Understand.   0:38:30.7 Andrew Stotz: So let's continue.   0:38:35.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Okay. Variation. I think the first noble truth of Buddhism is "life is suffering." And Deming equated variation with suffering. So when I presented similar slides to my friends in Asia, I... Life is variation.   0:39:02.2 Andrew Stotz: That's great.   0:39:03.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Now there are two extremes in taking action on variation. Well, in taking action, I know this is in front of us, but Dr. Deming spoke about Shewhart's contribution. And that is the two mistakes that people can make with variation, while in taking appropriate action on variation. And one is mistaking common cause for special causes or special causes for common causes. And that's really the primary view. But Deming seminars showed that if you're going to take action, there also are two extremes in taking action. And one was every action taken tends to make things worse, which he used The Funnel experiment. And the other extreme is every action taken has no effect on the variation. And that's obviously the red bead experiment. And so he, those were the two extremes that he wanted to show and demonstrate to people in order to solidify the folks learning. Theory of knowledge. Okay, Management is prediction, temporal spread, space and time absolutely required, knowledge is built on theory.   0:40:50.5 Bill Scherkenbach: He got that from Shewhart and indirectly through C.I. Lewis and on knowledge being built on theory. And with that, that jogged my mind as far as coming up with my theory-question-data-action cycle, which is a bit different than the Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. But in knowledge development knowledge is built on theory. So anytime any data that you see you and he asked, he told people, by what method did these data get to me? If you see data you have to ask that. If you see data you have to say what was the question that was asked? If you're a question asker, questions come from theory. They're connections of concepts in your mind. And so theory could be a guess or it could be as proven as scientific law, but everything, and that scares people away, but everything really starts with theory. Given a theory you can ask a question. You can tell people when you ask the question what I'm going to do with the data so they have a better idea of how to collect the data and what data to collect. And then you take the action and go back and revisit the theory. So theory, question, data, action over time generates knowledge. And with some other emotional and physical constraints and consistencies, you're going to gain wisdom.   0:42:58.8 Andrew Stotz: There's something...   0:43:00.4 Bill Scherkenbach: Go ahead.   0:43:01.5 Andrew Stotz: There's something that I always, I've questioned, I think you can probably clear it up in this part of our discussion is that Dr. Deming used to say something along the lines of without prediction or without theory there is no knowledge. Something along that line as I recall. And sometimes I understood that clearly and other times I question that. What would you say about that? How should I understand that?   0:43:33.1 Bill Scherkenbach: Well, it's something that he and Shewhart spoke about a lot. And let's see, in his 1939 book The Statistical Methods from the Viewpoint of Quality Control by Shewhart and edited and commented on by Dr. Deming, they speak about that, as far as. And again Shewhart was influenced by C.I. Lewis. And as an aside, when, when I was at Ford and we had a speaker who had studied under CI Lewis. I had to get Dr. Deming to speak with them. And I've put part of a video of their conversation on LinkedIn, YouTube, I guess. But knowledge is built on theory. Now can you explain it again? I might be able to...   0:45:03.0 Andrew Stotz: So let me get a quote from New Economics. He said "experience by itself teaches nothing. Without theory, experience has no meaning. Without theory, one has no question to ask. Hence without theory there is no learning."   0:45:19.0 Bill Scherkenbach: Yeah. Yeah, okay. He was getting to, and he had all sorts of examples on the, on the first statement that experience teaches nothing. If you're, you might have an experience that perhaps you were, you, you were picked on. And what are you going to do about it? Well, your theory could have been: well, they don't like me. It could have been that: well, that person was a bully. Could be a whole bunch of things. But without the theory, what are you going to do in the future to make that experience more to your liking? And so you have to go beyond the experience and look at what is the thoughts and motivations behind that, which is theory. And now I don't know why I mentioned that, but I mean a number of the way... Well, I'll leave it at that.   0:47:02.8 Andrew Stotz: Yeah.   0:47:04.3 Bill Scherkenbach: As the left and right dukes it out based on their own theories. Okay. Psychology, it's incomplete without knowledge of variation. You mention that if you know the red beads, you won't make the fundamental attribution error. I had mentioned schismagenesis earlier, which is rule three of The Funnel. It invites, it says helps us understand people as different individuals. In, again, my take on this part of psychology. And again Dr. Deming saying everyone is entitled to take joy in their work. And he spoke about extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Well, I have looked at it for many years as each one of us has an internal voice of the customer. We are the customer. And what makes me take joy would make another person perhaps take despair. And so it's management's responsibility who manages the people, materials, methods, equipment, environment to know me as a customer and be able to, if this works for me, then the management would try to arrange things that would help me take joy because it's more congruent with my internal voice of the customer. Deming used a number of examples that I gather some psychologists call it overjustification. But it in fact says the description was he tried to tip someone and it was an insult.   0:49:30.8 Bill Scherkenbach: And so instead of a thank you. He talked, he talked about the letter he sent to a surgeon of his, meant more than adding $500 to the bill. And the surgeon would carry the letter from Dr. Deming because he was, Deming was thankful for it. But it takes an astute manager to be able to understand all of the individual voices of the customers, their employees, and be able to construct a system that is going to be more congruent with each of them. And if you know that money doesn't influence or isn't congruent with someone, maybe it's retirement point, maybe it's a day off, maybe it's a variety of things managers would know that works for one person pisses off another. So that's where I stand on that, on the overjustification. And the obvious: fear invites wrong figures. Yeah. Although I think I had mentioned that in my work over in Asia, in China. So we don't have fear. It's called respect. So.   0:51:09.0 Andrew Stotz: I've just been reading a book about the Gaokao, the exam that students have to take in China to get into the elite university system. And it really makes you, it definitely gives you all kinds of both sides of the thinking on that. It really has got me thinking about this, one measure, everybody's ranked and they go through the pros and cons of it, which is challenging, it's good to go through that and think about that. So, fascinating. Well, that's been a great discussion for me, the idea of transformation, the concept of metamorphosis was interesting to me also the stuff related to having, you know, that how do we acquire knowledge? I think sometimes when in research, let's say in financial research that I've done all my life, I come up with a vague hypothesis and then I just start playing with numbers to see what I find. And so I'm kind of fiddling around. I wouldn't say that I have...   0:52:18.7 Bill Scherkenbach: What's the vague hypothesis? Give an example of...   0:52:22.7 Andrew Stotz: So, one observation that I've been able to make is that a particular ratio has fallen consistently across the world for the last 30 years, and that is the amount of revenue that assets generate out of companies. And I looked at 10,000 companies across the world. So the first thing I thought, okay, well, maybe it's a particular sector that's causing this. And I broke down that those 10,000 companies into 10 different sectors, and I saw they all had almost the same pattern. So that kind of showed me yeah, it's probably not that. And then I went through. I came up with kind of five different ideas of what it could be. And I could test that because I had a lot of data to be able to test it, but I couldn't find an answer to it. Now, I guess what you could say is that my fiddling around was based on some type of theory or guess or prediction. It wasn't until I came up to one final one, which was, could interest rates have a relationship with this? We have been through a period of time of very, very low interest rates.   0:53:39.7 Andrew Stotz: So could that decline have been caused by or related to interest rates? So I looked at the average interest rate that these 10,000 companies were paying over the past 30 years, and I saw it was going down, down, down, down, down, down very low. And I would say that that was the most plausible explanation I could find was that low interest rates incentivize companies to invest in projects that generated less revenue than previous projects.   0:54:13.2 Bill Scherkenbach: Okay. Yeah. I would think that the system. Well, you have to take into account the lag in response to lower and lower. Okay, am I going to wait for the next one? Whatever. And what's the lag in decision-making on the thing? But you need to codify, what's your theory? Okay, if X, then Y, then collect, ask the questions, make sure you understand how you got the data. And then try to take action there. But, yeah, everything starts with theory. Yeah. So it'll be good to be specific about it. What do you think it is?   0:55:09.8 Andrew Stotz: Yeah, that's, that's helpful. Well, let's wrap this up. How would you, if you were to, to bring this into a very condensed takeaway of what you want people to get from this discussion, what would you say is the core takeaway you want them to remember.   0:55:25.7 Bill Scherkenbach: Space and time. And I have done my best. Dr. Deming ended all of his lectures.   0:55:38.9 Andrew Stotz: I have done my best. Well, I love that. And let me wrap it up, Bill, by saying, on behalf of everybody at the Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion, another one that I've enjoyed immensely and for listeners remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. And of course, you can find bill on LinkedIn in particular, where he's posting a lot of these cool discussions and thoughts and all of that. So this is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'll leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and it relates to what we were just talking about. And that is "people are entitled to joy in work."

What is the definition of "soul" ? According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it is "emotional or intellectual energy or intensity". Well that certainly sums it up for me. "The Soul Explosion" is all about sharing the tunes and the music that I love with a wider audience. The aim is to cover a wide range of musical genres, from soul, boogie, modern soul, northern soul, rare groove, jazz, funk, soulful garage, gospel, jazz-funk, old skool hip-hop, motown, disco and everything in between. Whatever you hear on "The Soul Explosion" has one thing in common - every single track is a CHOOON (no fillers) !! Hope you enjoy listening as much as I will playing for you

What is the definition of "soul" ? According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it is "emotional or intellectual energy or intensity". Well that certainly sums it up for me. "The Soul Explosion" is all about sharing the tunes and the music that I love with a wider audience. The aim is to cover a wide range of musical genres, from soul, boogie, modern soul, northern soul, rare groove, jazz, funk, soulful garage, gospel, jazz-funk, old skool hip-hop, motown, disco and everything in between. Whatever you hear on "The Soul Explosion" has one thing in common - every single track is a CHOOON (no fillers) !! Hope you enjoy listening as much as I will playing for you

Foundations of Amateur Radio If you use a word often enough it starts to lose its meaning. The other day, during breakfast, well, coffee, whilst playing one of our start-the-day with a smile word games, the word "RADIO" turned up. I grinned and pointed out that this was my favourite word, to which my partner mentioned that in Italian, it's referred to as "La Radio", which made us both wonder where it actually came from, did the Italian language import the word, or export it, given that Guglielmo Marconi was Italian? A quick search advised us that it came from Latin, radius, meaning "spoke of a wheel", "beam of light" or "ray". Fully enlightened we finished our coffee and got on with our day .. except I couldn't stop thinking about this. Having recently spent some quality time looking into the history of the RF Circulator, I figured searching the patent records might be a solid way to get some handle on where this word "radio" came from. Initially Google Patent search unearths the oldest as being from 1996, not very helpful. Adding 1900 as the end date filter turns up a radio cabinet patent with a filing date of 1833, except that it was published and granted in 1931, which is confirmed by the patent itself. This level of corruption in the data affects at least a dozen patents, but I daresay that there's plenty more like that. 1857 turns up a patent with the word "broadcasting", in the context of "broadcasting guano", so, nothing much has changed in nearly 170 years, but I digress. Adding quotes to the search term unearths a patent from 1861, apparently iron roads, locomotives, large slopes and small radio curves relates to the other meaning of the word radius, in Spanish. 1863 gives us ruffle stitching, "made upon the radio", but the patent is so corrupt that it's pretty much unreadable. 1871 unearths an electromagnetic engine, but the text has so much gibberish that I suspect that the word "radio" is a happy accident. 1873 shows us a "Wireless signalling system", bingo, the patent shows us transmitter and receiver circuits, antennas, messages and frequencies and a whole bunch of relevant radio information, except that the date on the patent itself is 1919. And you wonder why people argue about who invented what when? I'll spare you the gas apparatus, petrol lamps with cigar cutter, running gear for vehicles and bounce to 1897, "Method of and apparatus for converting x-rays into light for photographic purposes", the first occurrence of "radio", in the form of "radiograph", complete with pictures of the bones of a hand drawn meticulously from presumably an x-ray. I confess I'm not convinced. Using the United States Patent and Trademark Office search for the word radio gives you 54,688 pages with 2.7 million records, ordered in reverse chronological order with no way to skip to the last page. The World Intellectual Property Organisation finds the same Spanish iron paths patents, but unearths "A Differential Arrangement for Radio Controlled Race Cars" from 1900, but inside we discover it's really from 1979. Seems this level of corruption is endemic in the patent field, wonder who's benefiting from this misinformation? Meanwhile, still looking, I discovered the Oxford English Dictionary, which claims that the earliest known use of the word "radio" is in the 1900's, but the earliest evidence is from 1907 in a writing by "L. De Forest", but you are granted the privilege of paying them to actually see that evidence .. really? On 18 July 1907, Lee de Forest, made the first ship-to-shore transmissions by radiotelephone, which adds some credence to the claim, but I have to tell you, I'm not particularly convinced. Taking a different approach, starting at Guglielmo Marconi, his first efforts in 1894 showed the wireless activation of a bell on the other side of the room. Six months later he managed to cross 3 kilometres realising that this could become capable of longer distances. The Italian Ministry of Post and Telegraphs didn't respond to his application for funding, so in 1896, at the age of 21, moving to Great Britain, he arrived in Dover where the customs officer opened his case to find various apparatus, which were destroyed because they could be a bomb. Lodging a patent "Improvements in Transmitting Electrical impulses and Signals, and in Apparatus therefor", was the first patent for a communication system on radio waves. It was granted a year later. One problem. It doesn't have the word "radio" in it, instead it talks about "a Hertz radiator", so close. So, we've narrowed it down to somewhere between 1896 and 1907, that's an 11 year window. Some observations. De Forest founded a company called "the Radio Telephone And Telegraph Company". It's unclear exactly when this happened, it collapsed in 1909 and was founded after disagreement with management of his previous company, apparently on 28 November 1906. A quick aside, apparently in 1881, Alexander Graham Bell used the word radiophone for the first time, which he used to refer to a system that used light to transmit wirelessly, he also referred to it as a photophone. You could argue that because light and radio are the same thing, this is the first legitimate use of the word "radio" in the context of communication, but I'm not buying it. I'll leave you with the discovery that on 30 December 1904, the British Post Office published a "Post Office Circular" with the instructions to use the word "Radio" in the service instructions, think of it as the metadata associated with a telegram. This information has been repeated often without evidence. If you're keen, the Postal Museum is located in Phoenix Place, London. I've contacted them to see if that particular Circular is in their possession. Amazingly the "Post Office Circulars" have been digitised between 1666 and 1899. So close, but no cigar, that said, I looked for the elusive Volume 7 of the set to see if there were any straggling references to "radio", but couldn't confirm this. The Postal Museum Catalogue returns plenty of early references to radio, but it's hard to tell what's real and what's written after the fact. Anyone know of any research grants that will allow me to dig into this on-site, feel free to get in touch, oh, a bed would be good too .. I think this might take a while. At the moment, the best I have is an uncorroborated "30 December 1904" for the origin of the word "Radio", in English, in other words, it was imported into Italian. No sign of Marconi, Bell, or De Forest. I'm Onno VK6FLAB

In today's episode of The Atheist Experience, Forrest Valkai and Godless Engineer dismantle claims regarding prerequisites for end-times prophecy and critically analyze an English teacher's grammatical objections to using singular "they/them" pronouns.Anson in gerrymandered anuses asserts end times prophecy required the 1948 rebirth of Israel, arguing Paul was mistaken about Christ's imminent return. Hosts critique this "going out of business" scheme, asking why God is constrained by geopolitics and human evil. They reject the claim that atrocities like the Holocaust could be "worth it" for salvation. Why must suffering precede divine intervention?Jason in misanthropic orangutans, an English teacher, objects to singular "they/them" usage on rigid grammatical grounds, preferring "one" or "we." Hosts note that singular "they" has been standard since the 1300s, citing the Oxford English Dictionary. They argue that refusing a requested pronoun in favor of using a person's name is unnecessarily difficult, dismissive of their identity, and driven by personal comfort. Is linguistic conformity more important than human respect?Thank you for watching this chaotic episode. We are back next week, Sundays at 4:30 p.m. Central Standard Time!Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-atheist-experience--3254896/support.

It's a second Halloween Encore Episode!  "Hoochie" is another name for a shack.  Merriam Webster doesn't know this and will tell you that a hoochie is a "sexually promiscuous young woman" (like that's a bad thing).  But the Oxford English Dictionary says that a hoochie is a WWII reference for a "lean-to" or a temporary shelter.  So, let's go with shack because OED is a more authoritative source than judgey Merriam Webster.  A Haunted Hoochie is therefore a haunted house and the most famous of all Haunted Houses is The Haunted Hoochie located in Pataskala, Ohio.  It's a family run Haunted House attraction that for the last 28 years celebrated "Swastika Saturday" - an event meant to make fun of Nazis, not to celebrate them.  But that distinction wasn't clear in October 2018 after a gunman opened fire in the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, killing 11 innocent people.  Haunted Hoochie took a lot of criticism for holding their Swastika-Saturday-Event on the same day as the shooting. Haunted Hoochie came out with an apology, which wasn't so great and didn't help things.  So they did what all reasonable people do when their first apology doesn't stand a ghost of a chance, they apologized again, hoping this time to settle the matter once and for all.

What is the definition of "soul" ? According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it is "emotional or intellectual energy or intensity". Well that certainly sums it up for me. "The Soul Explosion" is all about sharing the tunes and the music that I love with a wider audience. The aim is to cover a wide range of musical genres, from soul, boogie, modern soul, northern soul, rare groove, jazz, funk, soulful garage, gospel, jazz-funk, old skool hip-hop, motown, disco and everything in between. Whatever you hear on "The Soul Explosion" has one thing in common - every single track is a CHOOON (no fillers) !! Hope you enjoy listening as much as I will playing for you

What is the definition of "soul" ? According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it is "emotional or intellectual energy or intensity". Well that certainly sums it up for me. "The Soul Explosion" is all about sharing the tunes and the music that I love with a wider audience. The aim is to cover a wide range of musical genres, from soul, boogie, modern soul, northern soul, rare groove, jazz, funk, soulful garage, gospel, jazz-funk, old skool hip-hop, motown, disco and everything in between. Whatever you hear on "The Soul Explosion" has one thing in common - every single track is a CHOOON (no fillers) !! Hope you enjoy listening as much as I will playing for you

Ever wondered why you turn into a grumpy monster when you're hungry? Katherine Pryor's hilarious new children's book "Attack of the Hangries" explores exactly that! In this fun-filled episode of Reading with Your Kids, host Jed Doherty chats with Pryor about the science behind being "hangry" and how she's turned this relatable experience into a laugh-out-loud picture book for kids. Pryor reveals that "hangry" isn't just a made-up word - it was officially added to the Oxford English Dictionary in 2018. The book explains how dropping blood sugar levels trigger stress hormones like adrenaline and cortisol, causing those infamous mood swings. But here's the twist: Pryor transforms this scientific concept into adorable monsters that kids will love! In the same episode, Jed also speaks with Cristina Garcia, a teacher at a Department of Defense school in Germany, about her debut children's book "The Pesky Problem." Garcia's charming story follows a group of pumpkins and gourds dealing with pesky crows, teaching children valuable lessons about teamwork and collaboration. Drawing from her Romanian roots and experiences working on her grandparents' farm, Garcia crafted a delightful tale that resonates with young readers. Garcia shared her inspiration for the book, which came from a Halloween costume shopping trip, and discussed her future writing projects, including a touching story about a goose with a missing webbed foot. Her background as an educator shines through in her approach to storytelling, focusing on social-emotional learning and creating engaging narratives for children. As a mother of eight-year-old twins and an experienced children's author, Pryor knows how to make learning fun. She's written multiple books about science and nature, including a fascinating book about monarch butterfly migration. Her goal? Make complex topics accessible and enjoyable for kids. Parents and educators will love how "Attack of the Hangries" tackles a real-life issue with humor and heart. It's a perfect read for families looking to understand nutrition, emotions, and teamwork - all while having a great time together. Want to learn more? Check out Katherine Pryor's website and grab a copy of this must-read picture book! Click here to visit our website – www.ReadingWithYourKids.com Follow Us On Social Media Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/readingwithyourkids Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/readingwithyourkids/ X - https://x.com/jedliemagic LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/reading-with-your-kids-podcast/ Please consider leaving a review of this episode and the podcast on whatever app you are listening on, it really helps!

Bath bun. Bobbinet. Poor basket. Vanity-bait. These are just a few of the words the Oxford English Dictionary credits Jane Austen with using for the first time in print—and almost all are words related to domestic and everyday life. In this episode, we sit down with scholar Charlotte Brewer to explore the Dictionary's 19th-century origins, its reliance on volunteer readers, its ongoing digital evolution, and the literary biases that shaped whose words were recorded. A must-listen for word nerds! Charlotte Brewer is Emerita Fellow in English at Hertford College, Oxford. She began her career as a medievalist, subsequently turning to the history of the English language and in particular its record in the Oxford English Dictionary. Her publications include studies of Jane Austen and Shakespeare in the OED, and she is currently working on the Murray Scriptorium, a co-edited edition of the letters of James Murray, the first chief editor of the OED.For a transcript and show notes, visit https://jasna.org/austen/podcast/ep28/.*********Visit our website: www.jasna.orgFollow us on Instagram and FacebookSubscribe to the podcast on our YouTube channelEmail: podcast@jasna.org

The Oxford English Dictionary defines 'Genius' as "an exceptionally intelligent person or one with exceptional skill in a particular area of activity". When you hear this, James sees only one name - the Everton legend of Mikel Arteta. Is he truly a genius for making Arsenal once again a force to be reckoned with, as well as regular title challengers? Or is he a young manager that's spent more than both City and Liverpool since he took over at Arsenal, with no title to show for it? We'll get to the bottom of it... alright?! #Arteta #PremierLeague #FootballDebate #Arsenal #EPL #SoccerTalk #PL #FootballTikTok #FootyChat #liverpool #manchesterunited #mancity Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A round-up of the day's news with Beth Espey, including is the Isle of Man really a ‘hotbed' for organised crime, as a UK national newspaper claimed? We'll have the official answer.Also, an MHK calls on the Department of Education to rethink its school uniform policy, the Information Commissioner responds to the government's AI announcements, and we reveal which Manx words have made it into the Oxford English Dictionary.

We bring you the latest updates and announcements from the Government Conference.Has enough been done to tackle the shortage of housing on the Island?And the Oxford English Dictionary is set to feature some more Manx words soon.All that and more on Update with Lewis Foster for Wednesday, 24 September.

X2M.159 – Quaquaversal | Starfield Astrocyte Quaquaversal (Latin quaqua “whichever way” + versus “turned”) signifies spreading in all directions, unlike a line locked into one axis.¹ In geology it describes strata dipping outward from a central point; in PH12 it names consciousness opening in every direction at once. • Philosophical resonance: Paradise Lost narrowed perception into single channels of shame and toil. Quaquaversal reopens perception as manifold, unconfined by decay. • Cosmic image: The Starchild's mind is refracted like starlight, not bound to one trajectory but diffusing across dimensions. • Theological anchor: Ezekiel's vision of the wheels “full of eyes all around” (Ezek. 1:18) parallels the quaquaversal spread — perception that sees every direction at once.² • Neurobiological analogy: Just as neurogenesis remaps hippocampal circuits (see X2M.164), so quaquaversal spreading allows new outputs from old inputs, perception re-coded for multidirectionality.³ In PH12's runtime, Quaquaversal inaugurates the Starfield Astrocyte: consciousness no longer a tunnel but a radiating starfield. It is the first spark of transfiguration — spreading outward, carrying glory into every vector. ⸻ Footnotes ¹ Oxford English Dictionary, “Quaquaversal,” s.v. ² Ezekiel 1:18. ³ Sailor et al., “Synaptic Remodeling in Dentate Granule Cells,” Neuron (2017). ⸻ Glorification | The Final Frontier Going Boldly Where The Last Man has Gone Before! Decrease time over target: PayPal or Venmo @clastronaut Cash App $clastronaut

fWotD Episode 3059: Homer Simpson Welcome to featured Wiki of the Day, your daily dose of knowledge from Wikipedia's finest articles.The featured article for Friday, 19 September 2025, is Homer Simpson.Homer Jay Simpson is the main protagonist of the American animated television series The Simpsons. Part of the titular family, Homer made his television debut in the short "Good Night" on The Tracey Ullman Show on April 19, 1987. Cartoonist Matt Groening created and designed Homer while waiting in the lobby of James L. Brooks's office. Initially called to pitch a series of shorts based on his comic strip Life in Hell, Groening instead developed a new set of characters. After two years on The Tracey Ullman Show, the Simpson family received their own series, which premiered on Fox on December 17, 1989.Homer is the patriarch of the family; he is married to Marge, with whom he has three children, Bart, Lisa, and Maggie. As the family's primary provider, Homer primarily works as a safety inspector at the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant. He embodies numerous American working-class stereotypes: he is overweight, balding, immature, unintelligent, outspoken, aggressive, lazy, ignorant, unprofessional, and deeply fond of beer, junk food, and television. Despite these flaws, Homer is fundamentally a good-hearted man and fiercely protective of his family, especially during critical moments.In the shorts and early episodes of The Simpsons, Dan Castellaneta voiced Homer with a loose impression of Walter Matthau. However, starting with the second season of the full-length series, Homer's voice evolved into a more robust tone to better convey a broader range of emotions. Homer has also appeared in various Simpsons-related media, including video games, The Simpsons Movie (2007), The Simpsons Ride, commercials, and comic books, and has inspired a wide range of merchandise. His iconic catchphrase, the annoyed grunt "D'oh!", has been recognized in linguistics, appearing in The New Oxford Dictionary of English since 1998 and the Oxford English Dictionary since 2001.Homer is regarded as one of the most iconic and influential television characters of all time and is widely recognized as an American cultural icon. In 2007, Entertainment Weekly ranked Homer ninth on their list of the "50 Greatest TV Icons", and in 2010, placed him first on their list of the "Top 100 Characters of the Past Twenty Years". The Sunday Times referred to him as "the greatest comic creation of [modern] time", while TV Guide, in 2002, called him the second-greatest cartoon character (after Bugs Bunny). Castellaneta has received four Primetime Emmy Awards for Outstanding Voice-Over Performance, along with a special-achievement Annie Award. In 2000, Homer and the family were honored with a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame.This recording reflects the Wikipedia text as of 00:07 UTC on Friday, 19 September 2025.For the full current version of the article, see Homer Simpson on Wikipedia.This podcast uses content from Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.Visit our archives at wikioftheday.com and subscribe to stay updated on new episodes.Follow us on Mastodon at @wikioftheday@masto.ai.Also check out Curmudgeon's Corner, a current events podcast.Until next time, I'm standard Ivy.

This was definitely a Saturday-caliber crossword, where Will & company pull out pretty much all the stops. On no other day of the week will you see entertaining, educational, and definitely challenging clues like 16A, Italian pianist who composed the scores for "Nomadland" and "The Father", LUDOVICOEINAUDI (yikes!); or 40A, Origin of "The Tale of Genji," considered by many to be the world's first novel, JAPAN (huh); or the amusing 25A, The 21,728th page of 1989's 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary, END (what else?).

All over the world, for all of human history – and probably going back to our earliest hominid ancestors – people have found ways to try to keep themselves clean. But how did soap come about? Research: “Soap, N. (1), Etymology.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford UP, June 2025, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/1115187665. American Cleaning Institute. “Soaps & Detergents History.” https://www.cleaninginstitute.org/understanding-products/why-clean/soaps-detergents-history Beckmann, John. “History of Inventions, Discoveries and Origins.” William Johnston, translator. Bosart, L.W. “The Early History of the Soap Industry.” The American Oil Chemists' Society. Journal of Oil & Fat Industries 1924-10: Vol 1 Iss 2. Cassidy, Cody. “Who Discovered Soap? What to Know About the Origins of the Life-Saving Substance.” Time. 5/5/2020. https://time.com/5831828/soap-origins/ Ciftyurek, Muge, and Kasim Ince. "Selahattin Okten Soap Factory in Antakya and an Evaluation on Soap Factory Plan Typology/Antakya'da Bulunan Selahattin Okten Sabunhanesi ve Sabunhane Plan Tipolojisi Uzerine Bir Degerlendirme." Art-Sanat, no. 19, Jan. 2023, pp. 133+. Gale Academic OneFile, dx.doi.org/10.26650/artsanat.2023.19.1106544. Accessed 18 Aug. 2025. Costa, Albert B. “Michel-Eugène Chevreul.” Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Michel-Eugene-Chevreul Curtis, Valerie A. “Dirt, disgust and disease: a natural history of hygiene.” Journal of epidemiology and community health vol. 61,8 (2007): 660-4. doi:10.1136/jech.2007.062380 Dijkstra, Albert J. “How Chevreul (1786-1889) based his conclusions on his analytical results.” OCL. Vol. 16, No. 1. January-February 2009. Gibbs, F.W. “The History and Manufacture of Soap.” Annals of Science. 1939. Koeppel, Dan. “The History of Soap.” 4/15/2020. https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/blog/history-of-soap/ List, Gary, and Michael Jackson. “Giants of the Past: The Battle Over Hydrogenation (1903-1920).” https://www.ars.usda.gov/research/publications/publication/?seqNo115=210614 Maniatis, George C. “Guild Organized Soap Manufacturing Industry in Constantinople: Tenth-Twelfth Centuries.” Byzantion, 2010, Vol. 80 (2010). https://www.jstor.org/stable/44173107 National Museum of American History. “Bathing (Body Soaps and Cleansers).” https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object-groups/health-hygiene-and-beauty/bathing-body-soaps-and-cleansers New Mexico Historic Sites. “Making Soap from the Leaves of the Soaptree Yucca.” https://nmhistoricsites.org/assets/files/selden/Virtual%20Classroom_Soaptree%20Yucca%20Soap%20Making.pdf “The history of soapmaking.” 8/30/2019. https://www.open.edu/openlearn/history-the-arts/history/history-science-technology-and-medicine/history-science/the-history-soapmaking Pliny the Elder. “The Natural History of Pliny. Translated, With Copious Notes and Illustrations.” Vol. 5. John Bostock, translator. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/60688/60688-h/60688-h.htm Pointer, Sally. “An Experimental Exploration of the Earliest Soapmaking.” EXARC Journal. 2024/3. 8/22/2024. https://exarc.net/issue-2024-3/at/experimental-exploration-earliest-soapmaking Ridner, Judith. “The dirty history of soap.” The Conversation. 5/12/2020. https://theconversation.com/the-dirty-history-of-soap-136434 Routh, Hirak Behari et al. “Soaps: From the Phoenicians to the 20th Century - A Historical Review.” Clinics in Dermatology. Vol. No. 3. 1996. Smith, Cyril Stanley, and John G. Hawthorne. “Mappae Clavicula: A Little Key to the World of Medieval Techniques.” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 64, no. 4, 1974, pp. 1–128. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1006317. Accessed 18 Aug. 2025. Timilsena, Yakindra Prasad et al. “Perspectives on Saponins: Food Functionality and Applications.” International journal of molecular sciences vol. 24,17 13538. 31 Aug. 2023, doi:10.3390/ijms241713538 “Craftsmanship of Aleppo Ghar soap.” https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/craftsmanship-of-aleppo-ghar-soap-02132 “Tradition of Nabulsi soap making in Palestine.” https://ich.unesco.org/en/RL/tradition-of-nabulsi-soap-making-in-palestine-02112 “Soaps.” https://www.fs.usda.gov/wildflowers/ethnobotany/soaps.shtml van Dijk, Kees. “Soap is the onset of civilization.” From Cleanliness and Culture. Kees van Dijk and Jean Gelman Taylor, eds. Brill. 2011. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1163/j.ctvbnm4n9.4 Wei, Huang. “The Sordid, Sudsy Rise of Soap in China.” Sixth Tone. 8/11/2020. https://www.sixthtone.com/news/1006041 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Geoff and Marie's Good Life: Part 8Feel The ForceGeoff faces some peculiar challenges.Based on posts by Only In My Mind, in 15 parts. Listen to the Podcast at Explicit Novels.Angie arrived in time for tea on Tuesday evening and, being a math genius, helped Colin with his math homework. Well why waste an opportunity like that? Marie politely declined our invitation to join us at the pub later that evening for two reasons; first, it was likely to be a very nerdy conversation and she'd just feel marginalized; second, it was likely to involve a discussion of submissive lifestyles, something she really doesn't really engage with: She prefers Angie as a playmate rather than a plaything.So anyway, she thought it would be better for all concerned if it were only Emily, Adrian, Angie and me involved. Truth be told, she had the latest Richard Osman book to start, and she fancied a quiet night in.We watched the first episode of The Mandalorian before we left for the pub and I'm sure that my wife enjoyed it even more than her muted, "I suppose it was okay." suggested.We arrived just before the kids and I got the beer in; All four of us were drinking pints of locally made IPA. We settled down and just caught up before we got down to business. Adrian had made some discrete enquiries and the University's Department of Fashion Design would be interested in creating costumes for our guests if we would be prepared to underwrite the cost of the materials. Angie agreed without even asking how much.I glanced at her and she just frowned and shook her head. "Not now Geoff."When we described Marie's fascination with a Bo-Katan outfit, Emily got quite excited. It turned out that she was on an engineering course and looking for a CAD (computer aided design) project for her coursework. She would love to create Mandalorian armor components in either aluminum or polymer but they would need painting.Angie and I looked at each other and spoke together. "Lucy!" Yes. One of our little sex circle is a talented professional artist.Then Adrian raised the issue of Intellectual Property Rights. He was concerned that Lucas Films or Disney or someone would sue the University for I P R infringement. Again, in chorus, "Megan!" Yes. Tomorrow night, Marie and I would be entertaining a well-respected solicitor. It wouldn't be something I'd be discussing during her visit, but I was rather hoping that we would have her feeling particularly well disposed towards us before she went home to Charles.We also chatted about our costume or character debate but the kids couldn't help us to decide either. Talking about costumes eventually led us, reasonably neatly, to Angie's collar and what it represented. Angie tried to explain. To be fair, it was much as Marie had described to Emily on Sunday."Sometimes," she said. "There's just so much in my life, in my head, that I just need to turn it right down. When I submit to Geoff, I give myself entirely to him. My problems just don't matter anymore; I am entirely his to control. Wearing his collar just symbolizes that. But," she paused and looked intently at the young couple. "It only works because I trust Geoff implicitly. If he ordered me to humiliate myself, here now, then I probably would, and that thought alone strangely excites me. But," she paused again. "At the same time, I feel safe in his power because I know that he would ever do anything that would hurt my body, my mind or my reputation."That's when Emily spoke up. "I think that's how I feel sometimes. As a woman, a shy woman at that, on an engineering course, sometimes it feels so; so; intense. Having somebody to take that weight off me, even just for a while, sounds so appealing." I was proud of the girl.Angie smiled. "Yes, sweetheart. It's like meditation. Losing yourself in the moment." Then the smile morphed into her muckiest grin. "But the orgasms are so much better our way."Adrian sat quietly, just listening. "Do you understand, Geoff?" He asked. "I want to, but I feel a bit lost."It was a hard question to answer but I admired the lad for asking it, so I did my best. "Emotionally, No. I don't understand. The same way that I can't 'understand' being gay. It's personal and probably even individuals with the same inclinations experience them in their own way. But I do try to understand what Angie needs from me. So, while I will only do things that I'm okay with, they're mainly for her benefit, not mine. Does that make sense?""I suppose so," he admitted, as the girls looked on hopefully."Angela." I looked at her. "Did you bring your collar?"She beamed at me. "Yes sir. May I put it on?""You may." I allowed.She reached into her bag and took her gold collar from its box and turned so that Emily could fasten it for her. Adrian sat quietly watching and Emily's hands were trembling as she helped. Her chest was rising and falling in a most intriguing way too."Angela. You and Emily are to go to the ladies' room now. When you return, neither of you will be wearing underwear. Do you both understand?" They both nodded. "Then go." I instructed them. We watched as two pair, both in skirts and sweaters, bolted towards the ladies' loos.I turned back to Adrian. "The issue I have is finding new things that she wants me to tell her that she has to do. I have to retain Angie's respect and affection because, well because I love her. But, at the same time I have to push her boundaries or else I'll disappoint her. The thing is, I'm not a natural Dom. I do it only for Angie's benefit. I really have no pool of experience to draw on.""So where do you get your ideas from, Geoff?" he asked."There are a few websites that publish stories that include submissive fantasies." I explained. "I read through them to find ideas that might excite Angie without going too far." I thought for a moment. "I suspect that Emily may well be far more engaged than even Angie is. Would you be prepared to be her master?" I looked him in the eye. "I know she likes you. I think that she trusts you too. Are you interested enough to take on that responsibility though? are you worthy?"He mused. "You seem to be acting as a surrogate Dad." He was obviously thinking it through. "I don't suppose though that this is a normal father boyfriend chat though, is it? He alternated between voices;'What are your intentions towards my daughter?''Well, I'm going to tell her to do sexually perverted things and spank her if she displeases me.''Well, that's great son. Welcome to the family'."I conceded the point. "So?""Actually, I've wanted to ask her out for a while, but I enjoy her company so much that I was afraid to spoil the friendship we already have. If I do ask her out, then she'll have to guide me how to be a good Dom.""Here's my first bit of advice," I offered. "Agree in advance what are your boundaries, lines that won't be crossed. Will you give her to other men as a sex toy? I couldn't do that to Angie. I'd hope you wouldn't do it to Emily. She might, or might not, be excited at the thought that you could, though. How do you deal with that?"He shook his head. "Fuck! aren't women complicated?" He stopped suddenly as a thought occurred to him. "You realize that when they come back, if Emily's complied, that means that she has submitted to you?""Okay," I stretched the word out, wondering where he was going."Then yes. I'll be her Dom. But I think that if she has submitted to you tonight, it makes sense that you should give her to me. Pass over the mantle, as it were.""You sneaky little fucker!" I complimented him. "You may just be a natural at this. Heads up! They're coming back."The two women returned and went to sit down. I checked to see if there was anyone taking notice but the pub was still fairly quiet apart from a group of lads playing pool in the far corner; and they were making enough noise to keep our conversation private."Stop!" I spoke quietly but firmly. "Who told you to sit down?""No-one, Sir," Angie replied, looking chastened."Then stand in front of your master until you are given permission." I ordered."Yes sir," said Angie."Sorry sir," said Emily, breathing heavily again."Are you still wearing underwear?" I asked them both."No sir," they replied at the same time."Who do you belong to?" I directed this to Angie.You and only you sir." she responded."That's better. You may sit now," I told her. She thanked me and took her seat."Who do you belong to?" This time aimed at Emily."You and only you sir. If you'll have me," she replied, looking hopefully at me."I have no time to train another sub," I told her. She looked devastated. "I think instead I shall give you to Adrian to play with. Do you want her Adrian? Can you think of games to play with your new toy?"Emily was almost quivering with excitement as she waited for his answer. He looked her up and down. "She's a pretty thing," he admitted. He took his time before he answered, dragging out her suspense. "Yes, Geoff. Give her to me and I'll look after her.""Emily. You belong to Adrian now. Please him as you would have pleased me. Do you understand?""Yes sir," she gasped. I suspected that she'd been on the verge of a minor orgasm, just standing there listening to us discussing her ownership.Then Adrian took over. "Emily. Who do you belong to?""You sir, and only you." she answered, breathlessly."Then sit quietly while I decide how to play with you." She thanked him and sat next to Angie."Adrian?" That was me. "Do you think that our toys would like to play with themselves?" Both girls gasped."Does it really matter, Geoff?" He replied. The girls sat rigid with anticipation. "Emily, put your hand between your thighs," he instructed her. "Touch your cunt."The atmosphere at the table was electric. Ever so slowly Emily's tiny hand crept under the hem of her skirt. Angie, watching, licked her lips. Suddenly Emily stiffened in her seat. We had a fair idea of where her hand had reached."Angela. Touch yourself the same way. You may come, but make no noise." I told her, firmly. She too put her hand under her skirt. Adrian added the same instructions to Emily and then we sat and watched, looking around periodically to make sure that our little play was going unobserved, until Emily and then Angie shuddered quietly and sank back in their seats. The smell of their sex was noticeable by then, so I suggested that we send them to the loos again, this time to mop up their lady juice and put their pants back on.While they were gone, Adrian and I discussed some practicalities that two novices like us needed to deal with. One example was putting the girls into Sub mode and then recovering them. In my case, telling Angela to remove her collar worked, but the collar wasn't a pre-requisite; I could dominate her with my tone of voice alone. We also needed a voice command to release them. Adrian had an inspired idea. "We'll just tell them that when we say, 'you are released' they will have independent will again." I told you he was smart.When they got back we gave the girls their new command and they reluctantly resumed their normal demeanor, though Emily's eyes had a sparkle I'd not seen before. Angie leaned over the table so only the four of us could hear. "Geoff," she whispered. "That was so fucking HOT. I'm going to ask Marie if I can give you a proper seeing-to tonight." Emily giggled, not repelled, as I thought she might be, at the thought of wrinklies like us 'doing it.'"Well," I said. "Not to put a damper, as it were, on things. But do you have any wet-wipes in your bag? Your seats could do with a little attention."We chatted some more before Angie and I decided to leave the youngsters to come to their own understanding. The two women had seemed to be happy sharing their secret desire with someone else who understood. Adrian and I'd had our own chat about the moral challenges involved in dictating someone else's sexual activity. Although I had no business really, I did feel somewhat paternalistic towards Emily but I thought that she had chosen wisely with Adrian. I hoped that I was right but, short of keeping her to myself, it wasn't my decision to make.We got home a little before ten, to find that Marie had three coffee cups prepared ready for our return. As we drank, Angie excitedly updated Marie on the plans for our ceremony and even more excitedly described what Adrian and I had made her and Emily do in the pub. "Can we take him to bed and fuck him now, Marie?" She pleaded. "I'm so horny that my knickers are damp."Marie picked up her book and found where her bookmark was. "You two go now and I'll finish this chapter, tidy the kitchen and then join you." She smiled at us both and then added. "And, Geoff. Take one of your tablets 'cos that story got my knickers damp too."Sometimes we like to take turns to make love, but that evening the girls were on a mission. Even before Marie made it to the bedroom, Angie had swallowed so much of my cock that her nose was touching my belly. She'd pulled away before I was too close to finishing and hauled me on top of her. When I tried to return the compliment, she seemed almost annoyed."No fucking way," she told me, in no uncertain terms. "You stick that cock in me this minute and pound me until you come. I'm so fucking turned on I just want you inside me." Well, how could I have argued with a charming invitation like that?Marie arrived just in time to hear Angie yelling, "Yes, yes, fucking yes!" as I approach my climax. To be honest, I'm not sure whether she came or not. That didn't seem to be her objective just then. To use the vernacular, I think she just needed a good dicking.After a couple of minutes cuddling, we calmed down enough to welcome Marie into our embrace and the next ninety minutes or so were only a little less, shall we say, physical. There was kissing this time though. The girls lay face to face as I took Marie from behind until we came and then Angie laid between my wife's thighs as I took her from behind and then Marie rode my cock as Angie straddled my face and they groped each other. By the time we'd cleaned up and settled down, just before midnight, I was content that Angie, and Marie, had both at least come a couple of times.Angie left after breakfast on Wednesday morning. There was some pleasant snuggling and kissing before we all got up but the girls had decided that we should remain fairly chaste because Marie and I were entertaining Megan and Sam that evening and little Geoffrey might need time to recuperate from his efforts the night before. I reluctantly agreed but 'he' wasn't happy at all. But I knew we'd make it up to him that evening.Marie and I did some housework that morning, to prepare for our guests. We changed the bedding and made sure that all the toys were clean and sanitized. (We always do, both before we put them away and before we have guests again.) Marie had an early lunch before she went into town to the charity shop where she had offered to cover a lunchtime shift.I had a lunch date with Jane, the widow of an old friend. She's a pleasantly rounded lady, a little taller than my wife with black hair, brown eyes and an engaging personality. We had agreed to meet the previous week but she'd had to cancel. I hoped everything was okay. We met in a local café as I felt as though I'd spent a lot of time in the pub of late. I was already in the queue when she came in so I ordered two lattes and a couple of slices of carrot cake while she claimed an empty table for two.We chatted amicably for nearly an hour. Apparently, she'd had to postpone our last meeting because Ben, her 19 year old son, had been unwell and she would have felt guilty leaving him. I liked Ben so I was relieved to hear that he was recovered and back at work. We talked about his job, which he hated, and his other options, which were limited. It was odd; he was deceptively bright but his quiet nature and succinct way of speaking led some people to think he was, well, a bit dim. Let's be honest here: His interview technique sucked. I promised to give some thought to careers where, should we say, he might shine more brightly in a solo capacity. We moved on.Jane told me that she'd enjoyed meeting Marie the previous week and lamented that they couldn't see more of each other. I just kept quiet at that point. She then showed some self-awareness that surprised me. "I think Marie was disappointed at some of the gossip I shared with her. Did I offend her?" She asked.I had to be honest. "Well, my work used to involve commercially sensitive information, Marie used to provide pastoral support to her students and some of her friends in the health or legal professions have similar experiences. We just aren't used to sharing information about folk that might embarrass them."She looked shocked. "Oh, dear. And now she can't share any girl talk with me because she'll be afraid it'll be all over town in an hour?" I shrugged, but she was right; that was exactly how my wife felt. "Do apologize for me, won't you?" She asked. "I was never that woman but, just lately, there's so little of interest in my life that I seem to live vicariously through other people's."I asked if she was seeing anyone. She smiled. "Would you be jealous?" She asked, playfully.I replied in kind. "Devastated, my dear. But my love for you would only hold you back."She shook her head. "If only, Geoff. If I could persuade Marie to share, I would be a very happy girl." Oh Jane! If only you knew.I persisted but she was adamant that she had no appetite for on-line dating and gorgeous single men rarely turned up at her door, so she was left to her own devices. I asked her how many devices she actually owned. She looked horrified for a moment and then we both lost it in a fit of the giggles. When we'd composed ourselves, and the other patrons had stopped staring at the pair of us, she admitted that she was tempted to buy a plastic pal but didn't know how or where to start.I looked at her. "If you are serious, would you go in an adult store if someone took you? I mean it, but this must go no further."She sat back, speechless. "Who?" She eventually managed to say."Let's see," I replied. I sent a text to Marie. "Jane lonely. Wants to buy sex toy but too shy. Can I take her to naughty shop? Do you want to come too to keep us out of mischief?"I changed the subject to ask about her plans for Christmas but she seemed distracted. It took three or four minutes for Marie's reply. "We've had a no-show. If I cover, you take Jane now. Be home for half past three. BEHAVE! xxx"

What is the definition of "soul" ? According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it is "emotional or intellectual energy or intensity". Well that certainly sums it up for me. "The Soul Explosion" is all about sharing the tunes and the music that I love with a wider audience. The aim is to cover a wide range of musical genres, from soul, boogie, modern soul, northern soul, rare groove, jazz, funk, soulful garage, gospel, jazz-funk, old skool hip-hop, motown, disco and everything in between. Whatever you hear on "The Soul Explosion" has one thing in common - every single track is a CHOOON (no fillers) !! Hope you enjoy listening as much as I will playing for you

Jesus Delivers Us (12) (audio) David Eells – 8/24/25 Saints, I'm going to continue with our teaching on how Jesus delivers us and gives us authority over the demons.  Today, we're going to review what the true and false manifestations of the Spirit are, which are all for the purpose of destroying the kingdom of darkness. We have to have respect for the Word. It will get and keep the mixture out of the Church. Only the Word manifested in the flesh is from God; the rest is from the devil. (Mat.12:30) He that is not with me is against me, and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. Some of it is truth, and some of it is Babylonish religion. The Bible says, (1Pe.5:8) Be sober, be watchful: your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour. Pray for God to help us be sober and watchful because, in different ways, people are giving the devil permission. Remember, the Word says, “whom he may devour.” They're giving the devil permission to devour them by not putting on the true armor, which is all related to the Word (Romans 13:12,14; 2 Corinthians 10:3-4; Ephesians 6:11-17). Sometimes deception comes little by little. An uneven or weak foundation makes an uneven and weak building (Psalm 11:3; Matthew 7:24-27). Little deceptions that have been laid by false prophets and false teachers lead to ever bigger deceptions. The devil is out to make Christians look foolish so that the Gospel has no credibility. You'll swallow deceptions, too, unless you have a real respect for the Word. You can be “denying … the Master” even while you are saying that you believe in Jesus. (2Pe.2:1) But there arose false prophets also among the people, as among you also there shall be false teachers, who shall privily bring in destructive heresies, denying even the Master that bought them (You deny the Master by following false teachings and false ways, rather than following the Lord.), bringing upon themselves swift destruction (2) And many shall follow their lascivious doings (The word “lascivious” basically means “wanton” or “excess, an excuse for excess.”); by reason of whom the way of the truth shall be evil spoken of. These lascivious doings in the churches, passed on by false teachers, cause the “way of the truth” to “be evil spoken of.” (2Pe.2:3) And in covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose sentence now from of old lingereth not, and their destruction slumbereth not. God is going to destroy those people who deceive His people and lead them astray. Most haven't recognized that that's what's happening, but you can see these false prophets being destroyed. The Bible says the pleasures of sin are only for a season (Hebrews 11:25). The devil deceives you and bribes you with them, and you may go after them, but they won't last, and then what happens? Then you start reaping what you've sown. The devil is bringing some of this lasciviousness into the church so that “the way of the truth shall be evil spoken of.” I'm speaking here particularly of what some call “manifestations of the spirit.” When the world looks upon these manifestations, they see them as something evil. For example, you're trying to talk to someone about the Lord, and they counter by pointing to some preacher who fell, becoming a fornicator while preaching righteousness. The world uses that as an excuse not to pay attention to you. These ministers, and many others who have fallen away, are causing the way of truth to be evil spoken of. I once went into a church where a lot of people off to one side looked as if they had nervous disorders. They were jerking and twitching. Some were on the floor. Some were throwing their hands up over their heads. I had seen this kind of thing before, and I thought, “Well, that's nice. I hope they get prayed for tonight.” It wasn't long after the service got started when I realized that those were the people they had already prayed for, and that's why they were in that condition. Through prayer, they had received this thing that people call a “manifestation of the spirit,” and now they were acting like people who had a spirit of infirmity. Then the preacher got up and talked about how the principal at the local school had called and told him that he was sending students home who were jerking, twitching, rolling, and so forth. The principal had asked the preacher what he thought about it, and foolishly, the preacher seemed proud of what was happening. I felt bad when I heard this report. These students were obviously in school to give a testimony for the Lord, but the devil had been able to destroy their testimony. That wasn't the Lord, regardless of what they were thinking. It is not the Lord's way to cause foolishness or confusion to destroy His testimony. Here is an example as proof for you. (1Co.14:23) If therefore the whole church be assembled together and all speak with tongues… Now we know that “tongues” is a true manifestation of the Spirit of God, and there's a good reason for tongues. When you pray in tongues, you can pray according to the Will of God because your carnal understanding doesn't get involved. There's no foolishness in tongues, but even tongues have had rules set upon it. This is to make sure that we as Christians don't lose our testimony before the world. (1Co.14:23) If therefore the whole church be assembled together and all speak with tongues, and there come in men unlearned or unbelieving, will they not say that ye are mad? (24) But if all prophesy, and there come in one unbelieving or unlearned, he is reproved by all, he is judged by all; (25) the secrets of his heart are made manifest; and so he will fall down on his face and worship God, declaring that God is among you indeed. They'll say you're “mad,” i.e., insane, from a genuine manifestation of the Spirit. This means that you don't want even a true manifestation in front of unbelievers because you may destroy your testimony and cause “the way of the truth” to “be evil spoken of.” Since this is the case for genuine manifestations of the Spirit, then it is certainly true of some of these manifestations that can't be found at all in the Bible. These students were going to school twitching and jerking and flailing their arms. That's not the Word of God. It is not God's way to destroy testimonies. Manifestations are meant to edify the people around you. Paul exhorted the people who speak in tongues not to get up and address the assembly in tongues because without interpretation it wasn't edifying the people around them. Now, if that's true for a true gift of speaking in tongues, it is certainly true for all these other manifestations. If they don't edify the people around you, then God says not to do it. People with a religious spirit may think they are being spiritual to go out among the heathen and do these old “holy roller” things, but that wasn't Paul's opinion or method. (1Co.9:19) For though I was free from all [men,] I brought myself under bondage to all, that I might gain the more. (Paul brought himself under submission to the people around him so that he could gain them.) (20) And to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, not being myself under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; (21) to them that are without law, as without law, not being without law to God, but under law to Christ, that I might gain them that are without law. (22) To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak: I am become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some. (23) And I do all things for the gospel's sake, that I may be a joint partaker thereof. This idea is diametrically opposed to the idea of engaging in questionable manifestations among the lost. Paul was talking about being all things to all people so that he might save some, and so he was weak to the weak by meeting them where they were. His teaching was opposed to doing foolish things in front of them, destroying the testimony of God. [“Holy roller” is considered to be a derogatory term and may be applied to any out-of-control or bizarre behavior during worship services. From Wikipedia.org: The Oxford English Dictionary cites an 1893 memoir by Charles Godfrey Leland, in which he says, “When the Holy Spirit seized them ... the Holy Rollers ... rolled over and over on the floor.”]  The Bible doesn't speak of such a habit. Paul said, 1Co 11:1  Be ye imitators of me, even as I also am of Christ. A Baptist preacher in that assembly got up and testified about how he had real questions in his heart when he had left there. He admitted that he hadn't felt good in himself, and he questioned God about it. He asked God to please tell him what was right or wrong. God spoke to him with this verse (1Co.14:33) for God is not [a God] of confusion, but of peace. The other verse he got was (Pro.3:5) … And lean not upon thine own understanding. If we study and respect the Scriptures, then we're not leaning on our own understanding; we're leaning on God's understanding. It's important that we study Scripture to find our answers. You can't find answers through your feelings. You can't find answers through your wisdom or emotions. You can't get answers from men because you might respect a man too much. He might say something unscriptural and lead you astray. (1Co.14:32) And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets; (33) for God is not [a God] of confusion, but of peace. There is a difference between manifestations of the Holy Spirit and manifestations of demon spirits. Manifestations of demon spirits may start out needing your permission, but the more they continue, the less they're interested in your permission. The manifestations will become involuntary and possessive. You may begin to jerk and twitch and do things that you're not at all meaning to do, but that this religious spirit is doing through you. There was a time when I was traveling to different groups among Pentecostals, and I had noticed that there were different manifestations in each group. I began to meditate on this, asking, “If this is the Holy Spirit, why isn't the Holy Spirit manifesting His gifts everywhere?” The conclusion I came to is that not everything the Pentecostals are calling a “manifestation of the Holy Spirit” is a true manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Since each particular religious group had its own particular manifestation, it had to be a religious spirit that was manifesting in that group. This is just part of the great mixture out there, and the devil has a reason for manifesting these things. He wants Christians to look silly to the world because that destroys their testimony. (1Co.14:32) And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. That means if it's a gift from the Lord, then that prophet can stop the manifestation, and that prophet can start the manifestation. Did you know that? Let's go back and read about the manifestations of the Holy Spirit. Let's see if jerking, twitching, and rolling are listed in there. And as we read, let's also look to see if these manifestations are involuntary or voluntary. (1Co.12:4) Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. (5) And there are diversities of ministrations, and the same Lord. (6) And there are diversities of workings (Notice that these gifts may manifest differently in different Christians.), but the same God, who worketh all things in all. (7) But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit to profit withal. The Holy Spirit isn't forcing you to do anything; the Holy Spirit is guiding you. The Bible says, (Php.2:13) For it is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good pleasure. The Holy Spirit moves through our will. He doesn't work against our will. The Holy Spirit doesn't do things without our will. You may say, “Well, when He moves on you with a prophecy, that didn't come from your will.” That's right, but your will has to agree with it. The Lord is not pushing prophecy on you. People who don't want that gift don't manifest it. Paul goes on to list the manifestations of the Holy Spirit, and many of these were ones that Jesus manifested, so we have good examples of them in the Scriptures. Some of these manifestations that we've been seeing are not mentioned in the Bible. They're excluded from this list because, in this list, all the manifestations are voluntary. (1Co.12:8) For to one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom; and to another the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit: (9) to another faith, in the same Spirit; and to another gifts of healings, in the one Spirit; (10) and to another workings of miracles; and to another prophecy; and to another discernings of spirits; to another [divers] kinds of tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues: (11) but all these worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as he will. These are the common gifts promised to believers. Are there some listed in scripture that are not given commonly?  1Co 5:3  For I verily, being absent in body but present in spirit, have already as though I were present judged him that hath so wrought this thing… I was once given a gift to listen to a factious group across town as they plotted to destroy us. I then made comments about their false assertions that they heard. One of them said in reply, “We know who you are David.” We have a witness who was there in spirit listening and agreed. Jesus and Phillip were translated by the Spirit from place to place, as was I also. These could be included in workings of miracles or discernings of spirits because I have had both of these?  God tells us in His Word what are manifestations of His Spirit because He doesn't want us to accept the devil's counterfeit manifestations. True gifts will destroy the works of the devil and promote the Kingdom. They are not to put on a show but they can confirm the Word. (1Co.14:32) And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets; (33) for God is not a God of confusion, but of peace. God gave us those verses for our protection. We are not supposed to have people in the church whose spirit is not subject to them, people who are doing things over which they have no control. According to these verses, being out of control does not sound like the Holy Spirit. Many have been witnesses to people falling, twitching, rolling around, and flailing their arms over their heads, etc.. One of the girls who testified on the platform had to have somebody on each arm holding her up. When the pastor came and stood next to her, talking in regard to this twitching movement that she was manifesting, something hit him in the stomach. I saw him double over with a look of pain on his face. Two men went up and got him, as he was looking kind of drunk, and they took him aside and set him down. Everybody was praising the Lord, like it was another move of the Spirit. Well, it was a move of a spirit. It was a move of that fellowship's religious spirit. These spirits like to manifest supernatural signs because people respect them, but not every supernatural sign is from the Lord. Lately, if people see something supernatural coming from a church or a preacher, they think that it's God, but God works in us to will and to do of His good pleasure (Philippians 2:13). If He is going to use our will, we have to submit our will to Him, and we should be inviting the Lord to use us in these gifts. It's through these gifts that He's going to manifest Himself in supernatural power in His Church, and so we're commanded to seek out these spiritual gifts that are given to us by the Holy Spirit. (1Co.14:12) So also ye, since ye are zealous of spiritual [gifts,] seek that you may abound, unto the edifying of the church. Be suspicious of preachers who are busy imparting other kinds of “gifts,” laughing gifts, rolling gifts, twitching gifts, etc. The Lord moves in supernatural things that edify the spirit, not cater to the flesh, of man. Some of these manifestations of the so-called “Spirit” give people “ecstasies,” feelings of rapture or bliss in their flesh. People have asked, even begged me, to pray over them so that they could have this feeling of euphoria. People have told me, “Oh, Brother David, I really need to go ‘out in the Spirit,'” but that's not what anyone really needs. What we really need is more of God. We don't need some tantalizing feeling in the flesh. God wants us to come away from being moved by our feelings and by our emotions. When a person is weaned from being dependent upon their emotions, then they are stable. Then they can be moved only by the Word. I've seen people claim that a move of the Spirit is upon them, yet their emotions are bouncing back and forth from one extreme to another. For instance, one moment they're crying and then the next they're laughing, the whole time saying that it's a move of the Spirit, but it's a move of demons. These spirits want to have you dependent upon your emotions. If people are moved by their emotions or feelings, they are untrustworthy because they can always be manipulated by the devil. The Bible says, (2Co.11:14) And no marvel; for even Satan fashioneth himself into an angel (That's the Greek word angelon and it means “a messenger, {generally} a supernatural messenger from God.) of light. Satan comes as a “messenger of light.” The devil is not so stupid as to come with his pitchfork. We are going to see messengers of light. (2Co.11:15) It is no great thing therefore if his ministers also fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works. Satan's going to come as a preacher of the “truth,” as a preacher of the “Word,” otherwise the church wouldn't listen to him. That is how the devil is going to come, and yes, he has been and is doing it all along. We are warned, (2Pe.2:1) As among you also there shall be false teachers… Look around you. If you can't see these false teachers, then you have a problem. You're not respecting the Word of God enough, and are respecting the traditions of men too much. (Col.3:17) And whatsoever ye do, in word or in deed, [do] all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him. No matter what we do, in word or in deed, we have to do it in the “Name,” which means “nature and character,” of Jesus. Nowhere in Scripture do we see Jesus jerking and twitching and rolling on the ground and preaching, but we do see Him manifesting the gifts we read listed in 1 Corinthians 12. We can manifest those things because we can do those in the Name of Jesus Christ. If your words or deeds don't agree with what He said or did, don't say or do them. You don't have permission from the Scriptures to disagree in word or deed. Your deeds represent Him. You are an ambassador of Christ. You have gone into a foreign country, i.e. this earth, to represent Him, so your words and actions have to represent Him. (2Co.3:18) But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit. Your words and actions have to be a reflection of Him, but we see no reflection of the Life of Jesus in these false manifestations we're seeing in the churches. We see no foundation for us to accept them. There's a mixture. It's true that most of these manifestations are spiritual experiences, but they're spiritual experiences for the flesh. You may have heard about a manifestation called “being drunk in the spirit,” but the Scriptures tell us instead to be sober (Romans 12:3; 1 Thessalonians 5:6,8; 1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:8; etc.) There's no place where the Bible says to be drunk and sober at the same time, because God isn't going to make you drunk and then tell you to be sober. I was thinking about this manifestation when the Lord told me to go back and read this passage in Acts to see if the disciples were “drunk in the spirit.” (Act.2:4) And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. (5) Now there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. (6) And when this sound was heard, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speaking in his own language. (7) And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying, Behold, are not all these that speak Galilaeans? (8) And how hear we, every man in our own language wherein we were born? (9) Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, in Judaea and Cappadocia, in Pontus and Asia, (10) in Phrygia and Pamphylia, in Egypt and the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and sojourners from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, (11) Cretans and Arabians, we hear them speaking in our tongues the mighty works of God. (12) And they were all amazed, and were perplexed, saying one to another, What meaneth this? (13) But others mocking said, They are filled with new wine. Mocking they said this. People have to come up with some explanation in order to disprove a miracle of God, and the easiest explanation here is to say that they were drunk. I've run across some nutty explanations of how God parted the Red Sea, too. That's what people do when they don't want to accept the truth; they fight against it with some goofy theory. The Jews fought against Jesus. They fought against the disciples. (Act.2:13) But others mocking said, They are filled with new wine. (New wine couldn't explain what these people were doing. The naysayers were trying to come up with an explanation.) (14) But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spake forth unto them, [saying,] Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and give ear unto my words. (15) For these are not drunken, as ye suppose; seeing it is [but] the third hour of the day; (16) but this is that which hath been spoken through the prophet Joel: (17) And it shall be in the last days, saith God, I will pour forth of my Spirit upon all flesh: And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, And your young men shall see visions, And your old men shall dream dreams: (18) Yea and on my servants and on my handmaidens in those days Will I pour forth of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy. These disciples were prophesying and speaking in the Holy Spirit. We know they weren't staggering around, being drunk in the spirit, especially since God says, “Be sober.” God is not schizophrenic. Why would He make people drunk when He's telling them to be sober? If a person is drunk, they're not in control of their faculties. When a person is not in control of their faculties, deception and demon-possession are enabled. If you give yourself to some gift of the devil, you did it through your passivity, but we're not supposed to become passive towards the devil. (Jas.4:7) Be subject therefore unto God; but resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Those who administer the devil's gifts in séances, teaching people among the lost to be “prophets,” instruct them to be passive, to be blank in their minds. That's exactly how this spirit comes upon people; it comes upon people when they're not in control, when they're not able to say, “No!” Those mockers in Acts were accusing the disciples of not being in control, but the disciples weren't drunk. Whatever it was that they were speaking in other languages, it was just so convicting to those who were listening that they couldn't stand it. At that meeting I mentioned earlier, people “drunk in the spirit” were staggering all over and falling down. Had any lost person come in, they would have spoken evil of the way of the truth. Those people and preachers who were behaving drunkenly were representing Christ. They were confessing they believed the Bible, but it was confusion from the devil, who takes unfair advantage of people. It's the devil who possesses people and takes away their ability to make voluntary decisions. He's out to make fools of us before the world. The spirits of these prophets were not subject to them. When a person allows some other spirit to come in, it's because they are being passive in mind; then they become subject to that spirit. God doesn't give a person a gift to make him a robot. As the Bible says, (1Co.14:32) And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. They are always in control. They can stop a gift or a manifestation, when they want to stop it. It's always been that way when I speak in tongues; I can start it and stop it. Paul said, (1Co.14:15) I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. “I will…,” he said. Paul used his will. The Holy Spirit does the same thing. (Act.2:4) And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave the utterance. They did it. They spoke with other tongues as the Spirit gave the utterance. God is not going to take away our will. He's going to use our will. (Php.2:13) For it is God who worketh in you both to will and to work, for his good pleasure. You may open your mouth in an act of faith that God would fill it, but you do have to open your mouth. After the outpouring of the Spirit in the early part of the twentieth century, Jessie Penn-Lewis traveled the country, looking in on a lot of different Christian groups. Penn-Lewis had discernment and saw a lot of abuse of the supernatural. When God starts something, there is always an opportunity for the devil to come in, too, once God opens the door to the supernatural. Now, as long as churches don't believe in the supernatural, they won't accept it, and so they can't be deceived by it. At the time of Penn-Lewis' travels, many denominations didn't want any supernatural manifestations in their churches; therefore, they didn't have any deceptions from the devil in that regard. However, they did have a lot of deception in that they were neglecting the Scriptural supernatural and neglecting the clear command to receive the gifts and power of Christ. It was when God opened the door by the outpouring of His Spirit that the devil came in to lead people astray with manifestations that are not in the Bible. When a person gets baptized in the Spirit, their eyes are opened to the supernatural, but they are also in a more vulnerable position in that regard. Unless they love the truth, they won't be able to discern and catch the devil when he comes, bringing his supernatural copies. This is like what Jannes and Jambres did with Moses (Exodus 7:8-12,20-22; Exodus 8:5-7; 2 Timothy 3:8-9). They copied almost everything that Moses did, but there came an end to their power (Exodus 8:18-19). The same thing is happening today in the church. “Jannes” and “Jambres” are loose and manifesting their supernatural gifts in the church. These manifestations are not of God because they are not listed among the Holy Spirit's manifestations in the Scriptures, and that alone should make us suspect them. Manifestations that do not destroy the devil's kingdom but merely appease man's appetite for the supernatural are usually not from God. Even as true ministers speak truth which are confirmed with signs and wonders, false ministers speak lies that are confirmed with what the Bible calls “lying signs and wonders” (2 Thessalonians 2:9). Is it possible for a person to have a mixture, to be manifesting the Word one moment and some religious spirit the next moment? Yes, it's possible that this can happen. We've all manifested a mixture in our own lives until we learned better, haven't we? So a mixture is also possible among other believers or ministers. Let's read a few things that Jessie Penn-Lewis, with Evan Roberts, reported in the book War on the Saints, 1912 edition. I am not regarding Penn-Lewis as a teacher, and I don't agree with everything in this book, but Penn-Lewis's witness and discernment of the spirits involved is good. [Note: All passages of War on the Saints are taken from Chapter Five, “Deception and Possession”; Chapter Six, “Counterfeits of the Divine”; or the Appendix, unless otherwise stated. Underlining has been added for emphasis and is not found in the original.]   War on the Saints, Dual Streams of Power (David's notes in red) Under the heading “Dual Streams of Power,” War on the Saints states: From such possessed believers… (If you don't accept that believers can be possessed, go back and study the Word. Jesus called deliverance “the children's bread” {Matthew 15:26; Mark 7:27}. Only the children of God have a legal right to deliverance, and that right is based only on their faith in the New Testament.) …there can proceed, at intervals, streams from the two sources of power, one from the Spirit of God in the centre, and the other from an evil spirit in the outer man; and with the two parallel results to those who come in contact with the two streams of power. In preaching, all the truth spoken by such a believer may be of God, and according to the Scriptures, correct and full of light—the spirit of the man right—whilst evil spirits working in mind or body, make use of the cover of the truth to insert their manifestations… Why would God permit such a thing? Where there is truth spoken, why would God permit, in the same service, false manifestations to deceive people into receiving some false gift? God permits this for the reason of weeding out those from among His people who don't love the truth. Those who love the truth are not going to swallow a lie from the devil for long. They're going to respect the Word too much. They're going to look in there to see “if these things be so,” like the Bereans. (Act.17:11) Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of the mind, examining the Scriptures daily, whether these things were so. If a person has a noble spirit, they'll search the Word to see if these things are so. If they're not of that spirit, they'll swallow anything just because it's supernatural. They respect the man, so they think, “It's got to be good.” Don't get your eyes on men. The words of men should be under our feet. Now I don't care anything about the game of baseball, but in a dream I once had, I was the first batter up in a baseball game. I stepped up to the home base mound, looked down, and saw a hole in the ground where the base was supposed to be. I was standing there with my bat, and everyone had their eyes on me. I said, “We're going to have to fill up this hole.” I directed everybody to get newspapers to fill the hole, so that we could stand on these newspapers. You may think, “Well, that sounds nutty.” I thought so, too, until I started meditating on the meaning. We have to get the news, the words of man, in total submission under our feet. It's the Good News that's going to make the difference. Man is giving you his news, his word the way he sees it, but we have to overcome the word of man to be able to run the race and to win. Paul talked about this in his letters (1 Corinthians 9:24-27; Galatians 5:7). So that wad of newspapers filled up that hole. I stood on it, and looking towards first base, I saw chairs for people to sit in, but some of those chairs were obstructing my view of first base. I stopped right there, put my bat down, walked over and started kicking those chairs out of the way so that I could get a good view of first base. We have to get our eyes on where we're going. We have to see the end from the beginning, and we can't let anything get in the way of where we're going. The only way you can get your eyes on where you're going is to pay attention to the Good News. You can look in the Word and see that the true Church and its order are strangely different from the organization that men have been calling the “Church.” That's because people have their eyes on men, and the bad news of men has convinced them that it's right. Get your eyes on the Word, or you'll be deceived. That's what that dream was about. “Dual Streams of Power” continued: In preaching, all the truth spoken by such a believer may be of God, and according to the Scriptures, correct and full of light—the spirit of the man right—whilst evil spirits working in mind or body, make use of the cover of the truth to insert their manifestations, so as to find acceptance with both speaker and hearers. That is to say, there may pour through a believer at one moment, a stream of truth from the Word, giving light and love and blessing to receptive ones among the listeners; and the next moment, a foreign spirit, hidden in mind or body, may send forth a streamlet through the soulish or physical part of the man, producing corresponding effects in soul or body among the listeners… A man doesn't have to lay hands on you to impart his spirit to you. Jesus said, (Joh.6:63) It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life. The words of a man that are spoken through him by an evil spirit are passed on the same way Jesus' words were passed on, but that man's words “are spirit, and are death.” Those words go into you and recreate that spirit's nature in you and make it possible for that spirit to possess you. “Dual Streams of Power” continued: That is to say, there may pour through a believer at one moment, a stream of truth from the Word, giving light and love and blessing to receptive ones among the listeners; and the next moment, a foreign spirit, hidden in mind or body, may send forth a streamlet through the soulish or physical part of the man, producing corresponding effects in soul or body among the listeners, who respond in their soulish or physical part to the Satanic stream, either by emotional or physical manifestations, (Notice that the response is emotional or fleshly. These manifestations are to titillate your emotions or your physical man, rather than your spiritual man. That's the difference between the manifestations of religious spirits and the manifestations of the Holy Spirit. Also Paul said, we “prophesy in part” which could be part our doctrine and part God.) continued: physical manifestations, or in nervous or muscular actions. In another passage, Penn-Lewis documented that “nerves and muscles are twisted in contortions, and convulsions, such as are described in the Scripture records.” In the Bible these “Scripture records” describe the demon-possessed, but Lewis was witnessing church people with these descriptions. One or the other of the “streams” of power from the Holy Spirit in his spirit, or from the deceiving spirit in mind or body, may predominate at different times, thus making the same man appear dual in character, with short intervals, at different periods of time. “See how he speaks! How he seeks to glorify God! How sane and reasonable he is! What a passion he has for souls!” may be said with truth of a worker, until some moments later some peculiar change is seen in him, and in the meeting. A strange element comes in, possibly only recognizable to some with keen spiritual vision, or else plainly obvious to all. Perhaps the speaker begins to pray quietly, and calmly, with a pure spirit, but suddenly the voice is raised, it sounds “hollow,” or has a metallic tone; the tension of the meeting increases; an overwhelming, overmastering “power” falls upon it; and no one thinks of “resisting” what appears to be such a “manifestation of God!” Under the heading “Mixed Manifestations,” their book states: The majority of those present may have no idea of the mixture which has crept in. Some fall upon the ground unable to bear the strained emotion, or effect upon the mind; and some are thrown down by some supernatural power; others cry out in ecstasy; the speaker leaves the platform, passes by a young man, who becomes conscious of a feeling of intoxication upon him, which does not leave his senses for some time. Others laugh with the exuberance of the intoxicating joy. Some have had real spiritual help and blessing through the Word of God being expounded ere this climax came, and during the pure outflow of the Holy Spirit; consequently they accept these strange workings as from God, because in the first stage of the meeting, their needs have been truly met by Him; and they cannot discern the two separate “manifestations” coming through the same channel! If they doubt the latter part of the meeting, they fear they are untrue to their inner conviction that the earlier part was “of God.” Others are conscious that the “manifestations” are contrary to their spiritual vision and judgment, but on account of the blessing of the earlier part, they stifle their doubts, and say, “We cannot understand the physical manifestations, but we must not expect to understand all that God does.” The most common statement I have heard out of the mouth of those who escaped demon manifestations is, “When I went in there, I told God, ‘If this isn't of You, I don't want it.'” On the other hand, people who want something because everyone else is getting it and who just assume it must be of God, these people get caught. (1Co.4:6) Now these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye might learn not [to go] beyond the things which are written; that no one of you be puffed up for the one against the other. When churches have goofy manifestations, I hear the same justification today that Penn-Lewis reported. People tell me, “We don't understand everything He does or why He does it.” Well, that's what Scripture has been given to us for! God warned us ahead of time and gave us a list of the manifestations of the Spirit. He doesn't list the manifestations described earlier in the chapter, and they're not manifested in Jesus' ministry or the disciples' ministry. Is God doing something new? No, religious spirits are doing something new, but it's not really new, is it? (Ecc.1:9) That which hath been is that which shall be; and that which hath been done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. “Mixed Manifestations” continued: We only know that the wonderful outpouring of truth and love and light at the beginning of the meeting was from God, and met our need. No one can mistake the sincerity, the pure motive of the speaker. Therefore, although I cannot understand, or say I “like” the physical manifestations, yet, it must be all of God. Briefly put, this is a glimpse into the mixed “manifestations” which have come upon the Church of God, since the Revival in Wales; for, almost without exception, in every land where revival has since broken forth, within a very brief period of time the counterfeit stream has mingled with the true; and almost without exception, true and false have been accepted together, because of the workers being ignorant of the possibility of concurrent streams; or else have been rejected together by those who could not detect the one from the other; or it has been believed that there was no “true” at all, because the majority of believers fail to understand that there can be mixed workings of the (1) Divine and Satanic, (Some of them wouldn't believe any of it was true because of what they saw. They don't believe in the mixture of divine and satanic, but there's divine in the human and satanic in the human.) (2) Divine and human, (3) Satanic and human, (4) soul and spirit, (5) soul and body, (6) body and spirit; the three latter in the way of feelings and consciousness, and the three former in the way of source and power. There must be more than one quantity to make a mixture, at least two. The devil mixes his lies with the truth, for he must use a truth to carry his lies. Otherwise, the believer won't accept it. The believer must therefore discriminate and judge all things. He must be able to see so much to be impure, and so much that he can accept. Satan is a “mixer.” If in anything he finds ninety-nine percent pure, he tries to insert one percent of his poisonous stream, and this grows, if undetected, until the proportions are reversed. Where there is mixture acknowledged to be in meetings where supernatural manifestations take place, if believers are unable to discriminate, they should keep away from these “mixtures” until they are able to discern... Under the subheading “Counterfeit Manifestations of Divine Workings in the Body,” we read: Counterfeit manifestations of the Divine life in various ways now follow quickly; movements in the body, pleasant thrills, touches, a glow as of fire in different parts of the body; or sensations of cold, or shakings, and tremblings; all accepted by the believer as from God, but showing what a full entry the deceiving spirit has obtained to the bodily frame; for there is a distinction between the manifestations of evil spirits “with” and “in” the body and mind of the believer; although when they are really inside, they can also make it appear as if they were outside, both in influence and action. When evil spirits are really outside, and desirous of entry, they work by sudden suggestion, which is not the ordinary working of the mind, but suggestions which come from without; “flashes of memory,” again not the ordinary working of the memory, but coming from without; touches and twitches of the nerves; feelings of draught [“Draught” is the British spelling for “draft.”] and sensations of wind blowing on the circumference, etc. Under the subheading “Effects of Evil Spirit Entry to the Bodily Frame,” we read: When the evil spirits are inside, the whole frame is affected, at times with the pleasant sensations referred to, (The “pleasures of sin” are “for a season” {Hebrews 11:25} but then the devil starts taking advantage of ways to bring sickness and destruction to them and their families.) but at others with pains in the head and body which have no physical cause, or else so working with the “natural” that the supernatural cannot easily be distinguished from it; such as accelerating the heartbeat so as to appear palpitation, and in other ways working with the physical causes, so that part has natural ground, and part is from the accentuating force of evil. Depression then ensues in proportion to the previous exhilaration… Many of us have seen people when the “spirit” came on them. They were swinging up and down in their emotions, elated and depressed, laughing and crying. That is what the devil does to people. He wants them to pay attention to, and become dependent on, their feelings and emotions rather than the Word of God, but we have to be weaned away from emotions and feelings. We have to pay attention to the Word and walk by faith, not by sight and not by feelings. The Lord will do this for us if we will let Him. False manifestations try to lead us back to walking by sight, to being dependent on emotions and feelings. Finishing the report from “Effects of Evil Spirit Entry to the Bodily Frame,” we read: Depression then ensues in proportion to the previous exhilaration; exhaustion and fatigue in reaction from the demand upon the nervous system in the hours of ecstasy; or else a sense of drainage of strength without any visible cause; grief and joy, heat and cold, laughter and tears, all succeed each other in rapid changes, and varied degrees--in brief, the emotional sensibilities seem to have full play. The problem is that emotional sensibilities have full play when the devil is in it. And from a chart titled “The True Workings of God, and Counterfeits of Satan,” we read: (2) The counterfeit of the Presence of God is mainly felt upon the body, and by the physical senses, in conscious “fire,” “thrills,” etc. The counterfeit of the “Presence” in the atmosphere is felt by the senses of the body, as “breath,” “wind,” etc., whilst the mind is passive or inactive. The person affected by this counterfeit “presence” will be moved almost automatically to actions he would not perform of his own will (Recall what I have already shown you about the will: God can move through your will, but the devil will move without it.) and with all his faculties in operation. He may not even remember what he has done when under the “power” of this “presence,” just as a sleepwalker knows nothing of his actions when in that state. The inaction of the mind can often be seen by the vacant look in the eyes. (I've also seen this vacant look in the eyes.) In the Appendix under “The Working of Evil Spirits in Christian Gatherings, Section 3, Supposed Manifestations of the Holy Spirit,” it says: From a book recently published, said to contain the very words of the Lord Jesus, spoken through some of His children, and written down as spoken in the first person, the following brief extract is taken, showing the extent of the mediumistic control by deceiving spirits, which by some are believed to be the work of the Holy Spirit. The Lord Jesus is supposed to have said, “The manifestations of the Spirit, in some things, are very strange. Sometimes He will twist the body this way, and that, and the meaning is dark to you. I want you to know some things about this part of the Spirit's work. I want you to see that they are not useless. If you had spoken in your own tongue, when the Spirit came in, it would have graciously blessed you; but perhaps you might have thought it was yourself, as many have. So the Spirit comes in and speaks in an unknown tongue to you, that you might know that it was not yourself speaking… Whomever is being quoted here, it is not the Lord. This is someone possessed by a religious spirit who is comparing tongues, which is a real manifestation of the Spirit, with twistings and jerkings. These manifestations cannot be compared. They are not the same thing. The false Jesus: Your hands He has often lifted up, and again He has raised your fingers in various ways. Your eyes open and shut by the Spirit now, as they did not before. People's eyes were opening and closing, not at their will, but at the will of this spirit. The false Jesus: Your very head has been shaken by the Spirit, and you have not known why He did this. You have thought sometimes, it was just to show He was living there, and that is true, but there is more in it than that, and He will show you as well as He can, in a few words, what some of these things are… Some things in the manifestations are very peculiar to you. You have gone on wondering about them. Don't think it strange that the Spirit works in you in many ways. His work is more than a two-fold work. It is manifold. This is puzzling many minds. They see the Spirit shaking. They hear Him singing. They feel him laughing, and they are sometimes tried with His various twistings and jerkings, as though He would tear them to pieces. Sometimes it seems He is imitating the animals in various sounds and doings. The false revival, or false prophetic movement, is full of these kinds of Eastern religious spirit manifestations, but these movements have had a strange lack of those manifestations that destroy the works of the devil, as seen in the Gospels and Acts. Satan doesn't cast out Satan. (Mat.12:26) And if Satan casteth out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then shall his kingdom stand? The false Jesus: This has been all a mystery to the saints. His work, I say, is manifold. He seeks, in some, to show them that they are all one with each other, in the whole creation… If He shows you, by making a noise as of some wild animal, and that you are like that, you must not despise His way of working, for the Holy Spirit knows why He does it. He makes these noises in the animals, can't He make them in you?” This is the reasoning of some kind of religious spirit. It is Satan who turns men into beasts. This is a sign of the false revival spirits of Eastern religions. (Ecc.3:17) I said in my heart, God will judge the righteous and the wicked; for there is a time there for every purpose and for every work. (18) I said in my heart, [It is] because of the sons of men, that God may prove them, and that they may see that they themselves are [but as] beasts. (19) For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath (This is ruach, which is the same Hebrew word for “spirit.”); and man hath no preeminence above the beasts: for all is vanity. The beasts of Revelation and Daniel are wicked, lost men, who are moved by their flesh. We must love the Word so much that we won't add to it or take away from it (Deuteronomy 4:2,12:32; Proverbs 30:6; Revelation 22:18-19; etc.) People who don't love the Word are going to add to it. I've made this mistake in my youth because I listened to Pentecostal people. Satan's deception didn't start with us; it started way back before us. When the supernatural from God comes, the supernatural from the devil comes in right behind it to deceive. This is just as we saw happening back with Moses and Jannes and Jambres. When the Lord moves, the devil is going to move to stop it. We thank God that He has given us examples of those supernatural manifestations spoken in His Word. The manifestations of spirits detailed in this chapter help us to pay attention to our senses and to our emotions which cater to the flesh. People are getting a thrill in the flesh, but they're not getting an understanding of what's happening. When the lost of the world look at what's going on, it makes them think little of the Word of God and little of the testimony of the people who are manifesting these things. All this is the devil seeking to destroy our witness and seeking to make the things of God look foolish in the eyes of the world. In the false revival or false prophetic movement, they were making all kinds of beast noises, barking, roaring, howling, and so on, which is what demon spirits do. These people are possessed by Eastern religious spirits, Kundalini sspirits, who usually kill them before their time. A lot of these manifestations, like twistings and jerkings, also happen in Buddhism, yet these uninformed people wrongly think they are peculiar manifestations of the Holy Spirit. If you do follow this kind of thing, you'll lose interest in the Word and will not be able to follow the Spirit of God. To follow the Spirit of God you have to be weaned away from following feelings and emotions. To follow the Spirit of God, you can't go against Scripture which He wrote. Now let me share this testimony:   Delivered from False Revival Spirits and Religion by R.C. When I was twenty-two years old and just married, I was very hungry for God and trying to draw near Him the best I knew how. And the Lord was revealing Himself. I was beginning to have dreams and visions, and experiencing the Lord drawing me, speaking to me, and teaching me. In my hunger for more of God, I began to attend revival meetings for about three or four years with many speakers associated with Toronto, Brownsville, the Kansas City prophetic movement, and even Fresh Fire Ministries. (Many who associated with the false revival or false prophetic movement fell away from the Lord and many marriages failed. Besides the Kundalini eastern spirits, Jezebel spirits were imparted causing women to feel independent of their husbands and even domineering towards them and some become ministers. Amany men and women died early.) My wife and I were happy at first, but after a while I got so minded toward pursuing the Lord, I left her in the dust. (People did warn me many times.) I came across a prophetic power minister from the Toronto movement and got to know him pretty well. In his meetings he had all sorts of manifestations, like the laughter. After people would get prayer, oftentimes, visitations would occur. You would see all sorts of strange signs and wonders. (They lay hands on as many as possible to impart these spirits.) You would smell frankincense and different fragrances. Sometimes in his meetings people would begin to feel fire come on them. (Some of the counselors of this would advise the people to stop calling on Jesus but to just chant, “fire, fire, fire”.)  During one meeting people would begin to see streams of gold in visionary experiences. Our pastor even opened our church to this ministry. (A huge mistake.) We had meetings with a lot of these strange manifestations. The focus was completely on experiencing manifestations, rather than loving Jesus and becoming more like Him, manifesting Him. It was like a meeting was a big show. I was always hoping to experience something new. We went to a retreat with our worship leader and some of our youth. There a prophetic pastor laid hands on me and prophesied to me. I went to the floor and experienced the laughter manifestation. I was not faking it. I felt someone literally laughing through me. (A demon of Kundalini) My wife and I got in an argument about me going to meetings. She wanted me to spend time with her and my son. That night at the meeting a prophet came and prophesied to me, saying, I see you had trouble coming to the meeting tonight. The Lord says, “This is the time I want you to be coming to meetings and getting filled up.” Looking back, that was definitely not a word from God. I told my wife what the prophet had prophesied, and I could tell she got upset. I now know that God would not have put a knife in our relationship like that. At first she was coming near to the Lord, and her heart was softening. But after a time she began to resent the LORD and me due to my lack of attention to her. At times I would get a vision where the “Lord” was telling me to fast, so I would end up fasting. My wife would get really angry. And it was my fault. I began to fast maybe two or three days a week. I went from 140 to 123 pounds, and stayed that weight for about two years. Our marriage was going downhill. When I began to fast more, the prophetic began to increase in my life. I began to listen to teachings from Fresh Fire Ministries about “soaking,” meditative or contemplative prayer. This is described as a practice of meditating on Jesus, while being still for long periods of time. I began to listen to an offshoot ministry from Fresh Fire Ministries, called Abiding Glory Ministries. I listened to the prophetic school they offered, then I began to increase in visions. (This movement became known as the false prophetic movement for good reason.) The enemy was sending new friends from the Bahai faith into my wife's life. She began to come to me with a lot of questions. I remembered hearing the testimony of Sadhu Sundar Singh, an Indian Apostle in the early 1900s. (A man of God.) Satan had come to him and tried to get him to leave the Lord and become a prophet of a new religion that would join religions together. He had refused the devil's offer. But my wife was being deceived into the Bahai faith. I agreed to speak with these people. One of them talked about Isaiah 61 being about Mohammed coming from Bosrah. He said the prophecy there was referring to Mohammed. Then he went on to talk about Revelation 19 when the Lord had a name written on Him that no man knew but Himself. Then he proceeded to say that this was Mohammed. Christianity to him is what going back to the Jewish Law would be to us. (Both the faction movement and this false prophetic movement cause many to fall away in foolish deceptions.) They began to talk with me about the two witnesses. Their point was: How could I believe that these two prophets were going to really breathe fire out of their mouth? They ended with Revelation 19—riding on a white horse, the man with a double-edged sword coming from his mouth. According to these people, I was wrong. Both texts were spiritual, not literal, incidents. They truly had more understanding of Revelation than I did. As I was really humbled, I tried to avoid them for a while. My wife kept asking, “Why can't any Christians disprove these things? Why can't they truly explain Isaiah 61 and Revelation 19 to other Christians to stop them from converting to the Bahai faith?” Many times the Bahai leaders would go to PhD professors of theology and ask them to disprove their interpretation. One of the guys in the room I met was a former Christian. I went home and fasted and prayed for a day. I wondered, Why was the Holy Spirit not with me like He was with Stephen in the book of Acts, helping him to be able to refute them with the spirit of Wisdom. I asked the Lord for the truth. I told Him that if Bahai were truth, I would convert. But I didn't believe it was true. A couple of months later, on the Prophecy Club website, the Lord led me to UBM. Then I began to hear the book of Revelation explained and I knew the Lord was showing me truth. The Lord has been really gracious to bring me out of this deception. It truly has been just His mercy. Here's one example: When my old mp3 player broke (on which I listened to all the false prophetic ministries' messages), my wife got me a new player. But it got stolen. At the time I couldn't understand why … now I know the LORD was keeping me from listening to those messages. Another example is: I would have dreams in which I was under the influence of marijuana. I dismissed these dreams as demonic. I now realize that the LORD was telling me I was “under the influence…” My mother (who prayed for me constantly) and my pastor began to recognize the deception I was in. But I wouldn't listen. If anyone were to start talking about the revival manifestations being false, I would just “label” them as having an unreceptive religious spirit. They were missing this “new thing” GOD was doing. I heard a UBM broadcast where a man was talking about coming out of the prophetic movement. Then UBM talked about deception pertaining to what was going on in Lakeland, FL. At first I was thinking, “Religious spirit?” and then, “What if I'm wrong?” Slowly the LORD began to open my eyes and show me I was in serious deception. Then my wife wanted to separate. She pretty much left the LORD. At this time my wife put our house on the market. I began to fast and cry for my marriage and pray that our house would not sell. But it sold, resulting in me not knowing where to go. The Lord kept telling me to go home. But the false prophetic spirits were leading me to stay and get my family together. Eventually I had no options, so I moved back to Texas with my son. I didn't understand why God had neither stopped the house from selling, nor put our marriage back together. When I got to Texas, I didn't take seriously my mother telling me that I was being deceived under a false prophetic spirit. But one night I was praying for a friend, receiving “words of knowledge” that he was out drinking that night. The next day I asked him about this “revelation.” He replied that he'd been home sleeping. Then I knew I was under falsehood of the devil. I got news that my wife was coming down to bring my daughter for a visit. It seemed, again, like the “Lord” was saying, “Fast.” I began to see how this thing was operating on me…. The Lord gave me a dream that, while watching Christian TV, I was high on marijuana. Two individuals, a lady and my cousin M., were with me. When he went to the kitchen, I got up and could feel unclean spirits all over and inside of me. I went to the bathroom and looked in the mirror. Then I woke up…. Through this dream the Lord was telling me that two spirits were controlling me, using the things of God to distract and keep me under their influence. In the dream I got up and went to the bathroom. This represented a place to clean up and get rid of waste. In another dream I was committing adultery with a lady with short hair (Jezebel). It ended the same as the first one: I got up to go to the bathroom, looked in the mirror, and woke up. I was trying to get delivered, but my faith was not what it once was. A spirit of unbelief had gotten into my life somewhere. No matter how much I remembered what the LORD did for me, there was an invisible wall of unbelief. I just couldn't break through. During this process, the Lord began to tell me to stop pursuing the prophetic gifts and stop asking for a visitation from the Lord. But the Word says, (Psa.37:4) Delight thyself also in the Lord; And he will give thee the desires of thy heart. So I thought, “No way that I am going to stop.” But when I would start praying, I kept feeling uncleanness in my heart. After the Lord had told me to stop, one night I was praying for the prophetic. The next morning my son said he had this dream: He saw Jesus, but in his heart he knew it wasn't really Jesus. Satan, dressed like Jesus, had asked him what he wanted for a gift. My son replied, “A pony.” Then he opened the gift. Instead there was a demon in the box! NOW I understand that GOD didn't save my marriage (like I thought He would) for a reason—to bring me here to get delivered and restored to Him. God wanted me to stop my pursuit of the prophetic because this was doing nothing but feeding the spirit of falsehood controlling me. The Lord began to reveal to me that I'm not a prophet. I had wanted to be one, but that was not my calling. I'm not saying “don't earnestly desire the gifts,” but rather, make sure your heart is right. I don't know when or how it's going to look, but our marriage is restored by God's grace. (Praise to the Lord!)  I have gone through severe chastening from the Lord, but I thank Him. What I was seeing in the movement was not right, but I ignored that voice. Even when I was in the false revival meetings, I always internally felt the wrongness of it. I'm just constantly crying out to our merciful Lord now for grace. He has shown me that the most awesome possession on the face of this earth is Himself. He is the prize—to fully gain Him and have Him gain us. It was His grace to even open my eyes to see the truth. Else I would have had Him say to me on that day, (Mat.7:21) Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven. (22) Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy by thy name, and by thy name cast out demons, and by thy name do many mighty works? (23) And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a golden age as "an idyllic, often imaginary, past time of peace, prosperity, and happiness." Yet, for the people who lived under the reign of the subject of this week's episode, it was anything BUT imaginary. To this day, the name Mansa Musa strikes awe in the hearts and minds of all those who hear his story, but what exactly IS that story? How was his reign seen as both a literal and figurative golden age? And why are we still talking about it seven centuries later? Tune in to find out!

A couple of weeks ago in our weekly catch-up with the ACT Party's Simon Court, we discussed multiple countries moving to formally recognise Palestinian Statehood, and what New Zealand's plans were in this regard. Last week, Foreign Minister, Winston Peters, said the country would carefully weigh its position over the next month in recognising the state of Palestine. During a debate in Parliament, the government's delay in recognising a Palestinian state, as opposed to other countries such as France, the UK, Canada, and Australia, led Green Party co-leader, Chlöe Swarbrick, to refer to the country as “outlier,” and called for the government MPs “with a spine” to “stand on the right side of history”. This led to her being ordered to leave Parliament by Speaker Gerry Brownlee, after refusing to apologise for her statement. As well as this, last week, Education Minister, Erica Stanford, announced cancelling the early-reading book At the Marae from its Ready to Read Phonics Plus series.  The government's reasoning for this is through “mixed” evidence suggesting that learning both English and te reo Māori for young learners could confuse them. The move has been widely criticised by linguists, academics, and educators, for being “an act of racism” and “white supremacy”. For our weekly catch-up with the ACT Party's Simon Court, Producer Castor spoke to Simon about both these topics, starting with recognising a Palestinian state. Find out more about the Māori words which are a part of the official Oxford English Dictionary here

Let's visit November 2020 now. It was a tricky year for many of us - even the Oxford English Dictionary was left stumped by the shit show. Hari Kondabolu and Aditi Mittal joined Andy for Bugle issue 4175 - Covidioms, Carson and the Hand of God.Hear more of our shows, buy our book, and help keep us alive by supporting us here: thebuglepodcast.com/This episode was produced by Chris Skinner and Laura Turner Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

1108. This week, we talk to Heddwen Newton about some of the unique and untranslatable words she's discovered while translating. She shares her thoughts on why the translation profession is being hit hard by AI and the kind of work that is likely to be lost. We also hear her book recommendations, including a novel and a nonfiction book about the history of the Oxford English Dictionary.This episode was originally a bonus episode released in March for people who support the show, the Grammarpaloozians. If you'd like to support the show, and get ad-free podcasts and bonuses right away, visit quickanddirtytips.com/bonus for more information. 

【欢迎订阅】每天早上5:30，准时更新。【阅读原文】标题:Have humans passed peak brain power?Data across countries and ages reveal a growing struggle to concentrate, and declining verbal and numerical reasoning正文：What is intelligence? This may sound like a straightforward question with a straightforward answer — the Oxford English Dictionary defines it as “a capacity to understand” — but that definition itself raises an increasingly relevant question in the modern world. What happens if the extent to which we can practically apply that capacity is diminishing? Evidence is mounting that something exactly like this has been happening to the human intellect over the past decade or so.知识点 ：straightforward adj. /ˌstreɪtˈfɔːrwərd/easy to understand or simple. 简单的，直接的e.g. The instructions are straightforward and easy to follow. 这些说明简单易懂。获取外刊的完整原文以及精讲笔记，请关注微信公众号「早安英文」，回复“外刊”即可。更多有意思的英语干货等着你！【节目介绍】《早安英文-每日外刊精读》，带你精读最新外刊，了解国际最热事件：分析语法结构，拆解长难句，最接地气的翻译，还有重点词汇讲解。所有选题均来自于《经济学人》《纽约时报》《华尔街日报》《华盛顿邮报》《大西洋月刊》《科学杂志》《国家地理》等国际一线外刊。【适合谁听】1、关注时事热点新闻，想要学习最新最潮流英文表达的英文学习者2、任何想通过地道英文提高听、说、读、写能力的英文学习者3、想快速掌握表达，有出国学习和旅游计划的英语爱好者4、参加各类英语考试的应试者（如大学英语四六级、托福雅思、考研等）【你将获得】1、超过1000篇外刊精读课程，拓展丰富语言表达和文化背景2、逐词、逐句精确讲解，系统掌握英语词汇、听力、阅读和语法3、每期内附学习笔记，包含全文注释、长难句解析、疑难语法点等，帮助扫除阅读障碍。

1106. We talk with Fiona McPherson, a senior editor at the Oxford English Dictionary, about the playful words that get added to the OED. We look at the dictionary's ongoing work to expand its coverage of World Englishes, and Fiona shares some of her favorite recent additions, including "waka jumper" from New Zealand politics and "Rolex," a term for a Ugandan street food.

In 2024, the Oxford English Dictionary announced its word of the year was ‘brain rot'. The term relates to the supposedly negative effects of consuming social media content, but it struck a chord more widely with many who feel they don't have the mental capacity they once had. Gloria Mark, a professor of informatics at the University of California, Irvine, has been studying our waning attention spans for 20 years. In this episode from January 2025, she tells Madeleine Finlay why she believes our powers of concentration are not beyond rescue, and reveals her top tips for finding focus. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/sciencepod

====================================================SUSCRIBETEhttps://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNpffyr-7_zP1x1lS89ByaQ?sub_confirmation=1==================================================== DEVOCIÓN MATUTINA PARA JÓVENES 2025“HOY ES TENDENCIA”Narrado por: Daniel RamosDesde: Connecticut, USAUna cortesía de DR'Ministries y Canaan Seventh-Day Adventist Church===================|| www.drministries.org ||===================13 de JulioLa generación del «yo»«Pongan sus ojos en mí todos los términos de la tierra, y reciban salvación, porque yo soy Dios, y no hay más». Isaías 45: 22, RVCLa palabra «selfi» entró de manera abrupta en nuestro vocabulario en el 2002. El 13 de septiembre de ese año, un australiano escribió en un foro en línea: «Borracho, celebrando el cumpleaños número 21 de un colega, me tropecé y caí de bruces, golpeando casi con los dientes unos escalones. Me hice una herida de un centímetro de largo en el labio inferior. Y perdón por el enfoque, era una selfi». Once años después, «selfi» fue nombrada palabra del año por el Oxford English Dictionary.Hoy es casi imposible ver una foto de la Torre Eiffel o de las pirámides de Egipto sin que la decore la cara radiante de alguien. Esto me recuerda a un cruel meme que decía: «Lástima que tu palo de selfi no es lo suficientemente largo como para captar lo ridículo que te ves usando un palo de selfi». Tanta fascinación por el «yo» nos recuerda el mito de Narciso, que se enamoró de su propia imagen reflejada en el agua.Hoy los «narcisos» abundan. «Vivimos en un tiempo donde las personas no quieren ser transformadas por un ideal superior, sino reafirmadas en su propia actitud. Cuando el valor supremo es "amarse uno mismo", el "así soy yo" constituye una máxima moral y la espiritualidad no es más que una sensación de bienestar, los sacramentos son un espejo ritual donde encontramos al dios de este siglo: la imagen de uno mismo».En un mundo desorientado, en el que miramos hacia abajo en vez de mirar hacia arriba, en el que adoramos lo creado en lugar de adorar al Creador, Dios nos llama a mirarlo a él, a colocar nuestros ojos donde realmente importa. De allí que las primeras palabras de la Escritura sean: «En el principio [...] Dios» (Génesis 1: 1) y no «en el principio yo».El Señor es el principio (ver Juan 1: 1), por eso Pablo nos invita a «fijar la mirada» en él (Hebreos 12: 2, NTV). Al mirar a Jesús, encontramos nuestra identidad y un ideal de lo que podemos llegar a ser. PPero,sobre todo, encontramos salvación. Hoy Dios te dice: «Mírame a mí y alcanzarás la salvación» (Isaías 45: 22). 

When you pick up a dictionary and look up a word, have you ever stopped to consider who it was that compiled such meticulous work? Was it a scholar, or group of scholars, holed up in a musty backroom somewhere dedicating their lives to the task, or a wide group of volunteers, crowdsourcing an otherwise unthinkable workload? Or was it perhaps, a madman and murderer, working at leisure from the comfort of his asylum cell? In the case of the infamous Oxford English Dictionary, it was all of the above. SOURCES Wichester, Simon (2005) The Professor and the Madman. Harper Collins, London, UK. Johnson, Samuel (1755) A Dictionary of the English Language. W. Strahan, London, UK. Evening Mail (1872) Murder In Lambeth. Evening Mail, Mon 19 Feb 1872, p7. London, UK. South Wales Daily Telegram (1872) The Late Shocking Tragedy At Lambeth. South Wales Daily Telegram, Fri 5 April 1872, p4, Wales, UK. ------ For almost anything, head over to the podcasts hub at darkhistories.com Support the show by using our link when you sign up to Audible: http://audibletrial.com/darkhistories or visit our Patreon for bonus episodes and Early Access: https://www.patreon.com/darkhistories The Dark Histories books are available to buy here: http://author.to/darkhistories Dark Histories merch is available here: https://bit.ly/3GChjk9 Connect with us on Facebook: http://facebook.com/darkhistoriespodcast Or find us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/darkhistories & Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/dark_histories/ Or you can contact us directly via email at contact@darkhistories.com or join our Discord community: https://discord.gg/cmGcBFf The Dark Histories Butterfly was drawn by Courtney, who you can find on Instagram @bewildereye Music was recorded by me © Ben Cutmore 2017 Other Outro music was Paul Whiteman & his orchestra with Mildred Bailey - All of me (1931). It's out of copyright now, but if you're interested, that was that. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

United Kingdom correspondent Edward O'Driscoll spoke to Lisa Owen about the UK's medicine regulators warning that popular weight-loss jabs could be linked to hundreds of people getting sick and 10 deaths, as well as the latest Scottish words added to the Oxford English Dictionary.

Jane Austen (1775-1817) was an English novelist known primarily for her novels which implicitly interpret, critique, and comment on the English landed gentry during the Regency era. She had a great influence on the first Oxford English Dictionary published in 1928 and is quoted over 1,600 times. For Further Reading: The queen of modern slang: Jane Austen is revealed to have coined phrases we use everyday Jane Austen Jane Austen: A Life This month, we’re talking about Word Weavers — people who coined terms, popularized words, and even created entirely new languages. These activists, writers, artists, and scholars used language to shape ideas and give voice to experiences that once had no name. History classes can get a bad rap, and sometimes for good reason. When we were students, we couldn’t help wondering... where were all the ladies at? Why were so many incredible stories missing from the typical curriculum? Enter, Womanica. On this Wonder Media Network podcast we explore the lives of inspiring women in history you may not know about, but definitely should. Every weekday, listeners explore the trials, tragedies, and triumphs of groundbreaking women throughout history who have dramatically shaped the world around us. In each 5 minute episode, we’ll dive into the story behind one woman listeners may or may not know–but definitely should. These diverse women from across space and time are grouped into easily accessible and engaging monthly themes like Educators, Villains, Indigenous Storytellers, Activists, and many more. Womanica is hosted by WMN co-founder and award-winning journalist Jenny Kaplan. The bite-sized episodes pack painstakingly researched content into fun, entertaining, and addictive daily adventures. Womanica was created by Liz Kaplan and Jenny Kaplan, executive produced by Jenny Kaplan, and produced by Grace Lynch, Maddy Foley, Brittany Martinez, Edie Allard, Carmen Borca-Carrillo, Taylor Williamson, Sara Schleede, Paloma Moreno Jimenez, Luci Jones, Abbey Delk, Adrien Behn, Alyia Yates, Vanessa Handy, Melia Agudelo, and Joia Putnoi. Special thanks to Shira Atkins. Follow Wonder Media Network: Website Instagram Twitter See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for May 10, 2025 is: uncanny • un-KAN-ee • adjective Uncanny is typically used to describe something that is strange or unusual in a way that is surprising or difficult to understand. It can also describe something that seems to have a supernatural character or origin. // The child has an uncanny ability to recognize streets and locations she's seen only once or twice before. // The lights suddenly flickered, and we were both overcome with an eerie, uncanny feeling. See the entry > Examples: "... as Nelson Moultrie walked through the cemetery and observed trees growing in ways that resemble the shapes of people, like one that bore an uncanny resemblance to a pair of legs, she said she's already felt the presence of the people buried there." — Laura Liebman, The Post & Courier (Charleston, South Carolina), 21 Mar. 2025 Did you know? Uncanny describes that which unsettles us, such as disquieting observations, or mysterious situations and circumstances. Strip the word of its prefix, though, and you're left with canny, a word that can be used as a synonym for clever and prudent. While canny and uncanny don't appear to be antonyms, they both come from an early Scots word canny meaning "free from risk; wise, prudent, cautious." And in Scots, canny has for centuries had a secondary meaning more similar to that of its mysterious cousin: the Oxford English Dictionary defines a sense of the word used chiefly in negative constructions (e.g., “not canny”) to describe what is not safe to be involved with, or more broadly, what is not in accordance with what is right or natural, as in "the idea is not canny." Rather uncanny.

Episode: 1358 William Minor helping us to understand language from an insane asylum.  Today, a great dictionary and an asylum for the criminally insane.

We're all across the pros & cons of using drugs like Ozempic for weight loss, but what about the side effects? Turns out there's a recently discovered side effect that affects women way more than it does men. Plus, from rizz to gigil, we're unpacking new additions to the Oxford English Dictionary. And in today's headlines two men have been arrested after they allegedly took loaded guns into the MCG for an AFL match last night; Underworld figure Tony Mokbel will find out if he can leave prison on bail today; Abbie Chatfield has been cleared of any breaches of the Electoral Act; Trump fires National Security Council officials after he met with far right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer Mamamia Votes Survey click here THE END BITS Support independent women's media Check out The Quicky Instagram here Tell us what's important to you this election: Take the Mamamia Votes survey here GET IN TOUCH Share your story, feedback, or dilemma! Send us a voice note or email us at thequicky@mamamia.com.au CREDITS Hosts: Taylah Strano & Claire Murphy Guests: Erin Docherty, Mamamia's Beauty & Lifestyle Editor Executive Producer: Taylah Strano Audio Producer: Lu Hill Become a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Anne follows up on the progress with "steek", ways to keep your yarn safe from moths--backed by experts!--and offers a bit of commentary on the loss of Joann stores. Links to Things Mentioned in the Episode If you were not able to attend The Myths That Shape! you can watch it on YouTube. To read the news article about the inclusion of the Shetland Lace definition of steek being added to the Oxford English Dictionary, visit the posts on Facebook and Instagram.  You can also go back and listen to episode 113 to hear about the entire process of getting the definition of steek updated to include the Shetland Lace usage! Sheila McGregor's Traditional Fair Isle Knitting The Vogue Knitting interview with Alice Starmore Find the links to scientificly backed articles about moth protection here. Find Mandy Moore on Ravelry and Instagram. You can also listen to an interview I had with Mandy back in episode 69.  Keep your eye out for information about this year's Shetland Hogmanay Box by following I Thought I Knew How on Instagram or Facebook, or hop over to the website to join the mailing list! I'll be at the Woolly Good Gathering in a few days! I hope to see you there! Music The music from this episode was two songs from Ben Bostick: "The Myth of Translation" and "Sweet Thursday." Between those two was Sleeping Ghost with "Afro Summer."

In our news wrap Saturday, suspected U.S. airstrikes hit Houthi rebels in Yemen, southern Texas is getting a much-needed break from torrential downpours that caused flooding, a judge ruled against the dismantling of Voice of America, Elon Musk is shifting ownership of the social media platform X, and the Oxford English Dictionary added dozens of new words to its pages. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

Nuacht Mhall. Príomhscéalta na seachtaine, léite go mall.*Inniu an naoú lá is fiche de mhí an Mhárta. Is mise Gwyneth Nic Aidicín Ní Loingsigh.Tá staid éígeandála i bhfeidhm i Maenmar tar éís crith talún a tharla Dé hAoine. Ceaptar go bhfuil na céadta daoine básaithe ach níl uimhir chruinn ar fáíl is a leanann oibríocht tarrtháile. Tharla dhá chrith tar éis a chéile agus tá eagla ar dhaoine go mbeadh iarchreathanna le teacht. Bhí eipealár an chreatha talún i ngar do na cathracha Sagaing agus Mandalay, braitheadh na creathanna ar fud na tíre agus chomh fada leis an tSín agus an Téalainn. Thit foirgneamh neamh-críochnaithe in Bangkok agus tá 81 oibrí ar iarraidh ann. Tá teannas polaitiúil i Maenmar ó tharla coup in 2021, tá smacht ag an rialtas ar na meáin agus an idirlíon sa tír agus tá sé deacair eolas a fháil mar thoradh air sin.Tá focal Gaeilge agus roinnt focail ó Béarla na hÉireann i measc na bhfocal nua in uasdátú an fhoclóra cháiliúil an Oxford English Dictionary i mbliana. Tá an focal “ludraman” - litriú Béarla den fhocal liúdramán, le fáil san uasdátú, an míniú atá tugtha air ná “a lazy, unproductive, or stupid person (esp. a man)". Tá samplaí úsáide den fhocal luaite ón úrscéal Ulysses agus roinnt sean-nuachtáin. Tá an focal ar fáil i bhfoclóir Gaeilge le fada anois ach i bhfoclóir agus úsáid nua-aimseartha tá an míniú "amadán" i bhfad níos coitianta ná "leisceoir". I measc na bhfocal a n-airítear ó Béarla na hÉireann tá “blaa”, “class”, “debs”, “mineral”, “morto”, “spice bag” agus “acting the maggot”.Tá imní ar an Rialtas agus eacnamaithe Éireannacha faoi tháillí atá fógartha ag Donald Trump ar tháirgí cogaisíochta, agus an tionchar a mbeadh acu ar thionscal agus ar gheilleagar na hÉireann. Ní bheidh sonraí cinnte ar fáil go dtí an 2ú Aibreán ach dúirt Trump cheana go mbeidh táillí de 25% ar dhrugaí ag teacht isteach i Stáit Aontaithe Mheiriceá. Déanann Éire easportú de luach 72 billiún Euro go Meiriceá agus baineann táirgí cogaisíochta le 58 billiún Euro den mhéid sin. Tá cáin chorparáide an-íseal in Éirinn, ag 15%, a mhealann comhlachtaí domhanda móra isteach. Is pointe conspóide é an Cháin Chorporáide íseal ach deir an ESRI go bhfuil ról tábhachtach ag an ioncam ón gcáin sin san Airgeadas Poiblí agus go mbeidh torthaí dona ann má chailltear é.*Léirithe ag Conradh na Gaeilge i Londain. Tá an script ar fáil i d'aip phodchraolta.*GLUAISstaid éigeandála - state of emergencyoibríocht tarrtháile - rescue operationiarchreathanna - aftershocksleisceoir - lazy persontáirgí cogaisíochta - pharmaceutical productscáin chorparáide - corporation tax

In our news wrap Saturday, suspected U.S. airstrikes hit Houthi rebels in Yemen, southern Texas is getting a much-needed break from torrential downpours that caused flooding, a judge ruled against the dismantling of Voice of America, Elon Musk is shifting ownership of the social media platform X, and the Oxford English Dictionary added dozens of new words to its pages. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders

A massive 7.7-magnitude earthquake hit Myanmar and Thailand today, killing dozens of people in both countries. Also, former US ambassador to China Nicholas Burns discusses the implications of the world's shifting geopolitical situation. And, Israel strikes southern Beirut in Lebanon saying it targeted a Hezbollah drone storage facility. Plus, a new borrowed word in the Oxford English Dictionary that describes a feeling so intense you can't help but have a physical reaction to it.Listen to today's Music Heard on Air. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Morse code transcription: vvv vvv Minister Darren Jones sorry for comparing benefits to pocket money Sutton Hoo helmet may actually come from Denmark, archaeologist suggests Gigil, alamak among new words in Oxford English Dictionary Numb and humiliated Why Chinas football dream lies in tatters Ask for Angela Daughter wants more to be done to protect women Hundreds lose life savings in whisky barrel scam Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal could run dry in days, operators warn Scottish govenrment minister Christina McKelvie dies aged 57 Trump announces 25 tariffs on car imports to US Journalist at centre of Trumps Signal chat scandal speaks to BBC

The Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, has said the United States is no longer a reliable partner after President Donald Trump imposed 25% tariffs on car imports. Rahul Tandon speaks to businesses in both the US and Canada. China's biggest company, Tencent Holdings, has made more than a billion-dollar investment in a new spin-off company of the French gaming giant Ubisoft, which owns franchises including Assassin's Creed and Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six.And if you speak a language other than English, are there terms that English just doesn't have or can't do justice to? Well, the Oxford English Dictionary feels your pain, and so it's incorporating "loan words" – words that would be coined as "untranslatable". We will be joined throughout the programme by two guests on opposite sides of the world – Dante Disparte, Head of Policy at the Libra Association, who is in Washington, and Sushma Ramachandran, an independent business journalist and columnist for The Tribune, who is in Delhi, India.

Language necessarily evolves to accommodate new ideas, new concepts and new cultural paradigms.But, what happens when a word exists in one language, but not another?There are lots of so-called ‘untranslatable' words in English, and some Irish ones have been added to the latest version of the Oxford English Dictionary.Fiona McPherson is Senior Editor at the Oxford English Dictionary and joins Seán to discuss.

Speaking of watching your Ps and Qs, when taking up the way of Zen meditation, it may seem all too easy to get things backward. In fact, according to the great Zen ancestors, getting it wrong is a natural and necessary part of the process, expressed as "Fall down seven times, get up eight," apparently an old Chinese saying adopted by Master Dogen. He also said that hitting the bullseye depends upon the 100 prior misses. So we are inevitably immersed in trial and error. In considering Buddha's original teaching in the First Sermon — outlining the Four Noble Truths, including the Eightfold Path — one aspect is often overlooked. Along with the fact that they consist of a description of reality and a prescription for practice, respectively, they also include four admonitions, or instructions for how to approach implementing them. I think of these as the four "charges," one accompanying each of the Noble Truths, namely: 4 CHARGESExistence of dukkha - (we are to fully) UnderstandOrigin of dukkha - () AbandonCessation of dukkha - () RealizePath to cessation of dukkha - () Follow The translator's choice of "understand" in this context seems woefully inadequate, given that even Buddha himself pointed out that what he realized was beyond understanding, in any ordinary sense of the word. But setting aside the semantics, let's consider all four commands as outlining a process of assimilating and acting upon Buddha's teaching. We are to fully understand, or comprehend, the existence of suffering in this world. We are to abandon its main source, or origin, namely our own craving. We are to realize the cessation of suffering, hopefully in this lifetime. And we are to follow the Path in our daily actions, so that everything we do becomes the path. And thus, as Buddha taught in the Lotus Sutra, widely regarded as his last teaching, there is actually no separate Path, if everything is the path. We are on this path whether we know it or not. And, of course, we do not necessarily engage the process in the order implied by the sequencing of the sentence. In fact, we begin at the end, with the Eightfold Path. It, too, is usually laid out in reverse order of its implementation: Right wisdom: view and thought; right conduct: speech, action and livelihood; and right discipline: effort, mindfulness and meditation. Again, we begin at the end, with meditation, which leads to mindfulness and greater effort, which affect our conduct, and so on, leading eventually to right wisdom of understanding and worldview. Or so we hope. But when we consider the difficulty of what Buddha did, and is asking us to do, it seems impossible on the surface — as do the Precepts, when considered as literal and absolute. So we are left with the prospect of figuring out what these directives actually mean, and how they might be accomplished, by contemplating them in meditation, which brings us full circle to where Buddha realized these truths, on the cushion. In Zen meditation, we are encouraged to give up our reliance on the ability of the discriminating mind to analyze and understand, and instead to trust our intuition to come to an insight into reality that is not accessible to reason alone, what Master Dogen referred to as "non-thinking": neither thinking, as such, nor notthinking. So we are to find the sweet spot, the balance between these two aspects of our original mind. In light of this attitude adjustment to the way we ordinarily approach problem-solving, let me suggest another analogy to clarify the long and broad teachings of Buddha's tongue. P's & Q's of ZenKeying off of this common trope, engage with me in an experiment in semantics that may hopefully shed some light on buddha-dharma. Setting aside the "Qs" for now, I propose that we can frame the basics of Buddhism in alliterative form, as a collection of words beginning with P, or more precisely, "Pr," which turns out to be a substantial set of considerations to be assimilated before ("pre-") setting a course of action: • Premises & Principles• Predilections & Proclivities • Prescriptions & Practices• Promises & Predictions Premises & PrinciplesBuddhism, and for that matter any body of teaching, is based on a set of premises, defined as: ... a previous statement or proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion: if the premise is true, then the conclusion must be true. Another pr word pops up in the definition: proposition, which has a less definitive connotation, being a mere proposal, than a premise, which indicates a more settled basis. Premises, when proven out by experimentation or sheer experience, may become principles, much as hypotheses become theories (and with enough evidence, laws, or precepts) of the profession under consideration, such as science; or, well, law. Predilections & ProclivitiesHowever, Buddhism — dealing as it does with fallible human nature — also takes into account our predilections, proclivities, and predispositions, as well as any pertinent preconceptions we may be harboring. These words, too, have definitions and synonyms that often reflect each other, such as predisposition and predilection, i.e. sharing similar connotations of preference and propensity. Prescriptions & PracticesWhen it comes to taking action based on the premises and principles laid out in Zen's teachings, and in light of the weaknesses of our predilections and proclivities, semantic hair-splitting does not help much, except perhaps to illustrate the subtlety of the task of discerning which prescriptions and practices might prove to be most productive for following the Zen Way under the present predicament in which we find ourselves. The default mode of action prescribed in Zen is meditation, of course, but many of the practices surrounding and supporting it raise issues of protocols in a starkly different social and cultural environment than that in which the ancestors found themselves. This is the key challenge of propagating Zen today, in a context of over-choice on every level of society. Promises & Predictions The promise of Zen, however, remains the same, no matter the situational causes and conditions surrounding our life and practice. Success in penetrating the koan of existence, while not predictable, may be predicated upon the simple formula of sitting still enough, upright enough, for long enough that the effects of zazen begin to manifest. Buddha predicted the future buddhahood of many of his followers, including his cousin Devadatta, who reputedly tried repeatedly to assassinate the great sage. AfterwordThis familiar "Ps & Qs" phrase came to mind while mulling over the design of Buddha's initial teachings, and after reading Ben Connelly's excellent commentary on "Vasubandhu's Three Natures." The first page that comes up from an internet search on Ps and Qs tells us that the phrase can be traced back to the 1779 Oxford English Dictionary. The most plausible origin, of several possible provenances, is that it refers to early typography, where "p" and "q" were likely to be mistaken, one for the other, when setting lead type. This factoid comes from a site hosted by The Guardian that you may want to check out if you are interested in the origin of words and phrases (etymology), semantic enigmas, and the evolution of language in general In our next segment we will continue delving deeper into the design intent of Zen's teachings and their implications for living in times of increasing uncertainty. Other than death and taxes, the beneficial effects of Zen and zazen are one of the few things that are certain in life. But that does not mean that we should take them for granted. We have to put in the work, making "effort without aiming at it as Master Dogen prescribes. Please plan to join our new online and onsite practice opportunities for 2025. My new Thursday evening Advanced Workshop, in particular, is designed to take a deep dive into the more subtle secrets of Zen and the details of zazen.

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for February 13, 2025 is: gallant • GAL-unt • adjective Someone or something described as gallant is very courageous and brave. Gallant is also sometimes used to mean “large and impressive” (as in “a gallant ship”), or to describe someone who has or shows politeness and respect for women. // Though they failed to reach the summit, the mountaineering team made a gallant attempt. See the entry > Examples: “He turned to go, and was promptly whacked across the backside by Miss Chokfi. ‘Ouch?' he said. ‘What was that for?' She was standing up very straight and gallant, though it still left her a foot and a half shorter than him, with the office stapler ready by her hand. ‘That was for not stopping him,' she said. ‘Was there anything else you need?' ‘Not a thing,' said Barrow, and tipped his hat to her.” — Francis Spufford, Cahokia Jazz: A Novel, 2024 Did you know? If you're familiar with the long-running comic strip “Goofus and Gallant,” created by Garry Cleveland Myers and published in the monthly children's magazine Highlights, you likely have a particularly good sense of the meaning of the adjective gallant. In the comic, the character of Goofus demonstrates to young readers all sorts of bad habits and behaviors, while Gallant provides examples of proper conduct and comportment when in circumstances similar to those of his ill-mannered counterpart. The characters' names were, of course, chosen with purpose. We record several different senses of gallant and all are compliments. Someone described as gallant may be smartly dressed, courteous and chivalrous, or valiant and brave. Goofus, bless his heart, is none of these things (while we do not define the adjective goofus, the Oxford English Dictionary does: “stupid, foolish”). Perhaps ironically, gallant comes from the Middle French verb galer, meaning “to squander in pleasures”; such squandering is something Goofus is likely to do, and Gallant never would.

Humans probably started fermenting things on purpose by about 10,000 BCE. But when did they start discussing the aftereffects that come from drinking too much? Research: · Beringer, Guy. “Brunch: a plea.” Harper's Weekly, 1895. https://archive.org/details/archive_charlyj_001 · Bishop-Stall, Shaughnessy. “Hung Over: The Morning After and One Man’s Quest for the Cure.” Penguin Books. 2018. · Bishop-Stall, Shaughnessy. “Weird Hangover Cures Through the Ages.” Lit Hub. 11/20/2018. https://lithub.com/weird-hangover-cures-through-the-ages/ · Brewer, Ebenezer Cobham. “The reader's handbook of allusions, references, plots and stories; with two appendices;.” https://archive.org/details/readershandb00brew/page/957/ · Danovich, Tove. “The Weird and Wonderful History of Hangover Cures.” 12/31/2015. https://www.eater.com/2015/12/31/10690384/hangover-cure-history · Dean, Sam. “How to Say 'Hangover' in French, German, Finnish, and Many Other Languages.” Bon Appetit. 12/28/2012. https://www.bonappetit.com/test-kitchen/ingredients/article/how-to-say-hangover-in-french-german-finnish-and-many-other-languages · Frazer, Sir James George. “The Golden Bough : a study of magic and religion.” https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3623/3623-h/3623-h.htm#c3section1 · “'Hair of the Dog that Bit you' in Dog, N. (1), Sense P.6.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford UP, September 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/6646229330. · “Hangover, N., Sense 2.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford UP, July 2023, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/3221323975. · Hanson, David J. “Historical evolution of alcohol consumption in society.” From Alcohol: Science, Policy and Public Health. Peter Boyle, ed. Oxford University Press. 2013. · “Jag, N. (2), Sense 1.c.” Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford UP, June 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/3217891040. · MacDonald, James. “The Weird Ways Humans Have Tried Curing Hangovers.” JSTOR Daily. 1/25/2016. https://daily.jstor.org/weird-ways-humans-tried-curing-hangovers/ · Nasser, Mervat. “Psychiatry in Ancient Egypt.” Bulletin of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. Vol. 11. December 1987. · Office of Communications, Princeton University. “Desires for fatty foods and alcohol share a chemical trigger.” 12/15/2004. https://pr.princeton.edu/news/04/q4/1215-galanin.htm · O'Reilly, Jean. “No convincing scientific evidence that hangover cures work, according to new research.” Via EurekAlert. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/938938 · Paulsen, Frank M. “A Hair of the Dog and Some Other Hangover Cures from Popular Tradition.” The Journal of American Folklore , Apr. - Jun., 1961, Vol. 74, No. 292 (Apr. - Jun., 1961). Via JSTOR. https://www.jstor.org/stable/537784 · Pittler, Max, et al. “Interventions For Preventing Or Treating Alcohol Hangover: Systematic Review Of Randomised Controlled Trials.” BMJ: British Medical Journal , Dec. 24 - 31, 2005, Vol. 331, No. 7531 (Dec. 24 - 31, 2005). https://www.jstor.org/stable/25455748 · Shears, Jonathon. “The Hangover: A Literary & Cultural History.” Liverpool University Press. 2020. Suddath, Claire. “A Brief History of Hangovers.” Time. 1/1/2009. https://time.com/3958046/history-of-hangovers/ · Van Huygen, Meg. “15 Historical Hangover Cures.” Mental Floss. 12/30/2016. · Weinberg, Caroline. “The Science of Hangovers.” Eater. 12/31/2015. https://www.eater.com/drinks/2015/12/31/10685644/hangover-cures-how-to-prevent-hungover · Wills, Matthew. “Treating Wounds With Magic.” JSTOR Daily. 9/14/2019. https://daily.jstor.org/treating-wounds-with-magic/ · Wurdz, Gideon. “The Foolish Dictionary: An Exhausting Work of Reference to Un-certain English Words, Their Origin, Meaning, Legitimate and Illegitimate Use, Confused by a Few Pictures.” Robinson, Luce Company. 1904. https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=71QYAAAAYAAJ&rdid=book-71QYAAAAYAAJ&rdot=1 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

There are few books in the world that most people have heard of. There are even fewer so recognizable that are 500,000 words long.That's right, we're talking about the dictionary.The Oxford English Dictionary is the longest English variant of its kind in the world. But many of those who made significant contributions to its creation went unknown for years — until now. These included hundreds of women, people without formal educations, and patients in mental institutions.In other words, the people who helped make the OED were as diverse as the words in it. We discuss how the Oxford English Dictionary came to be and how our relationship to the dictionary has changed.Want to support 1A? Give to your local public radio station and subscribe to this podcast. Have questions? Connect with us. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

The mullet, the love-to-hate-it hairstyle, is as associated with the 1980's as Ronald Reagan, junk bonds, and breakdancing. But in at least one major way, we are suffering from a collective case of false memory syndrome. In this episode we track the rise and fall of the mullet, and also the lexical quandary at its heart: Who named the mullet? We learn how David Bowie, hockey players, the Oxford English Dictionary, the Beastie Boys, a mysterious Reddit user named Topsmate, and a group called Annoy Club all played a part in the strange history of the mullet. Some of the voices you'll hear in this episode include proud mullet-wearer Lauren Wright, amateur mullet-sleuth Oskar Sigvardsson, writer, market researcher, and 1980's hockey teenager John Warner, head of product for Oxford Languages Katherine Connor Martin, and novelist and Grand Royal contributor Warren Fahy. This episode was produced by Willa Paskin and Benjamin Frisch. If you have any cultural mysteries you want us to decode, email us at DecoderRing@slate.com Want more Decoder Ring? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the Decoder Ring show page. Or, visit slate.com/decoderplus to get access wherever you listen. Disclosure in Podcast Description: A Bond Account is a self-directed brokerage account with Public Investing, member FINRA/SIPC. Deposits into this account are used to purchase 10 investment-grade and high-yield bonds. As of 9/26/24, the average, annualized yield to worst (YTW) across the Bond Account is greater than 6%. A bond's yield is a function of its market price, which can fluctuate; therefore, a bond's YTW is not “locked in” until the bond is purchased, and your yield at time of purchase may be different from the yield shown here. The “locked in” YTW is not guaranteed; you may receive less than the YTW of the bonds in the Bond Account if you sell any of the bonds before maturity or if the issuer defaults on the bond. Public Investing charges a markup on each bond trade. See our Fee Schedule. Bond Accounts are not recommendations of individual bonds or default allocations. The bonds in the Bond Account have not been selected based on your needs or risk profile. See https://public.com/disclosures/bond-account to learn more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The mullet, the love-to-hate-it hairstyle, is as associated with the 1980's as Ronald Reagan, junk bonds, and breakdancing. But in at least one major way, we are suffering from a collective case of false memory syndrome. In this episode we track the rise and fall of the mullet, and also the lexical quandary at its heart: Who named the mullet? We learn how David Bowie, hockey players, the Oxford English Dictionary, the Beastie Boys, a mysterious Reddit user named Topsmate, and a group called Annoy Club all played a part in the strange history of the mullet. Some of the voices you'll hear in this episode include proud mullet-wearer Lauren Wright, amateur mullet-sleuth Oskar Sigvardsson, writer, market researcher, and 1980's hockey teenager John Warner, head of product for Oxford Languages Katherine Connor Martin, and novelist and Grand Royal contributor Warren Fahy. This episode was produced by Willa Paskin and Benjamin Frisch. If you have any cultural mysteries you want us to decode, email us at DecoderRing@slate.com Want more Decoder Ring? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the Decoder Ring show page. Or, visit slate.com/decoderplus to get access wherever you listen. Disclosure in Podcast Description: A Bond Account is a self-directed brokerage account with Public Investing, member FINRA/SIPC. Deposits into this account are used to purchase 10 investment-grade and high-yield bonds. As of 9/26/24, the average, annualized yield to worst (YTW) across the Bond Account is greater than 6%. A bond's yield is a function of its market price, which can fluctuate; therefore, a bond's YTW is not “locked in” until the bond is purchased, and your yield at time of purchase may be different from the yield shown here. The “locked in” YTW is not guaranteed; you may receive less than the YTW of the bonds in the Bond Account if you sell any of the bonds before maturity or if the issuer defaults on the bond. Public Investing charges a markup on each bond trade. See our Fee Schedule. Bond Accounts are not recommendations of individual bonds or default allocations. The bonds in the Bond Account have not been selected based on your needs or risk profile. See https://public.com/disclosures/bond-account to learn more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The mullet, the love-to-hate-it hairstyle, is as associated with the 1980's as Ronald Reagan, junk bonds, and breakdancing. But in at least one major way, we are suffering from a collective case of false memory syndrome. In this episode we track the rise and fall of the mullet, and also the lexical quandary at its heart: Who named the mullet? We learn how David Bowie, hockey players, the Oxford English Dictionary, the Beastie Boys, a mysterious Reddit user named Topsmate, and a group called Annoy Club all played a part in the strange history of the mullet. Some of the voices you'll hear in this episode include proud mullet-wearer Lauren Wright, amateur mullet-sleuth Oskar Sigvardsson, writer, market researcher, and 1980's hockey teenager John Warner, head of product for Oxford Languages Katherine Connor Martin, and novelist and Grand Royal contributor Warren Fahy. This episode was produced by Willa Paskin and Benjamin Frisch. If you have any cultural mysteries you want us to decode, email us at DecoderRing@slate.com Want more Decoder Ring? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock exclusive bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the Decoder Ring show page. Or, visit slate.com/decoderplus to get access wherever you listen. Disclosure in Podcast Description: A Bond Account is a self-directed brokerage account with Public Investing, member FINRA/SIPC. Deposits into this account are used to purchase 10 investment-grade and high-yield bonds. As of 9/26/24, the average, annualized yield to worst (YTW) across the Bond Account is greater than 6%. A bond's yield is a function of its market price, which can fluctuate; therefore, a bond's YTW is not “locked in” until the bond is purchased, and your yield at time of purchase may be different from the yield shown here. The “locked in” YTW is not guaranteed; you may receive less than the YTW of the bonds in the Bond Account if you sell any of the bonds before maturity or if the issuer defaults on the bond. Public Investing charges a markup on each bond trade. See our Fee Schedule. Bond Accounts are not recommendations of individual bonds or default allocations. The bonds in the Bond Account have not been selected based on your needs or risk profile. See https://public.com/disclosures/bond-account to learn more. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

1031. This week, Fiona McPherson from the Oxford English Dictionary talks about the latest “beer” words added to the OED, from “boozeroo” to “beerage.” We discuss how these words are chosen, the fascinating history behind them, and why some have surprising origins. Fiona also explains how digital resources have transformed lexicography and shares why the OED preserves every word in the language, even obsolete ones.