“In the present state of the world, it is evident that the control we have gained of physical energies, heat, light, electricity, etc., without having first secured control of our use of ourselves is a perilous affair. Without the control of our use of ourselves, our use of other things is blind; it may lead to anything.” - Professor John Dewey

John Dewey was America’s most prominent philosopher. He was the chief proponent of the branch of philosophy known as Pragmatism and he was also very influential in the development of American public education during the first half of the twentieth century. Indeed he is often referred to as the “Father of American Education”.

The opening quote was written during the 1920’s and his language now seems a little quaint, particularly today when we are facing far more lethal threats to our security than Dewey could ever have imagined.

But the substance of his warning is more important than ever. Not only do we have control over potentially far more dangerous energies - nuclear and biochemical for example - but we also have more effective means to use them in harmful ways.

And not just long-range bombers and missiles. Equally effective, and far cheaper and more widely accessible methods, are now available to do harm.

As we have seen, all that is needed to convert a commercial airliner into a lethal weapon of mass destruction is a few determined individuals willing to sacrifice their own lives. A single terrorist is capable of spreading deadly poison over a huge area using the decidedly low-tech postal system.

Dewey talks about securing “control of ourselves” if we are to avoid “blind” and “perilous” use of external forces. Just what sort of control was he thinking of? Parental? Societal? Governmental? Psychological?

None of these. Dewey’s quote comes from the introduction to Constructive Conscious Control of the Individual, a book written by F. Matthias Alexander, the developer of what today is called the Alexander Technique in 1923.

What Alexander was concerned about, above all, was the way in which our thoughts affect or physical actions; how the way we think about the way we move affects the quality of that movement.

Alexander was a very practical and down-to-earth person, not much interested in abstract theories. His great contribution was the development of systematic and effective processes which ordinary people could use to improve the quality of their physical functioning in whatever they were doing.

Not surprisingly, many of his early students were performers - musicians, dancers, actors - for whom movement quality directly affects the quality and safety of their performance. Another group consisted of people suffering from pain - backaches, stiff shoulders, and the like. Pain of this sort is often caused by inefficient posture and movement habits which place harmful pressure of the body.

Dewey himself initially fell into this later category - but he soon recognized in Alexander’s work potential benefits that went far beyond the obvious physical ones he experienced. Three aspects in particular caught his attention:

1) The ineffectiveness of what Alexander called “end-gaining” - the pursuit of a goal without paying close attention to way this pursuit is conducted.

2) The futility of solving a problem by attempting to “fix” one aspect at a time, without taking into consideration of the complex web of interconnections between them.

3) The importance of having accurate information about how the system is functioning - of not being deluded by false conceptions.

None of these seems particularly novel when read as abstract principles. But what Alexander did was rediscover them in the context of our own mental/physical (“psychophysical” to use the term Alexander liked to use) functioning. And it is in this arena that these principles are most elusive.

To take one example - the “accurate information” question - it turns out that almost all of us suffer from faulty sensory information. In other words, what we think we’re doing at any moment is often quite different what what we’re actually doing. For example, we may think we’re standing upright when, in fact, we’re unconsciously pulling ourselves to one side or the other. Often this is obvious to everyone but ourselves!

What does this have to do with the larger questions Dewey was concerned about?

Well, if we don’t realize just how we’re doing something as basic as standing, imagine all the other misconceptions about our own functioning that we’re suffering from - and how these could easily cause us to act in ways that inadvertently produce harm.

As Dewey points out, modern science allows us to do all sorts of amazing things, but we’re often ignorant of our own habits and ways of doing them. And this ignorance can have catastrophic consequences. To quote Dewey again (from the same 1923 Introduction):

“The one factor which is the primary tool in the use of all (external) tools, namely ourselves, in other words our own psycho-physical disposition ... has not been studied as the central instrumentality...Is it not highly probable this this failure gives the explanation of why it is that in mastering physical forces we have ourselves been so largely mastered by them?

“It is one thing to teach to need of a return to the individual man a the ultimate agency in whatever (we) can accomplish...it is another to discover the concrete procedure by which this greatest of all tasks can be executed. And this indispensable thing is exactly what Mr. Alexander has accomplished.”

“What is the best use of technology?”

This question is asked more and more as the pace of technological change has accelerated. Greater speed, power, inter-connectedness etc. can produce all sorts of obvious benefits. We visit distant places quickly and cheaply thanks to jet airplanes. We have access to cheap, reliable power in our homes and in our cars. With the computer revolution, we can create, manage, transfer and store vast amounts of data in ways that would have been unimaginable to earlier generations.

But with those benefits have come come very serious drawbacks. The jet that can whisk you to Hawaii or Paris can also be used to kill thousands of people and inflict billions of dollars of damage. Cheap power is often generated by unsafe, polluting plants. Computer technology and the internet can be used to invade out privacy and spread false information around the world at the click of a mouse.

“What is the best use of technology?” is certainly an important question, one that probably deserves a good deal more attention. But there is another, related, question that is rarely asked, one that may ultimately be far more important:

“How do we make the best use ourselves as we live our lives employing these new technologies?”

Take our interaction with computers. I first saw computers being routinely used in the mid-1960s by ticket agents in airports. A third of a century later, they are everywhere - at work, in schools, at home.

By the early 1980’s there was increasing talk of Video Display Terminal (VDT) problems with eyes, neck pain etc. Terms like repetitive stress injury(RSI) and carpal tunnel syndrome entered our everyday language. It became commonplace to see people walking around with special braces for their lower arms and wrists. Surgery is increasingly a last resort.

Why did this happen? Was it faulty computer and furniture design? This is what ergonomists have argued and a whole industry has sprung up to re-design the work environment to make injuries less likely. Countless magazine and newspaper articles give ergonomically-inspired advice on proper sitting, screen and keyboard placement etc.

But the RSI epidemic continues unabated nonetheless. Why?

I believe the principal reason is our failure to look closely at ourselves and how we function as we go through life - our failure to ask ourselves “How am I using myself as I drive, as I walk, as I clean the dishes? As I use my computer?”

The best ergonomic design will do nothing to prevent RSI if we are using ourselves badly. And if we are using ourselves well, we can function without undue strain even in difficult, awkward situations. Ergonomic solutions are not useless but they are only a part of the solution.

So how can you learn to use yourself more efficiently? Is there a proven method one can learn?

The work of F. Matthias Alexander, today commonly referred to as the Alexander Technique, is just such a method. It has a long history of helping people with precisely the sort of stress-related issues that more and more people today are facing. The whole question of how we use ourselves is precisely what Alexander spend his life’s work on. Indeed his third book was titled “The Use of the Self”.

The introductions to this and two other books by Alexander were written by Professor John Dewey. Dewey was America’s most famous philosopher and a leading proponent of the school of philosophy known as Pragmatism. He was also very influential in the development of American education in the first part of the last century. He is sometimes called “The father of American education.”

Dewey knew from firsthand experience that Alexander’s ideas and teaching method (today carried on my thousands of teachers worldwide) was of the utmost importance to us all as we faced the challenges of rapid technological change.

In his 1932 introduction to “The Use of the Self” he wrote:

“In the present state of the world, it is evident that the control we have gained of physical energies, heat, light, electricity, etc., without having first secured control of our use of ourselves is a perilous affair. Without the control of our use of ourselves, our use of other things is blind; it may lead to anything.”

"If there can be developed a technique which will enable individuals really to secure the right use of themselves, then the factor upon which depends the final use of all other forms of energy will be brought under control. Mr. Alexander has evolved this technique."

This wasn’t just an abstract notion with Dewey. In his book “Freedom to Change”, the late Frank Pierce Jones of Tufts University wrote of a conversation he had with Dewey a few years before he died:

“(Dewey) said that he had been taken by (the Alexander Technique) first because it provided a demonstration of the unity of mind and body. He thought that the demonstration had struck him more forcibly than it might have struck someone who got the sensory experience easily and quickly, because he was such a slow learner. He had always been physically awkward, he said, and performed all actions too quickly and impulsively and without thought. ‘Thought’ in his case was saved for ‘mental’ activity, which had always been easy for him. It was a revelation to discover that thought could be applied with equal advantage to everyday movements.

“The greatest benefit he got from lessons, Dewey said, was the ability to stop and think before acting. Physically, he noted an improvement first in his vision and then in breathing. Before he had lessons, his ribs had been very rigid. Now they had a marked elasticity which doctors still commented on, though he was close to eighty-eight.”

Are you someone who wants to be a positive thinker but is having problems doing so? As people get older we notice that they either become cynical and brash or they start looking at the world through rose-colored sunglasses as if looking at a perpetual rainbow.

Everything is just great and they seem to understand the world is the way it is they are just happy as punch to be alive. You know the type? Have you ever wonder why some older folks are either completely cynical or perpetual optimists?

Philosophically perhaps it's because positive thinking starts with knowing that there are some things you just can't change and you should not sweat over them. One thing I have come to learn is that you just cannot trust humans. And once I realized this things just got a lot more simpler and the cynicism when away because I simply accepted the fact that you cannot trust human beings is far if you can throw them.

Different people find different ways in life to start thinking positive and myself well I am an eternal optimist, mostly due to my achievements in the past and knowing there is nothing I cannot do if I put my mind to it, yet I have adopted the philosophical point now that you cannot trust humans, but I can trust myself and a few friends most all the time.

That is the reality of life on Earth and excepting that although it may be tough is one way to get closer to positive thinking. There will be some self-help gurus who may disagree with this point, but if they are humans they don't trust them, but I do trust my own observations and therefore I don't trust humans.

It has often been said when dealing with Middle Eastern politics that each time there is a conflict the cycle of violence continues for another generation. I have heard this stated over and over again and yet that is not true in all cases.

In fact, there have been many wars where the two nations become friends in the next generation and make amends. In fact in the Machiavellian world of Middle Eastern politics over the last 2000 years it is often repeated that; the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

For someone to willy-nilly throw out the statement that when the United States goes in to a country to quell the violence that the United States becomes hated and we are breeding the next generation and future terrorists or enemies; I would say that is not necessarily true. And hindsight it is generally not true and there are numerous historical examples in the Middle East and other places throughout the world where this has not been the case.

Indeed, that simple statement should not be a reason to pass by an opportunity to do the right thing in the present period and defeat international terrorism. International terrorism and the killing of innocent life is not OK. It is also not OK to run and hide from a festering problem, which will continue to grow into a bigger problem in the future.

For instance if we look at the Hezbollah-Israeli war we see that Israel should have prevented Hezbollah from growing so strong in the region and taking over the power base of Lebanon and its political structure. By doing nothing and appeasing the situation at the time the problem only grew bigger. That in itself is not a solution either.

So, in hindsight it would've been better to take care of the Lebanese problem and Hezbollah in its entirety back then instead of letting people talk us out of it and Israel out of it at the time.

The logic was the same offspring of previous wars turn into future enemies. Actually sometimes that may be true but it is irrelevant to the task and mission at hand to defeat international terrorism in the present period.

“In the present state of the world, it is evident that the control we have gained of physical energies, heat, light, electricity, etc., without having first secured control of our use of ourselves is a perilous affair. Without the control of our use of ourselves, our use of other things is blind; it may lead to anything.” - Professor John Dewey

John Dewey was America’s most prominent philosopher. He was the chief proponent of the branch of philosophy known as Pragmatism and he was also very influential in the development of American public education during the first half of the twentieth century. Indeed he is often referred to as the “Father of American Education”.

The opening quote was written during the 1920’s and his language now seems a little quaint, particularly today when we are facing far more lethal threats to our security than Dewey could ever have imagined.

But the substance of his warning is more important than ever. Not only do we have control over potentially far more dangerous energies - nuclear and biochemical for example - but we also have more effective means to use them in harmful ways.

And not just long-range bombers and missiles. Equally effective, and far cheaper and more widely accessible methods, are now available to do harm.

As we have seen, all that is needed to convert a commercial airliner into a lethal weapon of mass destruction is a few determined individuals willing to sacrifice their own lives. A single terrorist is capable of spreading deadly poison over a huge area using the decidedly low-tech postal system.

Dewey talks about securing “control of ourselves” if we are to avoid “blind” and “perilous” use of external forces. Just what sort of control was he thinking of? Parental? Societal? Governmental? Psychological?

None of these. Dewey’s quote comes from the introduction to Constructive Conscious Control of the Individual, a book written by F. Matthias Alexander, the developer of what today is called the Alexander Technique in 1923.

What Alexander was concerned about, above all, was the way in which our thoughts affect or physical actions; how the way we think about the way we move affects the quality of that movement.

Alexander was a very practical and down-to-earth person, not much interested in abstract theories. His great contribution was the development of systematic and effective processes which ordinary people could use to improve the quality of their physical functioning in whatever they were doing.

Not surprisingly, many of his early students were performers - musicians, dancers, actors - for whom movement quality directly affects the quality and safety of their performance. Another group consisted of people suffering from pain - backaches, stiff shoulders, and the like. Pain of this sort is often caused by inefficient posture and movement habits which place harmful pressure of the body.

Dewey himself initially fell into this later category - but he soon recognized in Alexander’s work potential benefits that went far beyond the obvious physical ones he experienced. Three aspects in particular caught his attention:

1) The ineffectiveness of what Alexander called “end-gaining” - the pursuit of a goal without paying close attention to way this pursuit is conducted.

2) The futility of solving a problem by attempting to “fix” one aspect at a time, without taking into consideration of the complex web of interconnections between them.

3) The importance of having accurate information about how the system is functioning - of not being deluded by false conceptions.

None of these seems particularly novel when read as abstract principles. But what Alexander did was rediscover them in the context of our own mental/physical (“psychophysical” to use the term Alexander liked to use) functioning. And it is in this arena that these principles are most elusive.

To take one example - the “accurate information” question - it turns out that almost all of us suffer from faulty sensory information. In other words, what we think we’re doing at any moment is often quite different what what we’re actually doing. For example, we may think we’re standing upright when, in fact, we’re unconsciously pulling ourselves to one side or the other. Often this is obvious to everyone but ourselves!

What does this have to do with the larger questions Dewey was concerned about?

Well, if we don’t realize just how we’re doing something as basic as standing, imagine all the other misconceptions about our own functioning that we’re suffering from - and how these could easily cause us to act in ways that inadvertently produce harm.

As Dewey points out, modern science allows us to do all sorts of amazing things, but we’re often ignorant of our own habits and ways of doing them. And this ignorance can have catastrophic consequences. To quote Dewey again (from the same 1923 Introduction):

“The one factor which is the primary tool in the use of all (external) tools, namely ourselves, in other words our own psycho-physical disposition ... has not been studied as the central instrumentality...Is it not highly probable this this failure gives the explanation of why it is that in mastering physical forces we have ourselves been so largely mastered by them?

“It is one thing to teach to need of a return to the individual man a the ultimate agency in whatever (we) can accomplish...it is another to discover the concrete procedure by which this greatest of all tasks can be executed. And this indispensable thing is exactly what Mr. Alexander has accomplished.”

We have a problem within human societies who deny the reality of situations right in front of them and when large groups of people deny their observations and instead adopt a politically correct approach too much is swept under the carpet. It is important to wake people back up and to have them turn on their minds and yet it appears they do not wish to change or face the truth, finding comfort in the status quo, mass media hysteria brain washing and willfully accepting the purported version of reality; a created reality if your will. That is to say; the real world version of a virtual reality.

Another problem is that too often society wishes to kill the messenger or the child who yells; The Emperor Has No Clothes. If human civilizations continue to paint over reality in hopes that mere perception will bring forth a Utopia they seek then it will actually take longer to get there, than if they were to face reality, make bold moves, changes and seek personal inner strength and work together in a common cause to make it so.

The forward progression of the human race will take determination, perseverance and team work. Denial of reality will not get human populations there any sooner. Political Correctness is a form of denial, just as demanding respect when tolerance is barely possible will not get those with vast differences on the same page to build, to purport otherwise is also denial.

Denying is a mistake. Linear thought is a mistake. Fear of Change is a mistake. Fear of risk is a mistake. Allowing excuses, blame games or misrepresentations from individuals, authority, experts or organized groups of humans is a mistake. We need to stop making mistakes, get past linear thought and stop this politically correct rhetoric clouding reality in denial if we are to move this species forward.

Movie posters are created with the intention of advertising films. As the name suggests, horror movie posters are posters advertising horror movies. Horror movie posters have been around since the earliest public exhibitions of horror movies. They were used as placards listing the horror movies that were being shown in the theater. It was in the early 1900s, that horror movie posters began to feature illustrations of scenes from horror movies.

Nowadays, horror movie posters are issued in small print runs that are discarded when the film ends. However, previously, with large runs for most titles, horror movie posters were stored in production companies or advertising warehouses, with a few kept as souvenirs by theater owners. It was after the interest in pop art in the late 1960s that people started collecting horror movie posters as a hobby. Because they are rare, the supply is dwindling, and private collectors are willing to pay top dollar for collectables.

Horror movie posters come in different sizes and style that vary according to the country. In the United States, horror movie posters are found as inserts, three sheets, six sheets, one sheet and 22 inches by 28 inches sizes. The United Kingdom sizes are quad, double crown and three sheets. In Australia, most of the horror movie posters come in a size called daybill.

Nowadays, you can make your own horror movie posters. You become the director and executive producer of your own super-blockbuster with the poster as proof. All you need is a photo from a digital camera and Flickr and a poster making software.

Hand painted crates and sandwich boards were the first forms of movie advertising. However, the turn of the century saw the introduction of posters with vibrant colors and pictures and limited words. These old movie posters were used to promote a variety of products and services, including the early cinema.

One of the best ways of maintaining the value of an old movie poster is to restore it. If you plan to remove tape residue, rubber cement thinner is very effective. Using a q-tip, rub a small amount on the spot to be removed. Be careful not remove the poster ink. If the old movie poster is very valuable or if there is lots of tape residue, it is better to have it restored by a professional. Old movie posters were printed on high-acid, low-grade paper. So the process of deacidification helps arrest the deterioration.

There are three methods of de-acidification -- linen backing/mounting, lamination and encapsulation. The process of linen mounting is when a restorer fuses the old movie poster onto linen fabric. The poster is strengthened, facilitating necessary repairs and reducing the possibility of the poster getting torn through mishandling. In lamination, there is a clear coating on both the front and back of the poster. If the poster is to be handled a lot, this makes it more durable. However, this process should be handled by an expert, as there is a possibility of destroying the intrinsic value of the poster. In encapsulation, the old movie poster is first de-acidified and then sealed in an acid-free polyester enclosure. This process protects the poster from handling, and keeps it free from dirt and air contaminants.

How close is the world to World War III? Some people are now talking about how close the human race is to escape velocity for a continuous cycle of violence. Many say we're almost there.

The escalation of attacks have caused reciprocal responses, which lead to more attacks and more anger, which in turn leads to more reprisals. Will there ever be peace in the Middle East? Will the Middle Eastern conflicts drawing in the rest of world.

As we see the violence continue and wars and develop we see many a nations with interests in selling arms or trading with countries on both sides. All these countries have a stake in who wins or loses. In the end all mankind has a stake in what happens as well.

When one country does business with another country and in that country is at war it hurts the economic prosperity of both. It also causes countries to pick sides in conflicts, which should not be going on in the first place. Or should they some say?

It appears that the unique characteristics of mankind include warring against his own species. Throughout written recorded history humans have attacked their neighboring civilizations and killed senselessly. Sometimes out of greed, sometimes simply because they can and often to enslave.

It is interesting that we listen to the news during the Israeli-Hezbollah war only to find most of the experts on the Middle East telling us that there is no way that Hezbollah can be totally defeated. Their reasons are numerous but most of the reasons stem from the fact that Hezbollah is more of a social movement now than just an international terrorist organization.

This may be true however the goal is to defeat Hezbollah the international terrorist organization and not necessarily a social movement. Likewise, it should be known and it has been recorded in human history that an idea can be defeated by another idea. After all, the concept of Hezbollah in itself is nothing more than an idea and it took a long time to create it and get synergy. If you take away this synergy and have a secondary plan or idea, which is better for all concerned and one, which involves peace then in fact you can defeat Hezbollah and the social movement behind it.

To say that Hezbollah cannot be defeated and that with each international terrorist member of the organization you kill there will be another to replace him is to admit in advance that we may as well just give up all human civilizations right now to the international terrorists and give them the keys to our largest cities throughout the world.

Excuse me for a second but that is not going to happen and it is absurd to think we cannot beat an idea with another idea. For those that look towards defeatism and have already made up their minds in advance that Hezbollah cannot be beaten or broken; they do not paint a very good picture, as to what the next step would be if that were true.

Nobody wants ethnic cleansing, but if there is a clash between worlds and cultures those that claim the ideals and concept of Hezbollah will be eliminated from the surface of the planet and we already know what happens with ethnic cleansing. Nobody wants that.

For millennia, people have consulted soothsayers and psychics to see into the future and guide their decisions about work, love, and other matters, or to connect with loved ones who have passed on. Until recently, however, access to psychic readings was restricted by geography. If you didn't live in an area with a sizeable psychic community, your choices were limited. Now, however, the Internet has brought together psychics from around the country and throughout the world, and psychics - and even free psychic readings - are available online.

The beautiful thing about online psychic communities is that people who obtain psychic readings, including free psycic readings, can rate the psychics, so that you can have a sense of an individual psychic's strengths and weaknesses. You can also obtain psychic readings live, either through text chat, video chat, email, or over the phone.

Whether you're seeking advice about love, romance, health, dream interpretation, career, finance, or the passing of a loved one, it's important to find a psychic with whom you feel a connection. Different psychics have individual gifts and use different tools, but you should choose a psychic with whom you feel comfortable.

Depending on the kind of information you're seeking, you may wish to consult a psychic with a specific set of gifts. For example, if you wish to reconnect with a loved one who has passed on, you would want to consult with a medium. If, on the other hand, you wish to see what opportunities and challenges will come up for you in the near or distant future, or how to deal with the challenges you're facing today, you should schedule a reading with a psychic.

Two of the tools psychics use in readings are Tarot Cards and Astrology Charts. Tarot cards use archetypes and symbols to lay out a path or narrative of the future. Tarot doesn't purport to lay out a future set in stone, but rather tells you what may lie ahead so you can make the choices that determine your destiny.

Although many people read their daily horoscopes, an accurate natal astrology chart can help you see your strengths and weaknesses more clearly. As a result, you can optimize your choices in life and create an awareness of when you are most likely to be successful.

Many psychics, however, rely on their natural insight, which they've honed and trained, to perform psychic readings. When trying to find the psychic that's right for you, go online, read their profiles and reviews, and take advantage of the free psychic readings that are offered on some sites. These first steps will bring you that much closer to finding the proper connection with the person who has gifts that can help you lead a more fulfilled life.

Oftentimes, you can see psychic readers in carnivals; for fun, perhaps you and your friends have your fortune told. Actually, there is nothing wrong in consulting a psychic clairvoyant to give you messages or readings because these are just guides to help you come up with healthier decisions. However, you should not expect too much from these readings or you may be disappointed.

A psychic clairvoyant is one who has the ability to foresee events, places, people, and things clearly. In order to do this, he or she has to have a mental connection with the person and must be able to read the energy field to pick up these thoughts and images. Because of such abilities, your past, present, future, and many other things can be determined by the psychic clairvoyant, even if he or she has not possibly known about you before your reading.

Consulting a psychic clairvoyant has its advantages as well as its disadvantages. The advantage is that you will have an insight as to how your future can possibly be; thus, you will be able to avoid probable mistakes or come up with better choices and decisions so you will not suffer the consequences of your actions. The disadvantage, however, is that instead of using the psychic clairvoyant’s reading as your guide, you may consider it as a discouragement and let it affect your present state. So, instead of improving yourself, you may let yourself be confined by what the readings said about your future.

Therefore, before seeking the advice of a psychic clairvoyant, you have to make up your mind as to what you really want out of it. If you think it will do you more harm than good, then it is better not consult a psychic clairvoyant. But if you think it will be beneficial to you, then you can start doing research for a certified psychic clairvoyant online.