Search

Climate change is having a major impact on species distribution and habitat loss, especially for species with restricted ranges. The genus Seminemacheilus is endemic to Türkiye and includes six species. This study investigated the current distribution of the genus Seminemacheilus and its possible distribution in 2050 and 2070 using the Wallace platform, a Maxent modeling method. Simulations of future projections indicated that bioclimatically suitable habitats of Seminemacheilus spp. will be limited in 2050 and nearly extinct in 2070. The model is primarily affected by temperature and precipitation, which are directly associated with the phenomenon of global warming. It has been established that conservation strategies must be developed to protect the species of the genus and avoid habitat deterioration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundAnatomic complications of the ureteroenteric anastomosis in ileal conduit (IC) cause significant morbidity in patients post-cystectomy and cystoprostatectomy. The Bricker technique has a perceived disadvantage of increased risk for stricture, whereas the Wallace technique runs the risk for ureteral malignancy affecting both ureteric ends, and bilateral ureteric obstruction from a stone lodged at the anastomosis. We aimed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and stricture rate of a novel hybrid ureteroenteric anastomosis technique. We compared these outcomes to the Bricker and Wallace anastomosis techniques for IC urinary diversion (ICUD). MethodsWe performed a retrospective chart review of patients who had undergone ICUD after cystectomy for bladder cancer from 2011 to 2016. Patients were categorized into groups undergoing the Bricker, Wallace, and hybrid ureteroanastomosic techniques. Strictures were identified during clinical follow-up or hospital presentations with complications. ResultsWe identified 68 patients suitable for inclusion. They were separated by Bricker, Wallace, and hybrid anastomosis techniques, with 19 (27.9%), 20 (29.4%), and 29 (42.6%) patients, respectively. Ureteroenteric anastomotic strictures occurred in 9 patients (5 Bricker, 3 Wallace, 1 hybrid). This difference in stricture rates for Bricker versus hybrid (26.3% vs. 3.4%; OR, 10 [95% CI, 1.1 to 121.1]; P = 0.02) was significant but was comparable for Wallace versus hybrid (15.0% vs. 3.4%; OR, 4.9 [0.7 to 66.0]; P = 0.15) and for Bricker versus Wallace (26.3% vs. 15.0%; OR, 2 [0.4 to 8.6]; P = 0.87). 15 patients (51%) in the hybrid group required oral antibiotics for a symptomatic urinary tract infection compared with 4 (21%) with Bricker and 8 (40%) with Wallace (P = 0.10). Median post-cystectomy follow-up and stricture formation time were 16 months (IQR, 4–36) and 9 months (7–32), respectively. ConclusionThe hybrid technique is a safe and efficacious alternative to the Bricker and Wallace anastomoses. It carries with it a risk for urinary tract infection that is eclipsed by substantially lowered rates of ureteric strictures requiring intervention while maintaining the advantage of separating the two ureters.

INTRODUCTION: We present a modification to the Bricker technique involving 124 anastomoses in a 62-patient series, and the outcomes of the procedures that have been carried out successfully to date in our clinic. METHODS: The study sample included patients who applied to our clinic for whom a radical cystectomy procedure was decided between 2012 and 2018. Among these patients, a retrospective evaluation was made of 62 patients on whom a diversion was performed using a modified Bricker technique during a radical cystectomy. RESULTS: The mean duration of follow-up was 15.9+-14 months, with a maximum of 59 months. There were 2 (3.2%) women among 62 patients. The preoperative stage was T3a in 5%, T2 in 56% and T1 high-grade in 39%. Among the 62 Bricker operations (124 anastomoses) carried out using the modified technique at our clinic, only one patient, who was stage T3b and who was being treated with postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, developed left ureterohydronephrosis (0.8%). No stricture was observed in the other 123 anastomoses; and there were no late complications such as metabolic disturbance, stomal stenosis, pyelonephritis or lithiasis during the follow-up of the 62 patients who underwent a Bricker diversion. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: We believe that the lack of anastomotic leakage in none of the operated patients and the occurrence of stricture in only one of 124 anastomoses in 62 patients is evidence of the success of the technique.

The present article is a brief study on the personality of two great national heroes of Scotland and Tamil Nadu. They have been portrayed in a realistic manner by Nigel Tranter and Kalki in their novels, “The Wallace” and “Ponniyin Selvan” respectively. Every individual has initiation step as his age of profession enters. The subject of the novels is about the heroic journey of the national heroes in getting liberty and power to their nations. To justify the theme, assessment of the heroes quality becomes vital. The initiation process the beginning of the individuation process of an individual in his task. Wallace and Aditya start their career as a warrior by avenging the death of their dear ones and to quit the domination of the opponent. To note, the works “The Wallace”as “TW” and “Ponniyin Selvan” as “PS” have been abbreviated for denoting parenthetical documentation. Hence, the article brings forth the first attempt of both heroes in warfield and their tenacity of keeping themselves true to their goals.

Abstract Despite today’s controversy regarding several aspects of his legacy, Swiss-born Harvard Professor Louis Agassiz (1807–1873) was one of the most eminent scientists of his time. After his death, Washington-based photographer and amateur naturalist, Henry Ulke (1821–1910), honored his ‘esteemed friend’ which is clear from his personal letter of condolence addressed to Agassiz’s eldest son Alexander, and a posthumous portrait (oil on canvas) dated 1876. In 1877, his portrait was purchased by the United States Capitol, but it was not accepted by the Joint Committee on the Library. Thereafter, it soon went missing and remained unnoticed for nearly 150 years, until the same portrait (or at least a second, original version) was brought to auction in 2013 by heirs of the Ulke family. The painting is based on a rare carte-de-visite photograph, which bears the 1876 backstamp of Henry’s brother, Julius Ulke (1833–1910). Both the painting and the card, undoubtedly depicting Agassiz, were once mislabeled as General Francis E. Spinner, United States Treasurer (1802–1890), probably by Henry’s son, Titus Ulke (1866–1961) or another descendent. The rediscovery of the painting is of major historic and artistic importance. It is now on display in the library of Elasmobranch Research, Belgium.

There is a recent boom being witnessed in emerging areas like IoMT (Internet of Medical Things), Artificial Intelligence for healthcare, and disaster management. These novel research frontiers are critical in terms of hardware and cannot afford to compromise accuracy or reliability. Multiplier, being one of the most heavily used components, becomes crucial in these applications. If optimized, multipliers can impact the overall performance of the system. Thus, in this paper, an attempt has been made to determine the potential of accurate multipliers while meeting minimal hardware requirements. In this paper, we propose a novel Booth-Encoded Karatsuba multiplier and provide its comparison with a Booth-Encoded Wallace tree multiplier. These architectures have been developed using two types of Booth encoding: Radix-4 and Radix-8 for 16-bit, 32-bit and 64-bit multiplications. The algorithm is designed to be parameterizable to different bit widths, thereby offering higher flexibility. The proposed multiplier offers advantage of enhanced performance with significant reduction in hardware while negligibly trading off the Power Delay Product (PDP). It has been observed that the performance of the proposed architecture increases with increasing multiplier size due to significant reduction in hardware and slight increase in PDP. All the architectures have been implemented in Verilog HDL using Xilinx Vivado Design Suite. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background To evaluate the outcome and complication rate in a single institution experience using the two most commonly used techniques of ureteroenteric anastomosis, the Bricker and Wallace anastomosis. Methods A total of 137 patients underwent ileal conduit for bladder cancer. Ureters were anastomosed by two experienced surgeons, one performing a Bricker and the other, a Wallace anastomosis. Stricture was identified during clinical follow-up. Results Seventy-five patients underwent a Bricker anastomotic, and 65 received a Wallace anastomosis. The average age was 70 in both groups, males were predominant (66% Bricker, 70% Wallace). Follow up period was 36.5 months in Bricker group and 17 months in Wallace group. In both groups, the body mass index (BMI) was similar (26.1 kg/m2 Bricker and 26.4 kg/m2 Wallace). We observed that the stricture rate after performing the Bricker anastomosis technique was 25.3% (19/75) as compared to 7.7% (5/65) after Wallace anastomosis technique, which was statistically significant (p = 0.001). In the Bricker group, patients with strictures had higher BMI (28.3 vs. 25.7 kg/m2, p = 0.05). On average it took 8.5 months in the Bricker group and three months in the Wallace group (p = 0.6) to develop stricture. Conclusions The stricture rate was significantly higher when Bricker technique was applied. Although the BMI was not different in both groups, patients with a higher BMI were more likely to develop stricture. We believe that the approach of the separate and refluxing technique of Bricker anastomosis especially in obese patients poses a higher risk for anastomotic stricture formation.

Of the two studies that deal with works of the 'other modernity' of the French 19th century, the first deals with objects that, as multiply producible and stylistically eclectic objects, fell through the Modernist grid, although they correspond exactly to a definition of the avant-garde as formulated in the succession of Saint-Simon. The second asks whether the iconography of "modern life", in the sense of Charles Baudelaire's "Le peintre de la vie moderne", should not be added to the definition of modernity - against a limited formalist definition of modernity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite today’s controversy regarding several aspects of his legacy, Swiss-born Harvard Professor Louis Agassiz (1807–1873) was one of the most eminent scientists of his time. After his death, Washington-based photographer and amateur naturalist, Henry Ulke (1821–1910), honored his ‘esteemed friend’ which is clear from his personal letter of condolence addressed to Agassiz’s eldest son Alexander, and a posthumous portrait (oil on canvas) dated 1876. In 1877, his portrait was purchased by the United States Capitol, but it was not accepted by the Joint Committee on the Library. Thereafter, it soon went missing and remained unnoticed for nearly 150 years, until the same portrait (or at least a second, original version) was brought to auction in 2013 by heirs of the Ulke family. The painting is based on a rare carte-de-visite photograph, which bears the 1876 backstamp of Henry’s brother, Julius Ulke (1833–1910). Both the painting and the card, undoubtedly depicting Agassiz, were once mislabeled as General Francis E. Spinner, United States Treasurer (1802–1890), probably by Henry’s son, Titus Ulke (1866–1961) or another descendent. The rediscovery of the painting is of major historic and artistic importance. It is now on display in the library of Elasmobranch Research, Belgium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To evaluate the outcome and complication rate in a single institution experience using the two most commonly used techniques of ureteroenteric anastomosis, the Bricker and Wallace anastomosis.Methods: A total of 137 patients underwent ileal conduit for bladder cancer. Ureters were anastomosed by two experienced surgeons, one performing a Bricker and the other, a Wallace anastomosis. Stricture was identified during clinical follow-up.Results: Seventy-five patients underwent a Bricker anastomotic, and 65 received a Wallace anastomosis. The average age was 70 in both groups, males were predominant (66% Bricker, 70% Wallace). Follow up period was 36.5 months in Bricker group and 17 months in Wallace group. In both groups, the body mass index (BMI) was similar (26.1 kg/m2 Bricker and 26.4 kg/m2 Wallace). We observed that the stricture rate after performing the Bricker anastomosis technique was 25.3% (19/75) as compared to 7.7% (5/65) after Wallace anastomosis technique, which was statistically significant (p = 0.001). In the Bricker group, patients with strictures had higher BMI (28.3 vs. 25.7 kg/m2, p = 0.05). On average it took 8.5 months in the Bricker group and three months in the Wallace group (p = 0.6) to develop stricture.Conclusions: The stricture rate was significantly higher when Bricker technique was applied. Although the BMI was not different in both groups, patients with a higher BMI were more likely to develop stricture. We believe that the approach of the separate and refluxing technique of Bricker anastomosis especially in obese patients poses a higher risk for anastomotic stricture formation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

«Significa ancora qualcosa, oggi, parlare di “borghesia”?», chiede provocatoriamente Francesco de Cristofaro ne Il borghese fa il mondo (2017: 397), un corposo volume collettivo, da lui stesso curato insieme a Marco Viscardi, con saggi, tra gli altri, di Antonio Prete, Romano Luperini, Antonio Gargano, Pierluigi Pellini, Stefano Manferlotti, Francesco Fiorentino, Arturo Mazzarella, Clotilde Bertoni, e interventi di Toni Servillo ed Elio de Capitani, che riflettono sull’attualità della cultura borghese.

Evolucionistas antes de Darwin e Wallace já tinham mencionado o mecanismo da seleção natural. Para Darwin, a variação existe em larga escala entre populações e ela está disponível para a ação da seleção natural. Parte dessa variação beneficia seus portadores na luta pela sobrevivência. Wallace chegou a conclusões semelhantes quase ao mesmo tempo. A seleção natural como mecanismo de mudança evolutiva foi universalmente adotada após a Síntese Moderna (1930-1940). Nos últimos cinquenta anos, entretanto, outros mecanismos e processos evolutivos foram descobertos. Hoje em dia, é quase consenso que a seleção natural não é suficiente para explicar a evolução biológica. Atualmente, a necessidade de uma significativa extensão da teoria evolutiva, em algo como uma Síntese Estendida, é ponto principal de discussão. Em tal teoria, a seleção natural deixa de ter um papel criativo uma vez que a variação é limitada por outros processos que não a seleção. O objetivo do presente artigo é estabelecer o papel da seleção natural em três momentos distintos da história da biologia evolutiva, de Darwin até a Síntese Estendida.

Throughout the whole year 2009, the global biological community has celebrated the legacy of Charles Darwin, commemorating the anniversaries of his birth and the publication of "The origin", one of the most influential books of modern history. In this context, the Revista Chilena de Historia Natural inaugurates its new "Special Features" section with four independent essays dealing with the past, present and future of Darwin's ideas. This initial presentation focuses on some loóse ends of this Darwinfest, particularly on some forgotten anniversaries directly or indirectly related with Darwin's, and summarizes the contributions of the three essays following this introduction in the present issue.Durante todo el año 2009, la comunidad biológica global ha celebrado el legado de Charles Darwin, conmemorando los aniversarios de su nacimiento y de la publicación del "Origen", uno de los libros más influyentes en la historia moderna. En este contexto, la Revista Chilena de Historia Natural inaugura su nueva sección de "Temas Especiales" con cuatro ensayos independientes que tratan sobre el pasado, presente y futuro de las ideas de Darwin. Esta presentación inicial se enfoca en algunos cabos sueltos de la celebración darwiniana, particularmente en algunos aniversarios olvidados relacionados directa o indirectamente con los de Darwin, y resume las contribuciones de los tres ensayos que siguen a esta introducción en este número de la revista.

Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace independently discovered natural selection, and a set of common experiences surely contributed to that event. But, there were also major differences in their life-experience as collectors and travelers, their socio-political commitments, and their personal styles. The present paper is focused on, what is, perhaps, the most fundamental area of disagreement between Darwin and Wallace: the evolution of humanity. Darwin argued that human evolution could be explained by natural selection, with sexual selection as a signifcant supplementary principle. Wallace always had doubts about sexual selection, and ultimately concluded that natural selection alone was insuffcient to account for a set of uniquely human characteristics. Among these characteristics, the size and complexity of the human brain, found in all extant human races, occupied a central position. Wallace proposed that some new agent had to be invoked, in order to explain the existence of a brain, that could support the common intellectual activities of European culture, but was not (in his view) required to support survival and reproduction in the people that he lived with in the tropics. Wallace’s interest in the human brain, and in a materialistic view of brain function, was a natural outcome of an early and enduring belief in Phrenology. Once he had identifed the “paradoxical” cerebral hypertrophy of non-European racial groups, Wallace’s commitment to “adaptationism,” meant that a supplementary principle had to be invoked in order to account for that hypertrophy. The invocation of a higher power, and/or supreme intelligence, that intervened to create modern humanity, was undoubtedly facilitated by his interest in, and conversion to, spiritualism. Wallace’s abandonment of natural selection and sexual selection, as the sole agents of human evolution, set him apart from Darwin - and that, inevitably raises questions about the reasons for Wallace’s defection. Among Wallace’s personal traits was a consistent attraction to unpopular causes, including phrenology and spiritualism. Just as he had been attracted to evolutionary ideas, against the prevailing views of his time, so he diverged, from his fellow “Darwinists,” by invoking the action of a “Higher Intelligence” to account for the nature of our species.Charles Darwin y Alfred Russel Wallace descubrieron de forma independiente la selección natural; seguramente ciertas experiencias en común posibilitaron dicho evento. Sin embargo, hubo diferencias mayores en sus experiencias de vida como colectores y viajeros, en sus compromisos socioculturales y sus estilos personales. El presente ensayo se centra en, lo que quizás constituya, el área de mayor desacuerdo entre Darwin y Wallace: la evolución de la humanidad. Darwin argumentó que la evolución humana podía explicarse mediante selección natural, con la selección sexual como un principio suplementario importante. Wallace siempre tuvo dudas sobre la selección sexual, y concluyó que la selección natural por sí sola era insufciente para dar cuenta de un grupo de características único de los humanos. Entre éstas, el tamaño y complejidad de la mente humana, presente en todas las razas, ocupó un lugar central en sus argumentos. Wallace razonó que agentes adicionales debían ser invocados para explicar la existencia de una mente, que podía dar cuenta de las actividades intelectuales de la cultura europea, pero que no era (en su visión) requerida para explicar la supervivencia y reproducción de las personas con las que él había vivido en los trópicos. El interés de Wallace en la mente humana, y en una visión materialista del funcionamiento de la misma, fue una consecuencia natural de su creencia en la frenología. Una vez que visualizó la paradójica hipertrofa cerebral de los grupos raciales no europeos, el compromiso de Wallace con el “adaptacionismo” derivó en la necesidad de invocar un principio suplementario para explicar dicha hipertrofa. La invocación de un poder superior, y/o de una inteligencia suprema, que intervino para crear la humanidad moderna, fue propiciada indudablemente por su interés, a la vez que conversión, en el espiritualismo. El abandono de Wallace de la selección natural y sexual, como los únicos agentes detrás de la evolución humana, lo apartaron de Darwin; hecho que inevitablemente aparejó incertidumbre sobre los motivos de su deserción. Entre las características personales de Wallace fguraba una atracción consistente por causas impopulares, incluyendo la frenología y el espiritualismo. Así como se sintió atraído por las ideas evolutivas, contrarias a las ideas prevalecientes de su tiempo, se alejo de sus colegas darwinistas al invocar la acción de una “inteligencia superior” para dar cuenta de la naturaleza de nuestra especie.

Bearing in mind the distinction between the universally-curious explorer and the scientist with a theory to test, we shall ask three questions as we look at scientific travellers coming to Brazil in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. These questions are: Why did they come? What did they notice? and What were the consequences of their work? In the early days, visitors were chiefly impelled by curiosity about the world and especially by the tropical abundance of Brazil. In the nineteenth century, naturalists arrived with theories to test and noticed unexpected phenomena, such as the mimicry among butterflies on the Amazon. Colonial authorities were suspicious of visitors, who might find out too much and try to seize the products of Brazil for themselves. Besides, economically-oriented botanists were also becoming interested in Brazilian rubber and the possibility of cultivating it elsewhere. Perhaps colonial officials were wise to be suspicious.

By means of identifying its precursors, fundamental arguments, major proponents, and classic publications, an historical synthesis of the school of dispersalist biogeography is provided. Its concepts and major methods are analyzed and compared with those of other schools of historical biogeography. The historical roots of this synthesis emerge from Linnaeus, Buffon, and De Candolle. The founders of a dispersalist school were Darwin, l. vell, and Wallace whose theoretical structure was influenced by the intellectual and social contexts of the 19th century. This structure is recognizable in the neodarwinian biogeography of Darlington, Matthew, Mayr, Simpson and, most recently, Briggs. An ontological and epistemological criticism is provided of dispersalism.Se ofrece una síntesis histórica de la escuela biogeográfica dispersionista; se identifican sus precursores, ideas seminales, proponentes principales y obras clásicas. También se resumen sus conceptos y métodos más importantes, así como sus fundamentos teóricos, los cuales se analizan, se discuten y se comparan con otras escuelas de pensamiento en biogeografía histórica. La síntesis se inicia en sus raíces en la historia de las primeras ideas sobre la distribución orgánica que son base para las primeras teorías de Linneo, Buffon y De Candolle. Se reconoce en Lyell, Darwin y Wallace a los más importantes fundadores del Dispersionismo y se comentan los contextos sociales e intelectuales de su estructuración teórica en el siglo XIX. Tal estructura se reconoce en la biogeografía neodarwiniana cuyos representantes son Matthew, Darlington, Simpson, Mayr y, más recientemente, Briggs. Al final se desarrolla una crítica ontológica y epistemológica de los fundamentos del Dispersionismo.

Copyright of Universitas Médica is the property of Pontificia Universidad Javeriana and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

During 2009, while we were celebrating Charles Darwin and his The origin of species, sadly, little was said about the critical contribution of Alfred Russel Wallace (1823-1913) to the development of the theory of evolution. Like Darwin, he was a truly remarkable nineteenth century intellect and polymath and, according to a recent book by Roy Davies ( The Darwin conspiracy: origins of a scientific crime), he has a stronger claim to the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection than has Darwin. Here we present a critical comparison between the contributions of the two scientists. Sometimes referred to as 'The other beetle-hunter' and largely neglected for many decades, Wallace had a far greater experience of collecting and investigating animals and plants from their native habitats than had Darwin. He was furthermore much more than a pioneer biogeographer and evolutionary theorist, and also made contributions to anthropology, ethnography, geology, land reform and social issues. However, being a more modest, self-deprecating man than Darwin, and lacking the latter's establishment connections, Wallace's contribution to the theory of evolution was not given the recognition it deserved and he was undoubtedly shabbily treated at the time. It is time that Wallace's relationship with Darwin is reconsidered in preparation for 2013, the centenary of Wallace's death, and he should be recognized as at least an equal in the Wallace-Darwin theory of evolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Why was sexual selection so important to Darwin? And why was it de-emphasized by almost all of Darwin''s followers until the second half of the 20th century? These two questions shed light on the complexity of the scientific tradition named “Darwinism”. Darwin''s interest in sexual selection was almost as old as his discovery of the principle of natural selection. From the beginning, sexual selection was just another “natural means of selection”, although different from standard “natural selection” in its mechanism. But it took Darwin 30 years to fully develop his theory, from the early notebooks to the 1871 book The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Although there is a remarkable continuity in his basic ideas about sexual selection, he emphasized increasingly the idea that sexual selection could oppose the action of natural selection and be non adaptive. In time, he also gave more weight to mate choice (especially female choice), giving explicit arguments in favor of psychological notions such as “choice” and “aesthetic sense”. But he also argued that there was no strict demarcation line between natural and sexual selection, a major difficulty of the theory from the beginning. Female choice was the main reason why Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-discoverer of the principle of natural selection, engaged in a major controversy with Darwin about sexual selection. Wallace was suspicious about sexual selection in general, trying to minimize it by all sorts of arguments. And he denied entirely the existence of female choice, because he thought that it was both unnecessary and an anthropomorphic notion. This had something to do with his spiritualist convictions, but also with his conception of natural selection as a sufficient principle for the evolutionary explanation of all biological phenomena (except for the origin of mind). This is why Wallace proposed to redefine Darwinism in a way that excluded Darwin''s principle of sexual selection. The main result of the Darwin–Wallace controversy was that most Darwinian biologists avoided the subject of sexual selection until at least the 1950s, Ronald Fisher being a major exception. This controversy still deserves attention from modern evolutionary biologists, because the modern approach inherits from both Darwin and Wallace. The modern approach tends to present sexual selection as a special aspect of the theory of natural selection, although it also recognizes the big difficulties resulting from the inevitable interaction between these two natural processes of selection. And contra Wallace, it considers mate choice as a major process that deserves a proper evolutionary treatment. The paper''s conclusion explains why sexual selection can be taken as a test case for a proper assessment of “Darwinism” as a scientific tradition. Darwin''s and Wallace''s attitudes towards sexual selection reveal two different interpretations of the principle of natural selection: Wallace''s had an environmentalist conception of natural selection, whereas Darwin was primarily sensitive to the element of competition involved in the intimate mechanism of any natural process of selection. Sexual selection, which can lack adaptive significance, reveals this exemplarily. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Far from having diminished Darwin's priority in the formulation of natural selection theory, Alfred Russel Wallace's "On the tendency of varieties to depart indefinitely from the original type" supposes a way of reasoning that, besides being incompatible with that theory, does not carry us to Darwin's principle of divergence. The fundamental limitation of Wallace's argument was to consider that the formation of varieties did not deserve further explanations. His theory was just an explanation for the substitution of an original form by a derived variety, not an explanation of the proliferation of lineages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Marie-Louise von Franz's final lecture in November 1986 has revolutionary political implications because the more we manage to differentiate our feelings, the more we will be able to differentiate good from evil decisively. This is essential if we are to practice the great art of living together (a phrase from Bertolt Brecht). The first step in differentiating our feelings is to recognize that we live between the opposites and that we must often make painful choices between them. Even more important, however, a point on which both Jung and von Franz laid particular stress, is to recognize and accept the presence of living religion, that is, the numinous. Without that acceptance and without some "getting" of religion, evil is bound to triumph. Although we need to accept the numinous, archetypal dimension in our life, engaging as many of our functions in resisting what Esther Harding calls the "threat" from the unconscious is also most important. Particularly egregious in our scientific times is the triumph of undifferentiated thinking values in the everyday world of power politics and obedience to authority. The notorious 1961 obedience experiments of Stanley Milgram stand out as a particularly interesting portrayal of this trend. We are called upon to practice the politics of differentiated feeling in many ways, from deciding whether to accompany a group of friends when we really want to do something different, all the way to deciding if and how we might resist tyrannies such as Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia. Finally, the great art of living together concerns the difficult task of learning to love our individual fellow human beings consciously, as Rilke conceived it, and this we need to do, one relationship at a time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When socio-economic contexts are sought for Darwin’s science, it is customary to turn to the Industrial Revolution. However, important issues about the long run of England’s capitalisms can only be recognised by taking a wider view than Industrial Revolution historiographies tend to engage. The role of land and finance capitalisms in the development of the empire is one such issue. If we historians of Darwin’s science allow ourselves a distinction between land and finance capitalisms on the one hand and industrial capitalism on the other; and if we ask with which side of this divide were Darwin and his theory of branching descent by natural selection aligned, then reflection on leading features of that theory, including its Malthusian elements, suggests that the answer is often and largely, though not exclusively: on the land side. The case of Wallace, socialist opponent of land capitalism, may not be as anomalous for this suggestion as one might at first think. Social and economic historians have reached no settled consensuses on the long-run of England’s capitalisms. We historians of Darwin’s science would do well to import some of these unsettled states of discussion into our own work over the years to come. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the nineteenth century, Alfred Russel Wallace was generally acknowledged as one of the founders of evolutionary theory. But, during the twentieth century, his contributions came to be neglected as Darwin worship often replaced cogent historical asssessment. This is a story worth studying. It shows how scientific advances are often simultaneously made by many different individuals working independently; these advances are as much products of their intellectual context as they are of individual genius or inspiration. The story also shows the power of social background and privilege within science (how Darwin managed to avoid being pre-empted by Wallace), how scientists compete for priority, and how future generations co-opt history to suit their own purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I argue that our acts of moral appraisal should be communicative. Praise and blame should communicate, to the appraised, information about their status and competences as moral agents; that they are recognised by the appraiser as a competent moral agent, and thus a legitimate candidate for appraisal. I argue for this thesis by drawing on empirical data about factors that can affect motivation. On the basis of such data, I formulate a constraint, and argue that two prominent models of moral appraisal – a consequentialist model and Wallace’s ‘evaluative response’ model – violate this constraint. The model that I propose – the communicative conception of appraisal – does not violate this constraint. This conception, I argue, can provide a fuller picture of the role of appraisals in deepening agents’ commitment to moral norms. On this model, praise and blame has not only an evaluative component, but also communicates to the agent competence affirming information. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

P.F. Strawson’s work on moral responsibility is well-known. However, an important implication of the landmark “Freedom and Resentment” has gone unnoticed. Specifically, a natural development of Strawson’s position is that we should understand being morally responsible as having externalistically construed pragmatic criteria, not individualistically construed psychological ones. This runs counter to the contemporary ways of studying moral responsibility. I show the deficiencies of such contemporary work in relation to Strawson by critically examining the positions of John Martin Fischer and Mark Ravizza, R. Jay Wallace, and Philip Pettit for problems due to individualistic assumptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on external versus internal explanations of the Darwinian revolution. Genesis of the evolutionary theory and its reception; Impact of society on science; Argument that because Darwin's contemporaries lived in such a competitive and individualistic society, they were prone to accept a theory that exhibited these same characteristics; Competition between Darwin and A. R. Wallace.

This paper presents a 64-bit fixed-point vector multiply-accumulator (MAC) architecture capable of supporting multiple precisions. The vector MAC can perform one 64 x 64, two 32 x 32, four 16 x 16, or eight 8 x 8 bit signed/unsigned multiply-accumulates using essentially the same hardware as a scalar 64-bit MAC and with only a small increase in delay. The scalar MAC architecture is "vectorized" by inserting mode-dependent multiplexing into the partial product generation and by inserting mode-dependent kills in the carry chain of the reduction tree and the final carry-propagate adder. This is an example of "shared segmentation" in which the existing scalar structure is segmented and then shared between vector modes. The vector MAC is area efficient and can be fully pipelined, which makes it suitable for high-performance processors and, possibly, dynamically reconfigurable processors. The "shared segmentation" method is compared to an alternative method, referred to as the "shared subtree" method, by implementing vector MAC designs using two different technologies and three different vector widths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]