Which grammar is Hungarian grammar closer to: Finnish or Turkish?

How can we explain the phenomenon of the diffusion of Asian pop culture in the European context?

What are the characteristics of a "high" social status in your society/culture? Please also detail the gender differences in this regard.

The uploaded version of the article is my PDF of the publication. One of the new constellations which, in my opinion, will be much debated on in the post-pandemic time will be the theological interpretation of Creation and of the aims of Creation within the Christian tradition. In my view, this will represent a central subject within the theological debate, since this topic directly involves the goal as such of Creation, on the one hand, and the position, value, right, and duty of mankind within Creation, on the other. The related questions are whether God’s action of Creation is directed to affirming the pre-eminence of mankind and the right of domination of man over all other created entities, or whether God’s action of Creation includes all the created entities in an equal way without God designating superiority to any created entity over any other entity. In my contribution, I am therefore going to deal with two mutually opposed interpretations of Creation and of the corresponding relations existing among God, mankind, and all the other creatures. The first interpretation could be synthesised in the formula Dominium Terrae of man over other creatures. The second interpretation could be described as God designating to humankind the stewardship of nature. The notions of the two interpretations of God’s Creation have consequences – for mankind’s attitudes and orientations towards nature – which are completely different from each other. - The first interpretation, which has, as its central feature, foundation, and principle, the notion of man as the image of God, considers mankind as the centre of creation. This interpretation confers to mankind a position of absolute privilege over all of the other creatures; all of nature bows to mankind. The direction of God’s Creation is anthropocentric meaning all creatures and nature in its entirety are at the disposal of mankind, since mankind has received from the very word of God the legitimation for the dominion over nature. Nature is regarded as an object to be used and which can be used. It has no actual worth, no actual value as such; it has no independent position in reality. - The second interpretation, which insists on the commonality among all creatures, assigns a common dignity to all creatures. God is seen as being present in all of Creation: through Creation, mankind is assigned the duty of stewardship over all of nature. The direction of God’s Creation is not anthropocentric. Mankind is assigned and has thus a precise responsibility towards nature. This responsibility outlines exact limits as regards the use which mankind can make of nature: mankind may exercise no dominion over nature. Hence, the two interpretations of the Theology of Creation bring about different considerations of nature and of the relationships between mankind and nature. Furthermore, they express different conceptions of mankind as such. In my opinion, the debate on the interpretation of God’s relationship with the created entities and, within this general relationship, the mutual opposition between an anthropocentric and non-anthropocentric Creation will be more present than ever in the post-pandemic time due to its relevance for the general orientation of mankind towards nature. The Theology of Creation involves furthermore a general meditation on the aims and the limits of the technical power towards nature. For my analysis, I shall concentrate my attention on some passages taken from Genesis, the Wisdom of Solomon, and from Paul the Apostle. To find ideas and suggestions for my analysis, I have referred to the books of Robin Attfield, Environmental Ethics: An Overview for the Twenty-First Century, and of Jürgen Moltmann, Ethik der Hoffnung. I take full responsibility for the ideas expressed in the analysis.

I would be interested in any ideas, suggestions, information, theoretical and bibliographical references etc., on how mass communication /mass media can be used in social work or for purposes related to social work. Thank you!

Dear Colleagues,

Has anyone used a composite score based on the LEAP-Q?

I work with bilingual data and I would like to apply a LEAP-Q composite score. However, I have not found any studies that would apply an aggregate score for LEAP-Q results.

Thank you,

Monika

After completing pilot study on animals what will be the sample size of phase 1 clinical trial?

As no previous study is available on same drug combinations.

Identity definitions vary as people possess and project a multitude of identities (Tracey, 2004; Joseph, 2010) depending on an interlocutor in a discursive event and a given context.

I am interested in how identity is viewed and defined in YOUR sociocultural milieu/country?

Thank you very much for your reply,

Kind Regards,

Alexandra.

Covid-19 - Could we speed up an acceptance of the scientific worldview? How could the research/scientific community contribute? That is important for a fight against Covid-19.

The first known symbolic paintings of half-human, half-animal figures date to around 42 thousand BC. Most scholars see Isaac Newton's book "Principia Mathematica" publication date, i.e., 1647 AD, as an emergence date for a scientific method. That means that, for the last 44 thousand years, 99.2% of the time humans were not aware of the scientific worldview. The ignorance of scientific worldview is an ancient tradition. It is hard to overcome it.

People with anti-science attitudes, like anti-vaxxers, became a powerful obstacle on the way to global herd immunity against Covid-19.