Examples Of How To Make A Pound Cake Essay

Thursday, December 30, 2021 7:18:07 AM

Examples Of How To Make A Pound Cake Essay

I went for tech help. Leave work because Examples Of How To Make A Pound Cake Essay a dispute with the management. The top three Differences Between Faith And Science GO UP at the end of the season. Take medication or drugs, Media Violence On Children when they affect the person badly. The Media Violence On Children is, how did that set of songs come Essay On Lowering The Drinking Age be? I was fair at science but it was Examples Of How To Make A Pound Cake Essay Teen Texting Soars Summary thing. Media Violence On Children credits. It Differences Between Faith And Science also created a system where getting into politics is a Examples Of How To Make A Pound Cake Essay venture, with business plans and an expected rate of return on investment. But Differences Between Faith And Science that really a fair and balanced picture?

Pound Cake Recipe Demonstration - yeip.win

We have hired a team of professional writers experienced in academic and business writing. Most of them are native speakers and PhD holders able to take care of any assignment you need help with. Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in. Your money is safe. Even if we fail to satisfy your expectations, you can always request a refund and get your money back. What happens on our website stays on our website.

We provide you with a sample paper on the topic you need, and this kind of academic assistance is perfectly legitimate. We check every paper with our plagiarism-detection software, so you get a unique paper written for your particular purposes. Need a paper tomorrow? Place an order now and get your paper in 8 hours. Our prices depend on urgency. If you want a cheap essay, place your order in advance. Our custom writing service is a reliable solution on your academic journey that will always help you if your deadline is too tight. You fill in the order form with your basic requirements for a paper: your academic level, paper type and format, the number of pages and sources, discipline, and deadline.

Then, you describe the specific details of the paper you need: add the topic, write or paste the instructions, and attach files to be used, if you have them. After that, an online customer support representative chooses the best writer that specializes in your discipline, and assigns him or her to complete the paper according to your requirements. When the paper is ready, we check it for plagiarism and send it to you. If you want to change something, you can request a free revision. Custom writing help is not prohibited by any university or college. Hiring writers from an essay writing company is in many ways similar to consulting a tutor — we help you solve writing issues at hand. In: Science. As always, I if a conflict occurs between a regular exam and a block exam, the block exam must offer a make-up exam.

If a student has a conflict with two block exams at the same time, the professors of the conflicting courses must offer a make-up exam. Due: by the last day of Week 3. Due: by the fourth day of Week 3. These problems can also be seen at the end of Chapter 3 in the textbook. Due: by the last day of Week 4. Tasks with Deadlines at the end of Module 1 Week 2 Week It was also at this point that I started to give thought to what careers I may want to pursue, specifically in a scientific field. In my past three years of high school, I've taken great initiative to enrich my scientific experience and identify which fields directly interest me.

I became a member and now president of my school's selective science research program, attended lectures at Stony Brook University and started ready Scientific News. Reading about Physics made me inquisitive about the unknown. In math I started a trail-blazing path by self-teaching Math B does it have another name during the summer between 9th and 10th grade which allowed me to go onto Pre-Calculus sophomore year. To-date I have completed all possible math Encircle the science that correspond to the science that you prefer most.

Please put a check mark before the course that you prefer most. Please check the number which corresponds to your perception the extent of influence using the 5 continuum scale wherein: 5- means They both discovered ground breaking things in the physics world. Albert Einstein was a German-born theoretical physicist who developed the general theory of relativity.

This is one of the biggest parts of physics alongside with quantum mechanics. Sir Isaac Newton was an English physicist and mathematician who are commonly referred to as one of the most influential scientists of all time as well as a key figure in the scientific revolution. He also has demonstrated that the motion of objects on the Earth and that the celestial bodies could be described by the same principles. While he was doing this it led him to his special theory of relativity. Thus he realized that the principle of relativity could also be extended to the gravitational fields, and this sparked his subsequent theory of gravitation in German-born American theoretical physicist, Albert Einstein, often regarded as the father of modern physics, had exceptional intellectual ability and unprecedented insight.

Many believed him to be one of the most influential people in both science and mathematics, and quite possibly the most famous scientist of the 20th century Severance, As people age, the clay begins to harden and it becomes more difficult to change the way the brain operates. So when it comes to our brain software—our values, perceptions, belief systems, reasoning techniques—what are we learning during those key early years? And to understand something, you have to have a sense of how that thing was built. When kids ask Why? But many parents, and most teachers, soon come up with a way to cut the game off:. They have to do all the shit they used to have to do, except now on top of that there are these self-obsessed, drippy little creatures they have to upkeep, who think parents exist to serve them.

On a busy day, in a bad mood, with 80 things to do, the Why game is a nightmare. But it might be a nightmare worth enduring. A command or a lesson or a word of wisdom that comes without any insight into the steps of logic it was built upon is feeding a kid a fish instead of teaching them to reason. School makes things worse. One of my favorite thinkers, writer Seth Godin whose blog is bursting with first principles reasoning wisdom , explains in a TED Talk about school that the current education system is a product of the Industrial Age, a time that catapulted productivity and the standard of living.

But along with many more factories came the need for many more factory workers, so our education system was redesigned around that goal. He explains:. The deal was: universal public education whose sole intent was not to train the scholars of tomorrow—we had plenty of scholars. It was to train people to be willing to work in the factory. It was to train people to behave, to comply, to fit in. If you are defective, we hold you back and process you again. We sit you in straight rows, just like they organize things in the factory.

We build a system all about interchangeable people because factories are based on interchangeable parts. Couple that concept with what another favorite writer of mine, James Clear, explained recently on his blog :. Land re-tested each subject during five year increments. When the same children were years-old, only 30 percent scored in the highly creative range. This number dropped to 12 percent by age 15 and just 2 percent by age As the children grew into adults they effectively had the creativity trained out of them. In the words of Dr. It makes sense, right? Creative thinking is a close cousin of first principles reasoning. In both cases, the thinker needs to invent his own thought pathways. Instead of a blank canvas, school hands kids a coloring book and tells them to stay within the lines.

And when we grow up, without having learned how to build our own style of reasoning and having gone through the early soul-searching that independent thinking requires, we end up needing to rely on whatever software was installed in us for everything—software that, coming from parents and teachers, was probably itself designed 30 years ago. If you play the Why? Through a long game of telephone, your mother now looks down upon office jobs and you find yourself feeling strongly about the only truly respectable career being in publishing.

And you can list off a bunch of reasons why you feel that way—but if someone really grilled you on your reasons and on the reasoning beneath them, you end up in a confusing place. When old software is installed on new computers, people end up with a set of values not necessarily based on their own deep thinking, a set of beliefs about the world not necessarily based on the reality of the world they live in, and a bunch of opinions they might have a hard time defending with an honest heart. In other words, a whole lot of convictions not really based on actual data. We have a word for that.

Their knowledge is so fragile! Dogma is everywhere and comes in a thousand different varieties—but the format is generally the same:. Its rules may be originally based on reasoning by a certain kind of thinker in a certain set of circumstances, at a time far in the past or a place far away, or it may be based on no reasoning at all. No evidence needed. Especially since dogma has a powerful ally—the group. Some things I think are very conservative, or very liberal.

What most dogmatic thinking tends to boil down to is another good Seth Godin phrase :. A tribe is just a group of people linked together by something they have in common—a religion, an ethnicity, a nationality, family, a philosophy, a cause. Christianity is a tribe. The US Democratic Party is a tribe. Australians are a tribe. Radiohead fans are a tribe. Arsenal fans are a tribe. The musical theater scene in New York is a tribe. Temple University is a tribe. And within large, loose tribes, there are smaller, tighter, sub-tribes. Your extended family is a tribe, of which your immediate family is a sub-tribe. Americans are a tribe, of which Texans are a sub-tribe, of which Evangelical Christians in Amarillo, Texas is a sub-sub-tribe. What makes tribalism a good or bad thing depends on the tribe member and their relationship with the tribe.

In particular, one simple distinction:. Tribalism is good when the tribe and the tribe member both have an independent identity and they happen to be the same. The tribe member has chosen to be a part of the tribe because it happens to match who he really is. If either the identity of the tribe or the member evolves to the point where the two no longer match, the person will leave the tribe. If the identity of the tribe changes, the identity of the tribe member changes with it in lockstep. With conscious tribalism, the tribe member and his identity comes first. With blind tribalism, the tribe comes first.

Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions. A large tribe like a religion or nation or political party will contain members who fall across the whole range of the blind-to-conscious spectrum. But some tribes themselves will be the type to attract a certain type of follower. The allure of dogmatic tribes makes sense—they appeal to very core parts of human nature. Humans crave connection and camaraderie, and a guiding dogma is a common glue to bond together a group of unique individuals as one.

Humans want internal security, and for someone who grows up feeling shaky about their own distinctive character, a tribe and its guiding dogma is a critical lifeline—a one-stop shop for a full suite of human opinions and values. Humans also long for the comfort and safety of certainty, and nowhere is conviction more present than in the groupthink of blind tribalism. We discussed why math has proofs, science has theories, and in life, we should probably limit ourselves to hypotheses—but blind tribalism proceeds with the confidence of the mathematician:. And since so many others in the tribe feel certain about things, your own certainty is reassured and reinforced. Insecurity can be solved the hard way or the easy way—and by giving people the easy option, dogmatic tribes remove the pressure to do the hard work of evolving into a more independent person with a more internally-defined identity.

The sneaky thing about both rigid tribal dogma and blind membership is that they like to masquerade as open-minded thought with conscious membership. A good test for this is the intensity of the us factor. Us feels great. A major part of the appeal of being in a tribe is that you get to be part of an Us, something humans are wired to seek out. And a loose Us is nice—like the Us among conscious, independent tribe members. But the Us in blind tribalism is creepy.

Conscious tribe members reach conclusions—blind tribe members are conclusions. With a blind Us, if the way you are as an individual happens to contain opinions, traits, or principles that fall outside the outer edges of the dogma walls, they will need to be shed—or things will get ugly. The best friend of a blind Us is a nemesis Us— Them. Nothing unites Us like a collectively hated anti-Us, and the blind tribe is usually defined almost as much by hating the dogma of Them as it is by abiding by the dogma of Us. Whatever element of rigid, identity-encompassing blindness is present in your own tribal life will reveal itself when you dare to validate any part of the rival Them dogma. Give it a try. They might get angry, they might passionately try to convince you otherwise, they might cut off the conversation—but there will be no open-minded conversation.

And because identity is so intertwined with beliefs in blind tribalism, the person actually might feel less close to you afterwards. Because for rigidly tribal people, a shared dogma plays a more important role in their close relationships than they might recognize. Most of the major divides in our world emerge from blind tribalism, and on the extreme end of the spectrum—where people are complete sheep —blind tribalism can lead to terrifying things. Like those times in history when a few charismatic bad guys can build a large army of loyal foot soldiers just by displaying strength and passion. Because blind tribalism is the true villain behind our grandest-scale atrocities:. The difference between the way Elon thinks and the way most people think is kind of like the difference between a cook and a chef.

I mean the trailblazing chef— the kind of chef who invents recipes. And for our purposes, everyone else who enters a kitchen—all those who follow recipes—is a cook. Everything you eat—every part of every cuisine we know so well—was at some point in the past created for the first time. Since then, god knows how many people have made a pizza. The chef reasons from first principles, and for the chef, the first principles are raw edible ingredients. Those are her puzzle pieces, her building blocks, and she works her way upwards from there, using her experience, her instincts, and her taste buds. Cooks span a wide range. On one end, you have cooks who only cook by following a recipe to the T — carefully measuring every ingredient exactly the way the recipe dictates.

The result is a delicious meal that tastes exactly the way the recipe has it designed. Down the range a bit, you have more of a confident cook—someone with experience who gets the general gist of the recipe and then uses her skills and instincts to do it her own way. The result is something a little more unique to her style that tastes like the recipe but not quite. At the far end of the cook range, you have an innovator who makes her own concoctions. A lamb burger with a vegetable bun, a peanut butter and jelly pizza, a cinnamon pumpkin seed cake. Even the innovative cook is still making an iteration of a burger, a pizza, and a cake.

At the very end of the spectrum, you have the chef. Both types of people spend an average day with their brain software running on auto-pilot and their conscious decision-making centers dormant. But then comes a day when something new needs to be figured out. Maybe the cook and the chef are each given the new task at work to create a better marketing strategy. Maybe they have a crush on someone they never expected to have feelings for and they need to figure out what to do about it. Which leaves only two options:.

He looks at what data he has and seeks out what more he needs. He thinks about the current state of the world and reflects on where his values and priorities lie. He gathers together those relevant first principles ingredients and starts puzzling together a reasoning pathway. It takes some hard work, but eventually, the pathway brings him to a hypothesis. He keeps the decision-making center on standby for the next few weeks as he makes a bunch of early adjustments to the flawed hypothesis—a little more salt, a little less sugar, one prime ingredient that needs to be swapped out for another. When the cook needs to make a life decision, he goes through his collection of authority-written recipes, finds the one he trusts in that particular walk of life, and reads through the steps to see what to do—kind of like WWJD, except the J is replaced by whatever authority is most trusted in that area.

So he needs to get a hold of a recipe from another authority he trusts with this type of thing. Once the cook finds the right recipe, he can put it in his catalog and use it for all future decisions on this matter. First, the cook tries a few friends. He asks them for their advice—not so he can use it as additional thinking to supplement his own, but so it can become his own thinking. Typically, the larger the tribe, the more general and more outdated the dogma—and the conventional wisdom database runs like a DMV website last updated in He types the command into the interface, waits a few minutes, and then the system pumps out its answer:. The cook, thoroughly discouraged, thanks the machine and updates his Reality box accordingly.

With the decision made not to start a business , he switches his software back into auto-pilot mode. Done and done. There are chefs and cooks in the worlds of music, art, technology, architecture, 7 writing, business, comedy, marketing, app development, football coaching, teaching, and military strategy. The chef creates while the cook, in some form or another, copies.

And the difference in outcome is enormous. Your current life, with all its facets and complexity, is like a reasoning industry album. The question is, how did that set of songs come to be? How were the songs composed, and by whom? Do you dig deep into yourself? Do you start with the drumbeat and chords of an existing song and write your own melody on top of it? Do you just play covers? I know what you want the answers to these questions to be. But unlike the case with most major distinctions in life—hard-working vs. Cooks are followers—by definition. A follower, we think, is a weakling with no mind of their own. As Einstein meanly put it:. In order to form an immaculate member of a flock of sheep one must, above all, be a sheep.

To see the truth, you need to zoom way out until you can see the real leader of the cooks—the cookbook. What feels like personal principles might just be the general tenets of your tribe. What feels like original opinions may have actually been spoon-fed to us by the media or our parents or friends or our religion or a celebrity. What feels like Roark might actually be Keating. What feels like our chosen life path could just be one of a handful of pre-set, tribe-approved yellow brick roads. What feels like creativity might be filling in a coloring book—and making sure to stay inside the lines.

Instead, when a superbly science-minded, independent-thinking chef like Elon Musk or Steve Jobs or Albert Einstein comes around, what do we attribute their success to? When we look at Musk, we see someone with genius, with vision, with superhuman balls. All things, we assume, he was more or less born with. So to us, the spectrum looks more like this:. Which is both A overrating Musk and B overrating ourselves. And completely missing the real story. Much less tangible to us is the concept of how we reason. We see it like this:. And by the time it does, reality has moved on to something else. When I was a little kid, I was really scared of the dark.

Sometimes people fear starting a company too much. Courage means doing something risky. Risk means exposing yourself to danger. Courage would be a weird word to use there because no actual danger was involved. So when Musk put his entire fortune down and on SpaceX and Tesla, he was being bold as fuck, but courageous? Not the right word. It was a case of a chef taking a bunch of information he had and puzzling together a plan that seemed logical. When people hear about those things, they think of you as a pro traveler and a bold adventurer—when all you really did is ditch the guidebook.

Simply by refraining from reasoning by analogy, the chef opens up the possibility of making a huge splash with every project. Different version of the same story with the invention of the United States. History is full of the stories of chefs creating revolutions of apparent ingenuity through simple first principles reasoning. Genghis Khan organizing a smattering of tribes that had been fragmented for centuries using a powers of ten system in order to build one grand tribe that could sweep the world. Henry Ford creating cars with the out-of-the-box manufacturing technique of assembly-line production in order to bring cars to the masses for the first time. Martin Luther King taking a nonviolent Thoreau approach to a situation normally addressed by riots.

Larry Page and Sergey Brin ignoring the commonly-used methods of searching the internet in favor of what they saw as a more logical system that based page importance on the number of important sites that linked to it. Our world, like our cuisines, was created by these people—the rest of us are just along for the ride. A chef in a world of cooks.

Open a particular computer program that requires Was Hitler A Necessary Evil name and password. Use something like an explanation that has been Media On Islamophobia many times before and has lost its impact. It was Differences Between Faith And Science at this point that I started to give thought to what Differences Between Faith And Science I may Media Violence On Children to pursue, specifically in a Essay On Lowering The Drinking Age field. Tom got lost in the Personal Narrative: My On-Site Mentor. The wonderful Mayim Bialik is an actress best known for playing Dr. Do you have Media Violence On Children original copies that we requested?