0
The verb to equivocate means
a. to use equivocal/ elusive language especially with intent to deceive
b. : to avoid committing oneself in what one says
The fallacy of equivocation, a term in logic, is used to describe a situation in which the conclusion, based on seemingly true premises, is invalid due to the equivocative use of language.
What else can I help you with?
Do you mistrust a person who equivocates?
You most certainly do! A person who equivocates uses roundabout or dual-meaning language in order to deceive, so I know I would mistrust her/him!
Do mistrust a person who equivocates?
You most certainly do! A person who equivocates uses roundabout or dual-meaning language in order to deceive, so I know I would mistrust her/him!
What is the name of Seamus surname?
Sorry, but "Seamus" is not a surname. It is a masculine given name that equivocates to James or Jacob, meaning "one who supplants". In the U.S., the Yiddish masculine given name "Shamus" can be slang for a private detective.
What are the main scenes in Macbeth?
Some main scenes in "Macbeth" include the witches' prophecy in Act 1, Lady Macbeth's manipulation of Macbeth in Act 1, Macbeth's hallucinations of Banquo's ghost in Act 3, and the final battle scene in Act 5.
How is it possible for the universe to be infinite and have a beginning?
In the first place: we don't necessarily think the universe is infinite, which makes the second part kind of moot. It's the very fact that it isn't infinite, but expanding, that makes us believe it did have a beginning. I don't know why you deleted my answer to this as my answer was very appropriate and your answer is really just based on opinion and theory. i will try to find my previous answer in the archives but until then you will have to ignore the above. (The question equivocates between physical and temporal dimensions in order to pose a conundrum. I mean, like, I'm just sayin' .)
What are amusing parts in the duchess of malfi?
The duchess of malfi is innately amusing. Equivocations can be found interspersed throughout the whole play and if scrutiny is conducted thoroughly, one will be able to spot various multitudinous facetious comments made by different characters such as Bosola, Cardinal and Ferdinand. This brings out the theme of appearance and reality, which makes the play laughable, yet morbid at the same time. This can be illustrated at how Ferdinand tries to lure Antonio to return to his castle by offering him forgiveness through the letter sent by Bosola to the Duchess and Antonio. Notice how the letter is phrased; other subtleties can be seen when Bosola equivocates as Duchess reveals her husband's name.
What is the meaning of out riding fences?
Oh, dude, "out riding fences" is just a fancy way of saying someone is out there patrolling or checking their property boundaries. Like, imagine a cowboy on a horse, making sure no cows or bandits are messing with their land. So, it's basically just keeping an eye on things, but with a cool cowboy vibe.
What was the role of women in the 12th century?
Most of us think of the Renaissance in terms of the 15th and 16th centuries, but according to author RN. Swanson, the period spanning from 1050 to 1250 was indeed a period of great expansion and enlightenment. Specifically, Swanson considers the system of education during this era, from monastic an cathedral schools to other private institutions, and their corresponding changes in teaching styles. He also examines developments in law, government, and politics, as well as the development of kingships and royal authority. Swanson asserts that these educational changes fostered a massive transformation in western intellectual life in the 12th century when Aristotle was rediscovered and the art of argumentation was developed. Swanson also claims that humanism made its first appearance in this era, documenting several areas in which an increase in "self-awareness" is evident, particularly in the works of various authors of the time. Swanson even looks to the role of women in the 12th century for signs of enlightenment, spending time considering such women as Heloise, Hildegard of Bingen, and Marie de France. In sum, Swanson identifies a number of areas in which key cultural developments occured in what is generally regarded as a time of stagnation. Do these add up to a Renaissance? Swanson equivocates in his conclusion about the use of the term, suggesting that there were actually more than one Renaissance during this period. Yet however you choose to apply the term, the book provides a solid picture of the era, and, indeed, a valuable introduction to the times.
Who sang the song revolution by The Beatles?
The Beatles (The "White Album") has the slow version, and Past Masters Volume 2 has the fast single version. The White Album had the original, slow version. The fast version was the B-side of the "Hey Jude" single. It first appeared on album on 1970's Hey Jude (aka The Beatles Again), which was a collection of non-album singles. It was later reissued as part of Past Masters Vol. 2.
Why is the porter scene from Macbeth so famous?
We know that Duncan is dead and must soon be discovered. The comic interlude with the Porter delays that discovery. We want to know what will happen when the murder is discovered and the scene postpones that knowledge, creating suspense. Of course, the real reason for the scene is to give the actors playing the Macbeths a chance to change and clean up. Some of Shakespeare's most famous scenes are for just such practical purposes.
What kind of entertainment did Jesus have?
This question is yet to be answered but we know that he was a fan of parties and a point to prove this is shown in the wedding at cana miracle. To improve on this response to the previously posed query the answer is 'worship'. In Jesus's day worship was like going to the movies, talking on the phone with your best friend, going hiking (as he and his sometimes did). Then there was the whole dress rehearsal of all his sermons he'd do over at Mary and Martha's place. He was always running by his edicts with one of those two on the Sabbath day, and the disciples were jealous to beat all, but it was really what he needed, a place where he could refine his words and practice without the pressure of the crowd, someone to please and put a beautiful smile on their face, this is worship, this is entertainment. By the standards of today entertainment is often simply a place to relax and enjoy. But if outside the temple walls was also worship "highly entertaining". The type of entertainment we do for God and God alone, the only who even has the potential to see all you do and appreciate the subtleties of every thought. So in some ways, Jesus lives his life trying to entertain God. He was always trying to please his father, I don't think anyone who has ever lived would could debate this, I mean the guy was always talking about him. "My father" this..... do this for my father. The father... the father... the father... You see after all these days, there came the miracles and opening the ears of the deaf and the eyes of the blind, now this is what I call "Entertainment", the most relaxing and satisfying thing a man can ever do is perform a supernatural miracle of healing. One of these done authentically, in this day and age, and the audience would be astounding. Keeping in mind his motto, because he says informally the words, "Everything you do, do it in worship of the Lord," he says it in spirit by the way he lives, and so "worship" equivocates entertainment. "Worship", the word sounds like a navy boat, but seriously, now in these times, the only thing all the people have in common before we had cell phones and computer networks and offices with a lot of people scattered across the globe, was the temple service and the Sabbath. One out of seven is pretty okay. So in summary, and just let me close here, my thesis statement is he worships the service as the main event. Of course these technologies are great (sorry to digress), but I am simply making the point, the temple (the "church", his bride) or whatever you refer to it as, was is and forever shall be the source of all his entertainment. Trust me, endless conversations, joking around, besides all the seriousness took place--he was still a young man. On and on again this guy, beautiful women with good hearts and keen minds would eagerly wait to hear him musing, and blowing their minds, with his brilliant kindness. What could be more entertaining for a man in his age, for a man his age in any age, actually? "Worship" is where the meat parts from the potatoes and all the action takes place, the forming and maintaining of relationships, all your friends, family, talked, thought out loud, laughed and ate. It was the kind of place stories were told, like this one. Of course there were debates, there always have been and always will be held here it is part of the joy of life a gift as it were (held), and this you have to believe because it's true, even the occasional brawl took place! I say this to illustrate the authenticity of the time and date: people slept at inns, they worked in their shops with one or two others most the time, it was always the women worked at home or did the same as the men and I say this with selective meaning. I mean here we are out in the fields with our flocks, retrieving lost sheep, going fishing for food, planting wheat and corn for harvest, before the time of worship too busy to engage, so the worship is the source of entertainment. But after the Sabbath, after, when the Lord's blessing had been given to the people and they enjoyed his "something sacred", a river she's rising, a rose by any other name, I'm telling you it's all in the heart of the night, a blessing bestowed, what have you. It's all the same! Entertainmentendures. Hate, science, race, politics, violence, this things are a blip on a bad radar screen like a little tiny gnat sitting on the glass and wham! Crushed by another bug! A Jerusalem cricket. You ever see one of these? You'd be amazed the kind of things you could take in out and about on the Sabbath, the sights the sounds, the sunrises the sunsets, it was the exhausting long and relaxing day of every week; some days, of course there were weddings, and lovely engagements, beautiful brides, handsome bridegrooms, but catch the sun and have a little fun, a little too much new wine in their face, and suddenly you got a few Zealots, some Pharisees, a Sadducee, and a Samaritan all under one stall talking about politics and the son of man, tinder box! Someone says something about the High Priest under his breast and forget it, the time for peace was past and armies of heaven were throwing down warrior Gentiles and Jews are suddenly assembling alongside the Roman armies. Just say the word "Cesar, you should see the look--Saturday afternoon at the temple, the things you would see... the most entertainment. To speak the Latin term I just learned "hona notia", it is what you get when you leave this place. God bless.
Does the Your Baby Can Read Program really work?
Hi everyone,the first answer in non bold was written by S. ichigo apparently, he thinks he is an expert on a system he has never used, well I have used the "Your Baby Can Read" system, I do have an academic background in both Biological and Developmental psychology, and through personal experience utilizing the "Your Baby Can Read" methodology with my own child I believe it does work, you will see my rebuttals to the original answer in bold script. --JoshYes and no.Yes because a baby can recognize the word on the card and then say the word.No because the baby isn't actually "reading" in the traditional sense. The baby isn't seeing the letters as letter sounds, and is only recognizing the word's shape. The baby has been trained to associate the word 'cat" with the spoken word "cat" and the image of a cat...but he has no idea that the c says /k/, or the a says /a/, etc. He simply sees the image of the word on the card and parrots "cat", because, to him, it's the same as seeing a picture of a real cat.What is he really trying to say? This is generally known as "sight reading" in education and it is the first step to reading, and it is reading. Please don't redefine what it means to read.--JoshActually there are so many definitions of what it means to read, to say that they are all wrong except some singular fictitious undefined "Traditional" definition? What, exactly, is he talking about?Traditional? Well in that case, Lets take a Look at Merriam Webster Dictionary's primary definition of Read:"a (1)'': to receive or take in the sense of (as letters or symbols) especially by sight or touch"So we see in fact that Mr Ichigo is wrong on this count as well. The baby really is, as most of us non-self proclaimed experts can plainly see, actually reading.--JoshHe can learn to recognize the word 'cat", and the word "ball, but will never be able to read the word "bat" by recognizing the letter sounds, as a child who learned to read phonetically would, unless he was similarly trained with a card that said "bat".How do you know? Have you ever used the system? My kid is 18 months and already reading.He does sound it out. How do I know? I can show him any word, long or short, and if it has a B in front of it, when I ask him what it says. He says "Ba" , that is one small example, at just 18 months there are a majority of letters that he is so familiar with.He has been sounding out the words since he was 10 months old.His First word was "Apple" which he started saying at around 10 months, and for a while there, any word on the cards or in a book that had an A in front of it was "Apple" to him.If he develops the way the majority of children using the system have, he will be doing the more detailed level of reading Mr Ichigo is attempting to describe by the time he is around 2 to 3. --JoshThis is a neat trick parents can use to impress family and friends, but I would advise strongly against using it, as whole-word reading has been abandoned by the educational world as a failed experiment, and was NEVER thought to be a good idea by the most serious language and educational experts.Is he kidding me? Sources please.... Of course he doesn't have any."Your Baby Can Read" is not really related to the "Whole-Word" method. In fact it is entirely different.I studied developmental and cognitive psychology extensively in school and he is just plain wrong about that one. In History there has never been a methodology like "Your Baby Can Read". While attending University, I wrote several papers in Developmental psychology, even in language acquisition. It is a subject I had studied extensively in several classes. I knew this was an excellent system based in science as soon as I saw it. My knowledge paid off when I bought the system and followed the simple instructions. Just because no one has ever seen it before, including experts, does not mean it is impossible, and I believe there are even more experts who would agree with Dr. Titzer's Methodology, than not. --JoshLearning to "read" this way could possibly seriously hinder a child's ability to learn phonics the right way, and could make him dependent on sight words. This would mean he could ONLY read the few dozen words he knows by sight, and that he would have a total inability to "sound out" new words. Reading becomes a very painful process of guess-work and, at best, remedial phonics lessons that can hopefully break bad habits.Wrong again! My 18 month old son loves reading, and the "Your Baby Can Read" program has given him a love and passion for books that I have never seen in a small child. Of course I supplement his program with over 25, (especially Dr. Suess) popular and tough to tear, board books, that he can read on his own without trashing them. I read several books to him a day, It is his favorite activity, He sits with his books for over an hour at a time, just poring over them, and he brings them to me or my wife to read to him.Parents are always eager to show that their baby shines the brightest, and the creator of the "Your Baby Can Read" program feeds on their need. Unfortunately, this program will give them something that they can show off for a little while, but will offer nothing in the way of actual advantage. They are MUCH better off simply reading and talking to their babies as much as possible, and ingraining language(s) into their little brains.Reading and talking to your children is the most important thing you can do for their academic development, however it is not a substitute for "Your Baby Can Read". This system has supplemented my baby's education in a way no other program available on or off market can.Mr Ichigo thinks he is an expert on "Your Baby Can Read" but actually he is just plain wrong. What he is saying is very misleading. He has obviously never used the "Your Baby Can Read" system the way I have.My baby recognizes the words, he knows what they mean, Ergo he is "Reading" the words.In many schools nowadays a child has to be able to read a certain amount of sight words(usually around 25) to make it into 1st grade.My child has been learning the "Your Baby Can Read" system since he was 3 months old.At age 18 months he can sight read many more words than 25 thanks to the "Your Baby Can Read System"+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Hi everyone,"Mr. Ichigo" here. Actually, I'm a woman, and that is not my name, but that's irrelevant. I encourage people to do their own research on this subject after reading what follows. Here are a few sites that back up what I say, and that discredit the idea that there is any advantage to a baby "reading". In short, it still may produce a fun baby trick, but won't lead to any lasting develo pmental or academic advantage. Any time a parent spends interacting with their babies and stimulating their brains is good, but don't fall for a program like this thinking that it will turn Junior into a genius, or put him above his peers. At the end of the day, 10 year old kids who used this as babies aren't going to be reading any better than they would have otherwise. Be careful consumers, and research before you buy. Thanks for reading!http://www.voxy.co.nz/national/research-finds-no-advantage-learning-read-age-five/5/33888http://jezebel.com/5926283/your-baby-can-read-goes-out-of-business-broke-and-accused-of-swindling-parentshttp://giftedkids.about.com/od/schoolissues/i/even_out_2.htm+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Hi Mr Ichigo, or Mrs Ichigo, or whoever you might be,perhaps it is irrelevant who you are, but it certainly is not irrelevant that you are posting under a false name. It certainly doesn't add to your credibility, that you won't even use your real name.I on the other hand, am not using an alias.I am the proud father of a 20 month old baby that can read.This is in large part, owing to the fact that I started him on the "Your Baby Can Read" system at age 3 months.You know the system contains books, flashcards, and DVDs. It is amazing how much material you get for the money.The box weighs 21 lbs, and I bet all the DVDs combined are less than a pound, so the bulk of what you are getting is unique sliding flashcards, regular flashcards and books.It is an entire system, based on the latest researchers, and theories in cognitive development.The research you posted is actually irrelevant, as it only looks at children aged 5 to 7.Your baby Can Read is designed for babies and toddlers, not children aged 5 years and older.You stated in your post:"At the end of the day, 10 year old kids who used this as babies aren't going to be reading any better than they would have otherwise"That is quite a statement, Mr Ichigo, or Mrs Ichigo, or whoever you are. Can you please back that up?Of course you can't, you are posing as an expert, and yet you can't offer any credentials because you are using an alias, and apparently you don't know the difference between a 5 year old child and a baby.If we listen to you and your research, then we might as well wait until kids are 7 before teaching them to read.I was reading full length novels, like "The Hobbit" by JRR Tolkien, and "Frankenstein" by Mary Shelly by the time I was 7 or 8. Are you honestly suggesting that a child who learned to read at age 7 could compete with a child who, like myself was reading by age 3, by the time we were both 10?The truth is that there is not much difference between teaching a kid to read at 5 versus 7, because 5 is already too late, as the following link here clearly shows:http://www.campaignforeducationusa.org/learn-the-issue-eceHere is a link that directly refutes what you are trying to suggest with your irrelevent link, which includes a number of statistics that clearly show the risks waiting until your child is 7 or even 5 before teaching him to read:http://www.ounceofprevention.org/about/why-early-childhood-investments-work.phpIf we listen to Ichigo, then I suppose we should wait until our kids are in 2nd grade before we teach them to read.Not to much of an expert I think.Anyway here are some links to real research that actually supports Dr. Titzer's claims about the benefits early learning.http://blog.brillkids.com/?p=235http://www.cal.org/earlylang/benefits/research_notes.htmlhttp://www.preschoolcalifornia.org/resources/research--studies/making-the-case.htmlhttps://www.littlepim.com/what-scientists-sayhttp://www.bestbeginningsalaska.org/why-early-learning-matters/researchhttp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120509123653.htmThank you Dr Titzer! ( http://www.yourbabycanread.com ) My baby is 20 months old and he can already sight read many more words than he can say, and our pediatrician says his speech development is about 6 months ahead of the average child his age.______________________________________________________Welcome, all, to this mess of a page!I highly encourage any parents interested in deciding whether this controversial system is something they want to use on their babies to put on some high boots, wade through this page, and then do some more research other places. As always, be wary of people and pages trying to sell you something, and maintain a healthy skepticism.http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/your-baby-can-read-not/For the record, I never claim to be an "expert" on this particular system, though I am familiar with its method and I believe it to be flawed. I am disagreeing with the idea perpetuated by the "baby genius" industry that whatever type of stimulation they are selling is going to be that one key that gives parents their Superbaby.I will say one final thing, before I incite a 10,000 word rebuttal; The use of an "alias" or "screen name" is hardly a new one on the internet, and it doesn't negate anything anyone says. I'm sure by now people are aware of this. For the record, it is just as easy to make up a fake name, along with a fake back story and fake credentials. People do it all the time. I prefer to keep it simple, and I encourage anyone reading any expert advice on the internet to keep in mind that the expert may or may not be who he says he is. It's a good general rule if you're going to be taking advice from the internet. Thanks for reading, and good luck.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi S., I will just call you S. since you have already stated that your name is not really Ichigo.Your link is really arguing over semantics. "ie what is the definition of reading."We have already been over this, apparently the author has never heard of the definition that is used in modern education known as "sight reading".So according to the author sight reading is not really reading. So what?If you are going to read the link that S. Just gave you, I would advise you to scroll down to the comments section of that link. You will see that the majority of them are parents like me, with a scientific background who have successfully used the "Your Baby Can Read" System and are raving about it, because of the miraculous results of the system.(Note by S: I also encourage readers to read the comments. I saw one commenter that is a parent with a scientific/medical background saying good things about the product and how it anecdotally worked for his toddler. Not a majority, however. I also saw many people who are skeptical, and many who are against it entirely. Another thoughtful article on the subject may be found here:http://www.the-child-listener.com/your-baby-cant-read-using-your-baby-can-read.htmFor further reading, I recommend the classic book, Why Johnny Can't Read. A great resource for anyone wanting to learn about the process of reading instruction.)Thank you Dr Titzer( http://www.yourbabycanread.com )And by the way S. if you don't want a long rebuttal from me, then don't post falsehoods on a subject which on which you have no direct experience, and which I am passionate about.My baby is 20 months old and he can sight read well over 50 words, so lets stop arguing on whether or not "Sight Reading" is actually a form of reading or not, because it is really an irrelevent tangent.Thank you-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi S. I tried to straighten this page out, by arranging everything chronologically so it could be a bit easier to follow. I was careful not to omit anything or alter any language.Thank you for clarifying, When I stated "Vast Majority" What I meant was Vast Majority of people who were claiming to have actually used the Your Baby Can Read System with their own children. I just looked at the comments again, and while there are plenty of skeptics, I did not see a single skeptic who had actually claimed to have used the system. On the other hand, the vast majority of individuals posting who have used the system with their own child, claimed that it was beneficial.Also I saw the other link which you posted; again this link falsely equivocates Dr Titzer's Program with the whole word method, which it clearly is not. I notice that it does not have any comments. I have also noticed that every negative article about "Your Baby Can Read" on the internet that I have seen, which does have comments, of the people claiming to have used the system, the vast majority, like me, have seen miraculous results with their children.One could use an analogy when Comparing Dr. Titzer's system to the whole word method.If the whole word method is like addition then Dr Titzer's "Your Baby Can Read" might be like algebra.Now, if you look at algebra closely you will see that it has plenty of addition in it, but to equivocate it with addition would still be a misnomer.The "Your Baby Can Read" system incorperates aspects of the "whole word method", but there is much more to it than that.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------I will say one final thing, because I think if there is one thing that anyone can take away from this, it's that the program and the methodology behind it is controversial and that there is no clear answer. Here is a summary, as I understand it:Pertaining to the actual question posed...Does it work? Well, I will say that it is clear that if what you are looking to do is be able to show your toddler flashcards and have him repeat the word written on the card, then yes, it will accomplish that. Though the fine print on the advertisement is similar to the fine print on weight loss plan ads which say that the average results are somewhat less impressive than what is demonstrated in the ad itself.The other implied claims, specifically that a toddler using this program will have a lasting academic advantage...I will amend my original answer to a "yes and no", and here's why.I will say "No", because when a child is given a head start in a subject, be it math, science, or reading, that head start disappears and his ability tends to even out in grammar school when instruction in school is given to all students at the same time. Those who started out ahead will have an easier time in the beginning, but when instruction catches up to them, they will be at the same level as everyone else, unless he gets individualized instruction from another source.I will say "Yes", because if you look at it as something that will engage the mind and stimulate the senses, then of course it will do that. In that sense it performs a similar function as any visual and mental stimulation, which we parents know is very important. Anything that helps that brain work and make those connections is a good thing. It is important to note that reading, be it phonetic decoding or sight-word reading, is not the ONLY visual/mental stimulation or even the best one. Physical activity, playing with blocks, being read to, all of the normal activities attentive parents engage in with their toddlers. All of these help. What the Baby-Genius industry counts on is people buying the idea that the program or video they sell will be the BEST stimulation money can buy, and that simply isn't true.So going back again to the original question, if taken as read...Yes. If you use that program with your toddler, he will probably repeat back to you the words that are on the card. Any further guarantee that your toddler will grow up to have an advantage in school, or that he will be reading (or understanding) adult-level novels when he's 5 years old, shouldn't be inferred.With that, I hope to end this debate, apparently not with an agreement, but at least amicably. Thanks for reading.____________________________________________________Well S,In Conclusion I would like to say that, I love the Your Baby Can Read System, and I do believe that it has helped me immensely in providing a simple and detailed platform by which I can lay the groundwork for my child's developing language skills. I want to reiterate that while it is a simple, viable, effective and economical supplement to reading and interacting with your child, it is by no means a substitute for the most important things, and I agree with S. that Reading, talking and interacting with your child, are by far the most important things you can do for your child's early education, and even if the reader does not acquire the system for his or her child, I want to emphasize that the reader can and should start reading toddler board books to their child on a daily basis as early as age 3 months, and I would encourage everyone with a baby to do this for their child's language development.It was a pleasure debating with you S., and I respect your integrity in debate even if I do not agree with all of your views, and I am pleased that we are able to conclude on good terms. This looks like a good place to end this debate amicably, Thank you S. and everyone.
