scholarly journals The difference of jurists in the development of the Quran Alkarim

2018 ◽  
Vol 227 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-153
Author(s):  
Dr. Naseer kareem Kazem Al Saadi
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Common People ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference

The study of the reasons for the difference of jurists in the development is an attempt to alleviate the tension caused by the difference between them, as well as being the presentation of the culture of opinion and opinion of the other, not every difference between scientists leads to the boycott and quarrel among the common people, is a sincere invitation to show that we disagree with The dispute, we want to clarify that there are natural reasons are called for the difference, such as issues follow the character of the jurist, through the nature of the language that the Koran came down, which led to differences of scholars in the extraction of the Koran

Between High Culture and Low Culture; and also The Difference Between Popular Culture and Folk Culture

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. 12
Author(s):  
Kunal Debnath
Keyword(s):  
Popular Culture ◽  
Folk Culture ◽  
Common People ◽  
High Culture ◽  
The World ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Low Culture

High culture is a collection of ideologies, beliefs, thoughts, trends, practices and works-- intellectual or creative-- that is intended for refined, cultured and educated elite people. Low culture is the culture of the common people and the mass. Popular culture is something that is always, most importantly, related to everyday average people and their experiences of the world; it is urban, changing and consumeristic in nature. Folk culture is the culture of preindustrial (premarket, precommodity) communities.

Entrepreneurship vs. Bioentrepreneurship

2021 ◽  
pp. 39-58
Author(s):  
Sneha Upreti
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Future Perspective ◽  
Developed Country ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Great Idea ◽  
New Business ◽  
Innovative Idea ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference

The word bioentrepreneurship and entrepreneurship share the similarity in the fact that they must have a great and an innovative idea behind starting a business setup and to raise an investment. Also, they both must have a great idea about marketing of the related products and managing their start-up. If we talk about the difference, the common difference is the sector or field in which a startup is carrying on. In simple words, entrepreneurship is the process of launching any new business based on an innovative idea. On the other hand, bioentrepreneurship is the process that is started in the field of science (i.e., biotechnology). Nowadays, bio-industrialization is the key to being a modern and developed country, and this is the only reason bioentrepreneurs are highly in demand. Thus, this chapter will help you to understand the pillars to setup a startup based on biotechnology that has an excellent future perspective not only for entrepreneurs but also for the nation.

Imperatives of visual versus auditory perception as pragmatic markers in English and Dutch

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniël Van Olmen
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Distribution ◽  
Auditory Perception ◽  
The Other ◽  
Common View ◽  
Pragmatic Markers ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One

This article examines the English and Dutch imperatives of intentional visual and auditory perception and in particular their use as pragmatic markers. Look, listen, kijk ‘look’ and luister ‘listen’ are compared with respect to frequency, distribution and usage. The difference between look and kijk, on the one hand, and listen and luister, on the other, is argued to be indicative of a more general cross-linguistic tendency. This tendency is explained in terms of the imperatives’ effectiveness in and likely recruitment for what has traditionally been called attention-getting and in terms of the common view of the nature of visual and auditory perception.

Effect of modification of the electrophilic center on the α effect

2005 ◽  
Vol 83 (9) ◽  
pp. 1365-1371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ik-Hwan Um ◽  
Ji-Youn Lee ◽  
Sun-Young Bae ◽  
Erwin Buncel
Keyword(s):  
Ground State ◽  
Strong Dependence ◽  
Solvation Energy ◽  
The Other ◽  
Substrate Structure ◽  
Leaving Group ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Impact

We report on a nucleophilic study of esters R-C(=X)-Y-Ar in which the electrophilic center has been modified by replacing O by S in the leaving group or carbonyl center: 4-nitrophenyl acetate (1), S-4-nitrophenyl thioacetate (2), 4-nitrophenyl benzoate (3), and O-4-nitrophenyl thionobenzoate (4). The studies include O– and S– nucleophiles as well as α nucleophiles in H2O at 25.0 ± 0.1 °C. The sulfur nucleophile (4-chlorothiophenoxide, 4-ClPhS–) exhibits significant enhanced reactivity for the reactions with thiol and thione esters 2 and 4 compared with their oxygen analogues 1 and 3. On the contrary, the common nucleophile OH– is much less reactive towards 2 and 4 compared with 1 and 3. The effect of changing both the electrophilic center and the nucleofugic center on the reactivity of the other oxygen nucleophiles is not so significant: 4-chlorophenoxide (4-ClPhO–) is four to six times more reactive in the reactions with thiol and thione esters 2 and 4 compared with their oxygen analogues 1 and 3. The α effects exhibited by butan-2,3-dione monoximate (Ox–) and HOO– are strongly dependent on the nature of the electrophilic center of the substrates, indicating that the difference in the ground-state solvation energy cannot be fully responsible for the α effect. Our results clearly emphasize the strong dependence of the α effect on the substrate structure, notably, the nature of the electrophilic center. The impact of change in the nucleofuge (1→2) and the electrophilic center (3→4) on reactivity indicates that α nucleophiles will need to be “purpose built” for decontamination and nucleophilic degradation of specific biocides.Key words: α effect, nucleophilicity, nucleofuge effect, electrophilicity, polarizability.

The Standard of Living in Pakistan --- Better or Worse?

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-140
Author(s):  
Salman Ahmad
Keyword(s):  
Total Population ◽  
The Other ◽  
Standard Of Living ◽  
Economic Power ◽  
Common People ◽  
Standards Of Living ◽  
The Common

In a democracy there is scarcely any public question of greater importance than the standard of living of the common people. It is essential to know the actual level of this standard of living, and whether it is improving or deteriorating. There can be two types of standards of living. One is the standard of living of the society as a whole, and the other is the standard of a group within the society. It is perfectly possible for the standard of the society as a whole to be improving, while that of one or more groups within the society is declining. Moreover, if the distribution of economic power in the society is very unequal, it may happen that the group, the standard of which is declining may constitute a very large proportion, even a majority, of the total population.

Tevul Yom and the Red Heifer: Pharisaic and Sadducean Halakah

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 254-273
Author(s):  
Hannan Birenboim
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Common People ◽  
The Common ◽  
The One ◽  
The Masses

AbstractBoth the Qumran scrolls and the rabbinic sources teach of a controversy between the Pharisees, on the one hand, and the Sadducees and the Qumran sect, on the other, concerning the standing of the red heifer: The Sadducees, considering the red heifer as a sacrifice, held that a tevul yom was not permitted to deal with the heifer, whereas the Pharisees, not considering the red heifer as a sacrifice, held that a tevul yom was permitted to deal with it. This controversy derived from the Pharisees' desire to enable the common people to participate as much as possible in divine worship: by not considering the red heifer as a sacrifice, they made it possible for the masses to participate in the preparation of the ashes and even to sprinkle it upon the impure; this was opposed by the Sadducees and the Qumran sectarians.

scholarly journals A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Linguistic Features of Billboards

2021 ◽  
Vol VI (I) ◽  
pp. 356-362
Author(s):  
Saleha Aftab ◽  
Muhammad Khurram Iqbal ◽  
Abdul Rashid
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
Critical Discourse Analysis ◽  
Comprehensive Analysis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Critical Discourse ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Common People ◽  
Maximum Profit ◽  
The Common ◽  
Real Picture

The present research, "A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Linguistic Features of Billboards", has been accomplished in order to make a comprehensive analysis of the fact how advertising is manipulating and altering the basic philosophies, dogmas, creeds and ideologies of the common people. Advertising is a vast field, and it has influenced the lives of all of us in the last decades. Keeping this factor in view, the researcher has made an attempt to uncover those aspects which remain hidden in the glamorous and eye-catching commercials which contribute to the capitalist's efforts to make maximum profit by thrusting his products on the customers. The researcher has done the linguistic analysis by using Norman Fairclough's model of Critical Discourse Analysis (1993) of the billboard advertisements. The researcher has analyzed the language and images used on the billboards and had made an attempt to find out the basic notions for which these linguistic expressions have been used in the boards. For this purpose, he uses various tactics. The sincerity which is illustrated in the billboard advertisements by the advertiser is not factual. The real picture is on the other side.

[fo. 26] The Thirde Yeare of King Henrie the Fourth

1991 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 205-227
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Common People ◽  
The North ◽  
The Common ◽  
The One

This yeare in the moneth of March a blazing starre appeared, first spreading the flames round, then stretching them towardes the north, which astrologers (whose arte & errour are nere neighbours) conjecture ether to cause or to portend some tragicall event.About Whitsonntide certaine persons, whose hopes depended upon noe honest meanes, did newlie confederate against the king, with whose majesty theire malice continuallie contended in increase. And to drawe some authoritie to theire attemptes, they gave forth that King Richard was living and desired the aide of his loving people; that by extreame violence of the time hee was constrained to keepe unknowne, but upon some declaration of his frendes hee would appeare, & royallie rewarde those whoe should bee readie to adventure for him. This was whisoered uncertainely at the first, as in dangerous newes it is usuall; afterwardes it was confidently committed to the credulous eares ether of the weake sorte or of the turbulent & busie minded, the one being easie, the other being earnest for innovations. Among these, the reporte running variously concerning King Richards death, it was the more easily beleeved that hee might bee alive. The first brunt of this bruite much shaked the common people, wavering by nature & slowe to settle in a new subjection, but the king composed [fo. 26v] himselfe to a carelesse securitie, changing nether countenance nor place, ether through haughtinesse of courage, or because hee knew the truth lighter then the reporte. And indeed, upon apprehension of a certaine preist in Ware who was the principall both authour & actor of this devise, all the terrour vanished to a toye.

A method for observing the eclipses of the moon, free from the common inconveniencies, as it was left by the learned Mr. Rook, late Gresham-Professor of Geometry

1665 ◽  
Vol 1 (22) ◽  
pp. 388-390
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
The Moon ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Made In

Eclipses of the moon are observed for two principal ends; one astronomical, that by comparing observations with calculations, the Theory of the moons motion may be perfected, and the tables thereof reformed: the other, geographical, that by comparing among themselves the observations of the same ecliptick phases, made in divers places, the difference of meridians or longitudes of those places may be discerned.

Having discovered this fact, the defendant refused to deliver. A majority of the court held that the parties had contracted on the understanding that that the cow was incapable of breeding. Accordingly, there had been a mistake not merely as to quality, but as to the very nature of the thing sold. It was thought that there was as much difference between an ox and a cow as there was between the animal the plaintiff bought and the one which both parties believed to be the subject matter of the contract. The difficulty with Sherwood v Walker when compared with the reasoning employed in Bell v Lever Bros is that the former looks suspiciously like a case in which the court has rectified what amounts to little more than a bad bargain. One way of viewing the difference between Sherwood and Bell is that the cases reveal a policy conflict in the way different judges approach the issue of risk allocation. On the one hand, there is a market-individualist approach to cases of mistake which seeks to uphold the sanctity of contracts and will therefore result in only the smallest number of cases in which the courts will upset a bargain on the ground of a shared mistake. On the other hand, there are cases in which the courts are more prepared to consider notions of fairness and justice in determining whether a mistake invalidates an agreement. It is not surprising that this alternative approach has developed in equity rather than at common law, as a simple glance at the form of relief granted in each case reveals a substantial difference. The common law answer in cases of shared fundamental mistake is that the contract is void ab initio – the contract is treated as if it never existed. In contrast, the equitable solution is to order rescission of the contract, but on terms that attempt to do justice between the parties. Thus, it is possible in equity to order rescission of the contract but then to add a rider to the effect that there should be a renegotiation of the contract on terms which take account of the fact in respect of which the parties were mistaken. In Solle v Butcher, the defendant leased to the plaintiff a flat. Both parties believed that the relevant property was not covered by the provisions of the Rent Restriction Acts, with the result that the defendant could charge a rent of £250 per annum. However, it later transpired that the relevant legislation was applicable with the result that the maximum rent payable was only £140. Such a mistake would not have been operative at common law, but the court held that the contract was voidable in equity, provided there was a fundamental mistake and no fault on the part of the person seeking relief: Solle v Butcher [1950] 1 KB 671, CA, p 690

1995 ◽  
pp. 324-330
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Risk Allocation ◽  
Policy Conflict ◽  
Relevant Property ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document