text:
The MAGNETOSPHERE OF SATURN is the cavity created in the flow of the solar wind by the planet's internally generated magnetic field. Discovered in 1979 by the _Pioneer 11_ spacecraft, Saturn's magnetosphere is the second largest of any planet in the Solar System after Jupiter. The magnetopause, the boundary between Saturn's magnetosphere and the solar wind, is located at a distance of about 20 Saturn radii from the planet's center, while its magnetotail stretches hundreds of Saturn radii behind it.

Saturn's magnetosphere is filled with plasmas originating from both the planet and its moons. The main source is the small moon Enceladus, which ejects as much as 1,000 kg/s of water vapor from the geysers on its south pole, a portion of which is ionized and forced to co-rotate with the Saturn’s magnetic field. This loads the field with as much as 100 kg of water group ions per second. This plasma gradually moves out from the inner magnetosphere via the interchange instability mechanism and then escapes through the magnetotail.

The interaction between Saturn's magnetosphere and the solar wind generates bright oval aurorae around the planet's poles observed in visible, infrared and ultraviolet light. The aurorae are related to the powerful saturnian kilometric radiation (SKR), which spans the frequency interval between 100 kHz to 1300 kHz and was once thought to modulate with a period equal to the planet's rotation. However, later measurements showed that the periodicity of the SKR's modulation varies by as much as 1%, and so probably does not exactly coincide with Saturn’s true rotational period, which as of 2010 remains unknown. Inside the magnetosphere there are radiation belts, which house particles with energy as high as tens of megaelectronvolts. The energetic particles have significant influence on the surfaces of inner icy moons of Saturn.

In 1980–1981 the magnetosphere of Saturn was studied by the _Voyager_ spacecraft. Up until September 2017 it was a subject of ongoing investigation by Cassini mission, which arrived in 2004 and spent over 13 years observing the planet.

Discovery

Immediately after the discovery of Jupiter's decametric radio emissions in 1955, attempts were made to detect a similar emission from Saturn, but with inconclusive results.[1] The first evidence that Saturn might have an internally generated magnetic field came in 1974, with the detection of weak radio emissions from the planet at the frequency of about 1 MHz.

These medium wave emissions were modulated with a period of about , which was interpreted as Saturn's rotation period.[2] Nevertheless, the evidence available in the 1970s was too inconclusive and some scientists thought that Saturn might lack a magnetic field altogether, while others even speculated that the planet could lie beyond the heliopause.[3] The first definite detection of the saturnian magnetic field was made only on September 1, 1979, when it was passed through by the Pioneer 11 spacecraft, which measured its magnetic field strength directly.[4]

Structure

Internal field

Like Jupiter's magnetic field, Saturn's is created by a fluid dynamo within a layer of circulating liquid metallic hydrogen in its outer core.[5] Like Earth, Saturn's magnetic field is mostly a dipole, with north and south poles at the ends of a single magnetic axis.[6] On Saturn, like on Jupiter, the north magnetic pole is located in the northern hemisphere, and the south magnetic pole lies in the southern hemisphere, so that magnetic field lines point away from the north pole and towards the south pole. This is reversed compared to the Earth, where the north magnetic pole lies in the southern hemisphere.[7] Saturn's magnetic field also has quadrupole, octupole and higher components, though they are much weaker than the dipole.[8]

The magnetic field strength at Saturn's equator is about 21 μT (0.21 G), which corresponds to a dipole magnetic moment of about 4.6 T•m³.[9] This makes Saturn's magnetic field slightly weaker than Earth's; however, its magnetic moment is about 580 times larger.[10] Saturn's magnetic dipole is strictly aligned with its rotational axis, meaning that the field, uniquely, is highly axisymmetric.[11] The dipole is slightly shifted (by 0.037 Rs) along Saturn's rotational axis towards the north pole.[12]

Size and shape

Saturn's internal magnetic field deflects the solar wind, a stream of ionized particles emitted by the Sun, away from its surface, preventing it from interacting directly with its atmosphere and instead creating its own region, called a magnetosphere, composed of a plasma very different from that of the solar wind.[13] The magnetosphere of Saturn is the second–largest magnetosphere in the Solar System after that of Jupiter.[14]

As with Earth's magnetosphere, the boundary separating the solar wind's plasma from that within Saturn's magnetosphere is called the magnetopause.[15] The magnetopause distance from the planet's center at the subsolar point{{#tag:ref|The subsolar point is a point on a planet, never fixed, at which the Sun appears directly overhead.|group=note}} varies widely from 16 to 27 Rs (Rs=60,330 km is the equatorial radius of Saturn).[16][17] The magnetopause's position depends on the pressure exerted by the solar wind, which in turn depends on solar activity. The average magnetopause standoff distance is about 22 Rs.[18] In front of the magnetopause (at the distance of about 27 Rs from the planet)[19] lies the bow shock, a wake-like disturbance in the solar wind caused by its collision with the magnetosphere. The region between the bow shock and magnetopause is called the magnetosheath.[20]

At the opposite side of the planet, the solar wind stretches Saturn's magnetic field lines into a long, trailing magnetotail,[21] which consists of two lobes, with the magnetic field in the northern lobe pointing away from Saturn and the southern pointing towards it.[22] The lobes are separated by a thin layer of plasma called the tail current sheet.[23] Like Earth’s, Saturn's tail is a channel through which solar plasma enters the inner regions of the magnetosphere.[24] Similar to Jupiter, the tail is the conduit through which the plasma of the internal magnetospheric origin leaves the magnetosphere.[25] The plasma moving from the tail to the inner magnetosphere is heated and forms a number of radiation belts.[26]

Magnetospheric regions

[The structure of Saturn's magnetosphere] Saturn's magnetosphere is often divided into four regions.[27] The innermost region co-located with Saturn's planetary rings, inside approximately 3 Rs, has a strictly dipolar magnetic field. It is largely devoid of plasma, which is absorbed by ring particles, although the radiation belts of Saturn are located in this innermost region just inside and outside the rings.[28] The second region between 3 and 6 Rs contains the cold plasma torus and is called the inner magnetosphere. It contains the densest plasma in the saturnian system. The plasma in the torus originates from the inner icy moons and particularly from Enceladus.[29] The magnetic field in this region is also mostly dipolar.[30] The third region lies between 6 and 12–14 Rs and is called the dynamic and extended plasma sheet. The magnetic field in this region is stretched and non-dipolar,[31] whereas the plasma is confined to a thin equatorial plasma sheet.[32] The fourth outermost region is located beyond 15 Rs at high latitudes and continues up to magnetopause boundary. It is characterized by a low plasma density and a variable, non-dipolar magnetic field strongly influenced by the Solar wind.[33]

In the outer parts of Saturn's magnetosphere beyond approximately 15–20 Rs[34] the magnetic field near the equatorial plane is highly stretched and forms a disk-like structure called _magnetodisk_.[35] The disk continues up to the magnetopause on the dayside and transitions into the magnetotail on the nightside.[36] Near the dayside it can be absent when the magnetosphere is compressed by the Solar wind, which usually happens when the magnetopause distance is smaller than 23 Rs. On the nightside and flanks of the magnetosphere the magnetodisk is always present.[37] The Saturn's magnetodisk is a much smaller analog of the Jovian magnetodisk.[38]

The plasma sheet in the Saturn's magnetosphere has a bowl-like shape not found in any other known magnetosphere. When Cassini arrived in 2004, there was a winter in the northern hemisphere. The measurements of the magnetic field and plasma density revealed that the plasma sheet was warped and lay to the north of the equatorial plane looking like a giant bowl. Such a shape was unexpected.[39]

Dynamics

[Image of plasma cloud around Saturn (Cassini)|300px] The processes driving Saturn's magnetosphere are similar to those driving Earth's and Jupiter's.[40] Just as Jupiter's magnetosphere is dominated by plasma co–rotation and mass–loading from Io, so Saturn's magnetosphere is dominated by plasma co–rotation and mass–loading from Enceladus. However, Saturn's magnetosphere is much smaller in size, while its inner region contains too little plasma to seriously distend it and create a large magnetodisk.[41]{{#tag:ref|On the dayside a noticeable magnetodisk only forms when the Solar wind pressure is low, and the magnetosphere has a size larger than about 23 Rs. However, when the magnetosphere is compressed by the Solar wind the dayside magnetodisk is quite small. On the other hand, in the dawn sector of the magnetosphere the disk-like configuration is present permanently.[42]|group=note}} This means that it is much more strongly influenced by the solar wind, and that, like Earth's magnetic field, its dynamics are affected by reconnection with the wind similar to the Dungey cycle.[43]

Another distinguishing feature of Saturn's magnetosphere is high abundance of neutral gas around the planet. As revealed by ultraviolet observation of Cassini, the planet is enshrouded in a large cloud of hydrogen, water vapor and their dissociative products like hydroxyl, extending as far as 45 Rs from Saturn. In the inner magnetosphere the ratio of neutrals to ions is around 60 and it increases in the outer magnetosphere, which means that the entire magnetospheric volume is filled with relatively dense weakly ionized gas. This is different, for instance, from Jupiter or Earth, where ions dominate over neutral gas, and has consequences for the magnetospheric dynamics.[44]

Sources and transport of plasma

The plasma composition in Saturn's inner magnetosphere is dominated by the water group ions: O+, H₂O+, OH+ and others, hydronium ion (H₃O+), HO₂+ and O₂+,[45] although protons and nitrogen ions (N+) are also present.[46][47] The main source of water is Enceladus, which releases 300–600 kg/s of water vapor from the geysers near its south pole.[48][49] The released water and hydroxyl (OH) radicals (a product of water's dissociation) form a rather thick torus around the moon's orbit at 4 Rs with densities up to 10,000 molecules per cubic centimeter.[50] At least 100 kg/s of this water is eventually ionized and added to the co–rotating magnetospheric plasma.[51] Additional sources of water group ions are Saturn's rings and other icy moons.[52] The Cassini spacecraft also observed small amounts of N+ ions in the inner magnetosphere, which probably originate from Enceladus as well.[53] [Cassini image of the ring current around Saturn carried by energetic (20–50 keV) ions] In the outer parts of the magnetosphere the dominant ions are protons, which originate either from the Solar wind or Saturn's ionosphere.[54] Titan, which orbits close to the magnetopause boundary at 20 Rs, is not a significant source of plasma.[55][56]

The relatively cold plasma in the innermost region of Saturn's magnetosphere, inside 3 Rs (near the rings) consists mainly of O+ and O₂+ ions.[57] There ions together with electrons form an ionosphere surrounding the saturnian rings.[58]

For both Jupiter and Saturn, transport of plasma from the inner to the outer parts of the magnetosphere is thought to be related to interchange instability.[59][60] In the case of Saturn, magnetic flux tubes loaded with cold, water–rich plasma interchange with flux tubes filled with hot plasma arriving from the outer magnetosphere.[61] The instability is driven by centrifugal force exerted by the plasma on the magnetic field.[62] The cold plasma is eventually removed from the magnetosphere by plasmoids formed when the magnetic field reconnects in the magnetotail.[63] The plasmoids move down the tail and escape from the magnetosphere.[64] The reconnection or substorm process is thought to be under the control of the solar wind and Saturn's largest moon Titan, which orbits near the outer boundary of the magnetosphere.[65]

In the magnetodisk region, beyond 6 Rs, the plasma within the co–rotating sheet exerts a significant centrifugal force on the magnetic field, causing it to stretch.[66]{{#tag:ref|The contribution of the plasma thermal pressure gradient force may also be significant.[67] In addition, an important contribution to the ring current is provided by energetic ions with energy of more than about 10 keV.[68]|name=n2|group=note}} This interaction creates a current in the equatorial plane flowing azimuthally with rotation and extending as far as 20 Rs from the planet.[69] The total strength of this current varies from 8 to 17 MA.[70][71] The ring current in the saturnian magnetosphere is highly variable and depends of the solar wind pressure, being stronger when the pressure is weaker.[72] The magnetic moment associated with this current slightly (by about 10 nT) depresses the magnetic field in the inner magnetosphere,[73] although it increases the total magnetic moment of the planet and causing the size of the magnetosphere to become larger.[74]

Aurorae

[The northern aurora of Saturn in the infrared light]

Saturn has bright polar aurorae, which have been observed in the ultraviolet, visible and near infrared light.[75] The aurorae usually look like bright continuous circles (ovals) surrounding the poles of the planet.[76] The latitude of auroral ovals varies in the range of 70–80°;[77] the average position is for the southern aurora, while the northern aurora is closer to the pole by about 1.5°.[78]{{#tag:ref|The difference between the southern and northern aurorae is related to the shift of the internal magnetic dipole to the northern hemisphere—the magnetic field in the northern hemisphere is slightly stronger than in the southern one.[79][80]|group=note}} From time to time either aurorae can assume a spiral shape instead of oval. In this case it begins near midnight at a latitude of around 80°, then its latitude decreases to as low as 70° as it continues into the dawn and day sectors (counterclockwise).[81] In the dusk sector the auroral latitude increases again, although when it returns to the night sector it still has a relatively low latitude and does not connect to the brighter dawn part.[82]

[Saturn and its northern auroras (composite image).[83]]

Unlike Jupiter's, the Saturn's main auroral ovals are not related to the breakdown of the co–rotation of the plasma in the outer parts of the planet's magnetosphere.[84] The aurorae on Saturn are thought to be connected to the reconnection of the magnetic field under the influence of the Solar wind (Dungey cycle),[85] which drives an upward current (about 10 million amperes) from the ionosphere and leads to the acceleration and precipitation of energetic (1–10 keV) electrons into the polar thermosphere of Saturn.[86] The saturnian aurorae are more similar to those of the Earth, where they are also Solar wind driven.[87] The ovals themselves correspond to the boundaries between open and closed magnetic field lines—so called polar caps, which are thought to reside at the distance of 10–15° from the poles.[88]

The aurorae of Saturn are highly variable.[89] Their location and brightness strongly depends on the Solar wind pressure: the aurorae become brighter and move closer to the poles when the Solar wind pressure increases.[90] The bright auroral features are observed to rotate with the angular speed of 60–75% that of Saturn. From time to time bright features appear in the dawn sector of the main oval or inside it.[91] The average total power emitted by the aurorae is about 50 GW in the far ultraviolet (80–170 nm) and 150–300 GW in the near-infrared (3–4 μm—H₃+ emissions) parts of the spectrum.[92]

Saturn kilometric radiation

[The spectrum of Saturn's radio emissions compared with spectra of four other magnetized planets] Saturn is the source of rather strong low frequency radio emissions called Saturn kilometric radiation (SKR). The frequency of SKR lies in the range 10–1300 kHz (wavelength of a few kilometers) with the maximum around 400 kHz.[93] The power of these emissions is strongly modulated by the rotation of the planet and is correlated with changes in the solar wind pressure. For instance, when Saturn was immersed into the giant magnetotail of Jupiter during Voyager 2 flyby in 1981, the SKR power decreased greatly or even ceased completely.[94][95] The kilometric radiation is thought to be generated by the Cyclotron Maser Instability of the electrons moving along magnetic field lines related to the auroral regions of Saturn.[96] Thus the SKR is related to the auroras around the poles of the planet. The radiation itself comprises spectrally diffuse emissions as well as narrowband tones with bandwidths as narrow as 200 Hz. In the frequency–time plane arc like features are often observed, much like in the case of the Jovian kilometric radiation.[97] The total power of the SKR is around 1 GW.[98]

The modulation of the radio emissions by planetary rotation is traditionally used to determine the rotation period of the interiors of fluid giant planets.[99] In the case of Saturn, however, this appears to be impossible, as the period varies at the timescale of tens years. In 1980–1981 the periodicity in the radio emissions as measured by Voyager 1 and 2 was , which was then adopted as the rotational period of Saturn. Scientists were surprised when Galileo and then Cassini returned a different value—.[100] Further observation indicated that the modulation period changes by as much as 1% on the characteristic timescale of 20–30 days with an additional long term trend. There is a correlation between the period and solar wind speed, however, the causes of this change remain a mystery.[101] One reason may be that the saturnian perfectly axially symmetric magnetic field fails to impose a strict corotation on the magnetospheric plasma making it slip relative to the planet. The lack of a precise correlation between the variation period of SKR and planetary rotation makes it all but impossible to determine the true rotational period of Saturn.[102]

Radiation belts

[Saturn's radiation belts] Saturn has relatively weak radiation belts, because energetic particles are absorbed by the moons and particulate material orbiting the planet.[103] The densest (main) radiation belt lies between the inner edge of the Enceladus gas torus at 3.5 Rs and the outer edge of the A Ring at 2.3 Rs. It contains protons and relativistic electrons with energies from hundreds of kiloelectronvolts (keV) to as high as tens of megaelectronvolts (MeV) and possibly other ions.[104] Beyond 3.5 Rs the energetic particles are absorbed by the neutral gas and their numbers drop, although less energetic particles with energies in the range of hundreds keV appear again beyond 6 Rs—these are the same particles that contribute to the ring current.[105][106] The electrons in the main belt probably originate in the outer magnetosphere or Solar wind, from which they are transported by the diffusion and then adiabatically heated.[107] However, the energetic protons consist of two populations of particles. The first population with energies of less than about 10 MeV has the same origin as electrons,[108] while the second one with the maximum flux near 20 MeV results from the interaction of cosmic rays with solid material present in the Saturnian system (so called cosmic ray albedo neutron decay process—CRAND).[109] The main radiation belt of Saturn is strongly influenced by interplanetary solar wind disturbances.[110]

The innermost region of the magnetosphere near the rings is generally devoid of energetic ions and electrons because they are absorbed by ring particles.[111] Saturn, however, has the second radiation belt discovered by Cassini in 2004 and located just inside the innermost D Ring.[112] This belt probably consists of energetic charged particles formed via the CRAND process or of ionized energetic neutral atoms coming from the main radiation belt.[113]

The saturnian radiation belts are generally much weaker than those of Jupiter and do not emit much microwave radiation (with frequency of a few Gigahertz). Estimates shows that their decimetric radio emissions (DIM) would be impossible to detect from the Earth.[114] Nevertherless the high energy particles cause weathering of the surfaces of the icy moons and sputter water, water products and oxygen from them.[115]

Interaction with rings and moons

[False-colour composite image showing the glow of auroras streaking out about 1,000 kilometres from the cloud tops of Saturn's south polar region] The abundant population of solid bodies orbiting Saturn including moons as well as ring particles exerts a strong influence on the magnetosphere of Saturn. The plasma in the magnetosphere co-rotates with the planet, continuously impinging on the trailing hemispheres of slowly moving moons.[116] While ring particles and the majority of moons only passively absorb plasma and energetic charged particles, three moons – Enceladus, Dione and Titan – are significant sources of new plasma.[117][118] The absorption of energetic electrons and ions reveals itself by noticeable gaps in the radiation belts of Saturn near the moon's orbits, while the dense rings of Saturn completely eliminate all energetic electrons and ions closer than 2.2 RS, creating a low radiation zone in the vicinity of the planet.[119] The absorption of the co-rotating plasma by a moon disturbs the magnetic field in its empty wake—the field is pulled towards a moon, creating a region of a stronger magnetic field in the near wake.[120]

The three moons mentioned above add new plasma into the magnetosphere. By far the strongest source is Enceladus, which ejects a fountain of water vapor, carbon dioxide and nitrogen through cracks in its south pole region.[121] A fraction of this gas is ionized by the hot electrons and solar ultraviolet radiation and is added to the co-rotational plasma flow.[122] Titan once was thought to be the principal source of plasma in Saturn's magnetosphere, especially of nitrogen. The new data obtained by Cassini in 2004–2008 established that it is not a significant source of nitrogen after all,[123] although it may still provide significant amounts of hydrogen (due to dissociation of methane).[124] Dione is the third moon producing more new plasma than it absorbs. The mass of plasma created in the vicinity of it (about 6 g/s) is about 1/300 as much as near Enceladus.[125] However, even this low value can not be explained only by sputtering of its icy surface by energetic particles, which may indicate that Dione is endogenously active like Enceladus. The moons that create new plasma slow the motion of the co-rotating plasma in their vicinity, which leads to the pile-up of the magnetic field lines in front of them and weakening of the field in their wakes—the field drapes around them.[126] This is the opposite to what is observed for the plasma-absorbing moons.

The plasma and energetic particles present in the magnetosphere of Saturn, when absorbed by ring particles and moons, cause radiolysis of the water ice. Its products include ozone, hydrogen peroxide and molecular oxygen.[127] The first one has been detected in the surfaces of Rhea and Dione, while the second is thought to be responsible for the steep spectral slopes of moons' reflectivities in the ultraviolet region.[128] The oxygen produced by radiolysis forms tenuous atmospheres around rings and icy moons. The ring atmosphere was detected by Cassini for the first time in 2004.[129] A fraction of the oxygen gets ionized, creating a small population of O₂+ ions in the magnetosphere.[130] The influence of Saturn's magnetosphere on its moons is more subtle than the influence of Jupiter on its moons. In the latter case, the magnetosphere contains a significant number of sulfur ions, which, when implanted in surfaces, produce characteristic spectral signatures. In the case of Saturn, the radiation levels are much lower and the plasma is composed mainly of water products, which, when implanted, are indistinguishable from the ice already present.[131]

Exploration

As of 2014 the magnetosphere of Saturn has been directly explored by four spacecraft. The first mission to study the magnetosphere was Pioneer 11 in September 1979. Pioneer 11 discovered the magnetic field and made some measurements of the plasma parameters.[132] In November 1980 and August 1981, Voyager 1–2 probes investigated the magnetosphere using an improved set of instruments.[133] From the fly-by trajectories they measured the planetary magnetic field, plasma composition and density, high energy particle energy and spatial distribution, plasma waves and radio emissions. Cassini spacecraft was launched in 1997, and arrived in 2004, making the first measurements in more than two decades. The spacecraft continued to provide information about the magnetic field and plasma parameters of the saturnian magnetosphere until its intentional destruction on September 15, 2017.

In the 1990s, the Ulysses spacecraft conducted extensive measurements of the Saturnian kilometric radiation (SKR),[134] which is unobservable from Earth due to the absorption in the ionosphere.[135] The SKR is powerful enough to be detected from a spacecraft at the distance of several astronomical units from the planet. Ulysses discovered that the period of the SKR varies by as much as 1%, and therefore is not directly related to the rotation period of the interior of Saturn.[136]

Notes

[1] Smith, 1959

[2] Brown, 1975

[3] Kivelson, 2005, p. 2077

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9] Belenkaya, 2006, pp. 1145–46

[10] Russel, 1993, p. 694

[11] Russel, 1993, pp. 717–718

[12]

[13]

[14] Blanc, 2005, p. 238

[15]

[16] Russel, 1993, p. 709, Table 4

[17] Gombosi, 2009, p. 247

[18]

[19] Gombosi, 2009, p. 206, Table 9.1

[20] Russel, 1993, pp. 690–692

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 206–209

[25]

[26]

[27] Andre, 2008, pp. 10–15

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32] Andre, 2008, pp. 6–9

[33]

[34] Mauk, 2009, pp. 317–318

[35]

[36] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 231–234

[37]

[38]

[39] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 211–212

[40] Blanc, 2005, pp. 264–273

[41] Kivelson, 2005, pp. 303–313

[42]

[43]

[44] Mauk, 2009, pp. 282–283

[45] Sittler, 2008, pp. 4, 16–17

[46] Young, 2005

[47] Smith, 2008

[48]

[49]

[50] Tokar, 2006

[51]

[52] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 216–219

[53] Smith, 2008, pp. 1–2

[54] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 219–220

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 206, 215–216

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 237–240

[64]

[65] Russell, 2008, p. 1

[66] Bunce, 2008, pp. 1–2

[67] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 225–231

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73] Bunce, 2008, p. 20

[74]

[75] Kurth, 2009, pp. 334–342

[76]

[77] Bhardwaj, 2000, pp. 328–333

[78] Nichols, 2009

[79]

[80] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 209–211

[81] Kurth, 2009, pp. 335–336

[82]

[83]

[84]

[85]

[86] Cowley, 2008, pp. 2627–2628

[87]

[88]

[89] Clark, 2005

[90]

[91]

[92]

[93]

[94]

[95]

[96] Kurth, 2009, pp. 341–348

[97]

[98] Zarka, 2005, pp. 378–379

[99] Zarka, 2007

[100]

[101]

[102] Gurnett, 2005, p. 1256

[103]

[104]

[105]

[106]

[107]

[108]

[109]

[110]

[111] Gombosi, 2009, pp. 221–225

[112] Andre, 2008, pp. 11–12

[113]

[114] Zarka, 2005, pp. 384–385

[115] Paranicas, 2008

[116]

[117] Mauk, 2009, pp. 286–289

[118] Leisner, 2007

[119]

[120] Mauk, 2009, pp. 290–293

[121]

[122]

[123]

[124] Mauk, 2009, pp. 283–284, 286–287

[125]

[126] Mauk, 2009, pp. 293–296

[127] Mauk, 2009, pp. 285–286

[128]

[129] Johnson, 2008, pp. 393–394

[130]

[131]

[132]

[133]

[134]

[135] Zarka, 2005, p. 372

[136]

title: Magnetosphere of Saturn

question: Which planet has the largest magnetosphere?

answer: Jupiter

question: Where do the plasmas in the magnetosphere originate?

answer: It comes from the planet itself as well as from its moons. The main source is the small moon Enceladus, which ejects as much as 1,000 kg/s of water vapor from the geysers on its south pole, a portion of which is ionized and forced to co-rotate with the Saturn’s magnetic field.

question: How does the magnetosphere release the plasma?

answer: This plasma gradually moves out from the inner magnetosphere via the interchange instability mechanism and then escapes through the magnetotail.

question: What causes the auroras around Saturn's poles?

answer: The interaction between the magnetosphere and the solar wind causes the auroroas.

question: What is the true rotational period of Saturn?

answer: As of 2010, it was unknown.

question: How is Jupiter's magnetic field created?

answer: It is created by a fluid dynamo within a layer of circulating liquid metallic hydrogen in its outer core.

question: What unexpected discovery did Casini make in 2004?

answer: It found that the plasma sheet in Saturn's magnetosphere was warped and looked like a giant bowl. This is unknown in any other magnetosphere and was unexpected.


split: train

text:
[]

Sony knows from phone cameras. After all, it’s the company’s components that fuel the competition’s hardware. As such, it makes sense that it’s opted to focus on the feature for a pair of new additions to its Xperia X line, the flagship 5.2-inch XZ and 4.2-inch Compact.

The company has moved to what it’s called triple image sensing technology, built around its Exmore RS sensor, combined with Predictive Hybrid AF for moving objects and Laser AF, which should help get good shots in low light. The RGBC-IR (red, green, blue, clear and infrared) sensor, meanwhile, helps auto-correct white balance based on the color of the light source.

Sony’s made a clear point here not to lead with megapixel count – often the first thing out of any manufacturer’s mouth when discussing phone cameras – though there’s an extremely generous 23MP on-board here. The company’s packed in a number of other photo-friendly features as well, including Intelligent Active Mode borrowed its camcorders and five-axis image stabilization.

[P8253098]

With the XZ, you also get a front facing 13-megapixel camera with a wide angle for some gloriously panoramic selfies. The flagship can also do 4K – one of the key features lacking in the 4.2-inch version.

[P8253096]

The design on the devices are pretty slick, and they feel nice in the hand, sporting what the company calls its loop surface, a rounded form factor that brings to mind a lot of what Nokia was offering in the smartphone space back in the day. The XZ is also sports an 1P68 waterproof rating and a Snapdragon 820 inside. Both handsets also sport USB-C ports on the bottom.

question: When was the article written?

answer: That information can't be found

question: What cell phone is being described?

answer: The Sony Xperia XZ

question: What is the purpose of the RGBC-IR sensor?

answer: To help auto-correct white balance

question: What is the resolution of the front-facing camera?

answer: 13 megapixels

question: Write a ~1 sentence summary.

answer: The article describes the camera features of the Sony Xperia XZ cell phone.


text:
The SEXUAL ABUSE IN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF CLOYNE was investigated by the Commission of Investigation, Dublin Archdiocese, Catholic Diocese of Cloyne, examining how allegations of sexual abuse of children in the diocese were dealt with by the church and state. The investigation was led by Judge Yvonne Murphy, THE CLOYNE REPORT, and published in July 2011.[1] The inquiry was ordered to look at child protection practices in the diocese and how it dealt with complaints against 19 priests made from 1996.[2]

Misrepresentation by Bishop Magee

In February 2008, the Irish Government referred two allegations of child sex abuse to the National Board for Safeguarding Children, an independent supervisory body established by the Irish bishops, led by Mr Ian Elliott. When the chief executive of that body made contact with the diocese on the matter, he was met with lack of co-operation. Meetings held with Bishop John Magee and representatives of the diocese in March failed to elicit his full co-operation with the National Board for Child Protection's investigation. As per BBC News, “The report found that Bishop John Magee falsely told the government and the health service that his diocese was reporting all abuse allegations to authorities. It also found that the bishop deliberately misled another inquiry and his own advisors by creating two different accounts of a meeting with a priest suspecting of abusing a child, one for the Vatican and the other for diocesan files”.[3]

Media disclosures

In April 2008, Justine McCarthy, a journalist with the _Sunday Tribune_, broke the story of the impending scandal in the diocese of Cloyne. There followed a number of hastily arranged meetings between Magee, Monsignor Denis O'Callaghan, (the Vicar General of Cloyne), and Dean Eamon Gould with representatives of the National Board for Safeguarding Children in the Catholic Church (or _Safeguarding_ for short). These resulted in O'Callaghan handing over documentation concerning the two cases referred by the Irish Government to Safeguarding.

On 28 June 2008, Ian Elliott, the chief executive officer of Safeguarding, completed a damning report on the handling of both cases by Magee, by his delegate for Child Protection, O'Callaghan, and by his inter-diocesan case management committee. The Elliot Report was examined by that case management committee on 9 July 2008, and it adopted a position threatening Elliot and Safeguarding with legal action were they to publish the Report. In the meantime, Elliott passed the report to the Irish Government and to the minister for Children, Barry Andrews who did not read the report but passed it to the Health Service Executive to compile another report on it.

Political recommendations

In December 2008, Deputy Sean Sherlock of the Labour Party raised the matter in the press and demanded a Dáil discussion of the handling of Child Sex Abuse in Cloyne.[4] Further press coverage led to the publication of the Elliott Report by Bishop Magee on 19 December 2008. The contents of the Report were shocking and concluded that Bishop Magee's actions, and those of his agent's in this area, were inadequate and in some respects were dangerous.

There followed a chorus of demands for Bishop Magee's resignation. The demands were renewed in January 2009 with the publication of the HSE Report commissioned by the Minister for Children which uncovered a number of other cases which had not been reported to the authorities or dealt with according to self-regulatory procedures. The Minister rejected a recommendation of the Health Executive Service report that the Cloyne case not be referred to the Dublin Tribunal of Investigation into Child Abuse and, following a Cabinet meeting held on 7 January, he referred Cloyne to the Dublin Tribunal which published a report in November 2009.

Public consequences

It now remains to be seen whether a member of the public will make complaint to the Garda Síochána (Irish police force) against Bishop Magee and/or Monsignor Denis O'Callaghan under the terms of the CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2006 which provides for a new offence of reckless endangerment of children. This came into effect on 1 August 2006.

This offence may be committed by a person who has authority or control over a child or an abuser and who intentionally or recklessly endangers a child by:

Causing or permitting any child to be placed or left in a situation which creates a substantial risk to the child of being a victim of serious harm or sexual abuse or failing to take reasonable steps to protect a child from such a risk while knowing that the child is in such a situation. This offence may be prosecuted only by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The penalty is a fine (no upper limit) and/or a maximum of 10 years imprisonment.

Apologies

In January 2009, Magee apologised to victims of clerical sex abuse after a report compiled by the Health Service Executive (HSE) found his diocese had put children at risk of harm through an “inability” to respond appropriately to abuse allegations. In spite of “a large number of calls for his resignation” the Bishop signalled his intention to remain.[5]

Further analysis in January 2009 suggested that the bishop and diocese staff were sparing with details of allegations, and that Bishop Magee might have to resign, but also that the Irish government had not yet legislated for all the improvements in the law of evidence that were called for in the Ferns Report of 2005.[6][7]

Intervention by Rome

On 7 March 2009 Pope Benedict appointed Archbishop Dermot Clifford of Cashel and Emly as apostolic administrator of the Cloyne diocese, though Bishop Magee remained Bishop in title.[8][9] Bishop Magee requested that the Pope take this action on 4 February. Bishop Magee said that he would use the time to “_devote the necessary time and energy to cooperating fully with the government Commission of Inquiry into child protection practices and procedures in the diocese of Cloyne_”. In accordance with canon law, an apostolic administrator is named for an open-ended interim period. Bishop Magee's resignation was formally accepted by the Vatican on 24 March 2010.[10][11]

Judicial Inquiry report, July 2011

Due to the success of the 2009 Murphy Report, a judicial inquiry into the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic archdiocese of Dublin, the same team was reappointed to investigate allegations surrounding the diocese of Cloyne. Its remit included investigating the state's health and policing practices as well as the Church itself. Judge Murphy's Inquiry issued its report on 13 July 2011.[12][13] The findings of fact included that:

-   Two-thirds of abuse allegations made in 1996–2009 were not passed on to the Garda, as required by the Church's 1996 guidelines
-   In a secret letter the Vatican described the Irish bishops' 1996 guidelines to be a “study document”, and not a binding set of rules
-   Bishop Magee had misled the former inquiries by the Health Service Executive (HSE) in 2009
-   An accusation against Bishop Magee himself was dismissed; another 18 priests were named using pseudonyms

Taoiseach and other reaction

-   On 20 July 2011 Taoiseach Enda Kenny criticised the Vatican, deploring “the dysfunction, disconnection and elitism that dominates the culture of the Vatican to this day” The Vatican reacted “to evidence of humiliation and betrayal ... with the gimlet eye of a Canon lawyer[, a] calculated, withering position.”[14][15][16][17] He also told the Dáil that “the historic relationship between church and state in Ireland could not be the same again. The rape and torture of children were downplayed or 'managed' to uphold instead the primacy of the institution, its power, standing and reputation.”[18]
-   In a televised interview, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin deplored a “cabal” in the Church that still refused to recognise Vatican rules on child protection.[19]
-   Alan Shatter, the Minister for Justice and Equality, said that “.. it is difficult to read the Cloyne Report and avoid despair. ..The report's findings are unambiguous. It is severely critical of the Diocese of Cloyne. The diocese's response to complaints and allegations of child sexual abuse in the period from 1996 up to 2008 was totally inadequate and inappropriate.”[20]
-   Head of the Holy See Press Office Federico Lombardi, speaking on a personal basis, said it was “.. somewhat strange to see the Vatican criticised so heavily”. Regarding the 1997 letter that suggested that the 1996 bishops' child protection guidelines amounted only to a “study document”, he added that “There is no motive to interpret the letter in the way it has been, as an attempt to cover up cases of abuse. There is nothing in the letter which suggests not respecting the laws of the land.”[21][22]
-   The Cloyne diocese commented that the 11 priests considered abusive in recent decades worked among 415 priests about whom no complaints were made.[23]
-   Statement by the Government of Ireland on the response of the Holy See regarding the report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne 8 September 2011
-   Statement by the Taoiseach on the Dáil Motion on the report of the Commission of Investigation into the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne, 20 July 2011
-

[1]

[2] BBC News: Cloyne report: A detailed guide as of 13 July 2011

[3]

[4] New church sex abuse guidelines published next month, Justine McCarthy, Sunday Tribune, 14 December 2008, retrieved 17 November 2009

[5] The Irish Times: “Andrews refers Cloyne to Dublin abuse commission”, January 7, 2009

[6] Irish Times, 8 January 2009, p.8

[7] Sunday Independent, 11 January 2009, p.24

[8] Bishop Magee steps aside over Cloyne controversy, Eoin Burke-Kennedy, The Irish Times, 7 March 2009, retrieved 9 March 2009

[9] BBC

[10] Acceptance of resignation

[11] RTE news article on Bishop Magee's resignation, 24 March 2010

[12] Cloyne report finds failures by church, State agencies _Irish Times_, 13 July 2011]

[13] Commission of Investigation: Report into the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne DocumentCloud.org. Retrieved: 18 July 2011.

[14] Commission of Investigation Report in the Catholic Diocese of Cloyne: Motion _Houses of the Oireachtas_ Dáil Éireann Debate Vol. 737 No. 11 Unrevised Page 13 of 263, 20 July 2011. Retrieved 2011-07-28.

[15]

[16]  This and many other reports included “narcissism” with “dysfunction” et al. The Dáil Éireann Debate transcript cited here has been asserted as authoritative by User:O'Dea, who also said video at YouTube confirmed the transcript.

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

title: Sexual abuse in Cloyne diocese

question: When was the Cloyne Report published?

answer: July 2011

question: When did Bishop Magee resign?

answer: March 24, 2010

question: Who broke the story of the impending scandal in 2008?

answer: Justine McCarthy, a journalist with the Sunday Tribune

question: Who led the investigation that produced the Cloyne Report?

answer: Judge Yvonne Murphy

question: Write a ~3 sentence summary.

answer: Sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Cloyne was investigated by the Commission of Investigation, Dublin Archdiocese, Catholic Diocese of Cloyne. The investigation was led by Judge Yvonne Murphy and examined how allegations of sexual abuse of children in the diocese were dealt with by the church and state. The investigation culminated in the publishing of the Cloyne Report in July 2011.


text:
*Crying*

"There's no shame in crying, Son. I do it all the time. Mainly at your T-Ball games. Because you are terrible." Then he started crying.

*Homosexuality*

"I'll never forget that day. I got in a car crash with a shuttle bus to an opening of A Chorus Line. They pronounced me gay at the scene. I've been gay since. They say it gets better. But I still feel just as gay as the day I hit that shuttle bus."

*How to Shave*

"First!" He was dressed in his army outfit. "You take your razor." He pulled out a pumpkin. "Then you take out your shaving cream!" He pulled out a beer. "Then you slather your face in shaving cream." He guzzled the beer. "Then you shave!" Then he threw the pumpkin as hard as he could against the wall.

I slowly walked out of the bathroom.

Then I heard a gunshot.

"Missed a spot!"

*Vegetable Gardens*

"You know how you spot a communist?"

"No, Dad."

"They have vegetable gardens."

"OK, Dad."

"You know why?"

"No, Dad."

"Because they can't digest meat. It makes them want freedom. It makes them want to have free trade. It makes them want to own a gun without having to have a background check. It makes them human."

"OK, Dad."

"That's why Colonel Sanders and Ronald McDonald were our best presidents."

"Uh."

"Why are you looking at me funny?"

"Because the sack race is over. We lost."

"Let's get some cheeseburgers."

*Memories*

"Son, you can't make memories. Memories just happen. Like right now. See, now that's a memory."

"I see what you're saying, Dad."

"That's another memory." His eyes began to light up.

"I get it."

"Another one. Look at all the memories we've shared. Think about all the futures!" Then he put on some ski goggles and ran as fast as he could into the wall.

"Dad, you OK?"

"I'm in the future!"

"You're bleeding."

"In the future!"

*Ticker Tape Parade*

"Dad, I need help on this English assignment."

"I just had a dream that I was a crocodile and they gave me a ticker tape parade."

"OK, I'll just ask Kevin."

"No. Don't bother Kevin. He's next in line for a ticker tape parade."

"See you, Dad."

"See you."

As I left I heard him yell "AT THE TICKER TAPE PARADE!"

*Vacation*

"Son, we're going to have the best vacation any father and son have ever had. And it starts right now." Dad opened a beer and pulled out of the driveway.

"Where are we going?"

"Well, I'm probably going to jail, but you're going to aunt Maggie's."

*Bacon*

"This is bacon." Dad pointed at a dog turd in the yard.

"That's not bacon, Dad. It's dog poop."

"Time for a PLT!"

I thought he was joking until I noticed the lettuce and tomatoes in his pockets.

*Ruth*

"You know, I think Ruth was 19 when it happened. Just came out of nowhere and BAM! Ruth was never the same. She's still doing that thing that she did after that happened."

"Dad, what happened?"

"That thing."

"What thing."

"God, I miss the old Ruth."

*Voting*

"You know why I don't vote, Son?"

"Why's that, Dad?"

"Because they are all criminals. Every last one of them."

"OK, Dad."

"You know, I snort coke, drink too much, then I go out and drive and I get thrown in prison for two years. But, if I just wore a top hat and freed slaves I'd be president. It makes you think."

"Yeah, Dad."

"Do you know any slaves?"

"No, Dad."

"Do you have a top hat?"

"No, Dad."

"Well, I guess I'll just mow the lawn like I always do."

*More Movies*

He was sitting outside eating popcorn on our porch, wearing 3D glasses and staring at the street.

"Dad, can I borrow the sander?"

"Shhhh...this is a good part."

He jumped and then started laughing.

"What? Ticket? I threw it out." He looked scared.

"Dad?"

"Get your hands off of me!" He began struggling.

"Dad?"

"Run, son, run!"

*Soda*

"You know, they say soda's bad for you - but I don't mind it." Dad was sipping a Pepsi.

"I think they mean it's not physically good for you."

"I don't intend to get physical with this soda. Now go wash your mouth out. This is a Christian home."

"It is?"

"Jewish?"

"I'll go wash my mouth out."

"And pray to Ganesha."

*Woodworking*

Dad was out in his shop again. And when I say shop, I mean a clearing in the forest.

"Son, I'm going to make a bat. I'm going to call it Wonder Boy."

I ignored the movie reference and asked him why he was bleeding.

"That's why I'm making the bat. That old tree there put up a fight."

I looked and saw the bear and ran blindly back home.

*Driving School*

"OK. Watch it. Watch it. Alright, now slowly back in."

"Am I doing OK?"

"You're doing fine, son. Now easy. Easy! OK. You did it."

"Can we go."

"No. You need to yell it."

"I don't want to, they'll hear us and come out."

"Yell it!"

"LAWN JOB!"

*Liberty*

Dad came out of the shower wearing an American flag again.

"Dad, I need to use the shower."

"OK, son. There's a bar of liberty and a bottle of freedom in there - use it wisely."

"OK. Thanks."

"Don't thank me, thank Abraham Lincoln and William Shatner."

"OK, Dad."

"But the conditioner is not free. That's why there's taxes!"

"OK, Dad."

*Guns*

"Now, a gun is not a toy. A GI Joe is a toy. A doll is a toy. But a gun is not a toy. Here, point it at your head."

"I don't think that's safe, Dad."

"Of course it's not safe, it's a gun!"

*Taxes*

"Son, I want to talk to you about the IRS."

I ran blindly back home.

title: [HM] Even More Advice From My Dad

question: What does the story say about the dad's relationship to alcohol?

answer: He guzzles a beer while "teaching" his son to shave. He opens a beer as he pulls out of the driveway when they're going on vacation. He also admits that he drinks too much.

question: Summarize everything relating to the dad injuring himself.

answer: He got in a car crash with a shuttle bus one time. Another time, he puts on ski goggles and runs as fast as he can into the wall, making himself bleed. He makes a bat in his shop while bleeding from being attacked by a bear.

question: What does the story say about the narrator's relationsip with his mother?

question: What does the story say about guns?

answer: The dad fires a gun while "teaching his son how to shave". The dad tells his son that a gun is not a toy. He tells the son to point the gun at his head, to which the sun remarks that it's not safe. He then says that of course it isn't safe, it's a gun.


text:
BARTSCH-JASPER HOUSE, also known as the AUGUST BARTSCH HOUSE, HENRY JASPER HOUSE, and CHARLES KAMPSCHROEDER HOUSE, is a historic home located at Washington, Franklin County, Missouri. It was built about 1855 and expanded to its present size about 1893. It is a 1 1/2-story, double entrance, brick dwelling on a stone foundation. It has a side gable roof and open hip roofed front porch with turned support posts.[1]

It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2000.[2]

[1]  (includes 7 photographs from 2000)

[2]

title: Bartsch-Jasper House

question: What is Bartsch-Jasper House?

answer: A historic home located in Washington, Missouri.

question: What is it also known as?

answer: Henry Jasper House and Charles Kampschroeder House

question: When was it built?

answer: About 1855

question: What are its characteristics?

answer: It's a 1 1/2 story, double entrance, brick dwelling on a stone foundation; it has a side gable roof and open hip roofed front porch with turned support posts.

question: Write a ~4 sentence summary.

answer: The Bartsch-Jasper House, also known as Henry Jasper House and Charles Kampschroeder House, is a historic home located in Washington, Missouri. It was built in 1855 and expanded to its present size in 1893. It is a 1 1/2 story, double entrance, brick dwelling on a stone foundation; it has a side gable roof and open hip roofed front porch with turned support posts. It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2000.


text:
[Matt]

Great interview, thanks for that.

I have to respectfully disagree with Dennett on this.

Yes, I want his version of free will, but I also want a stronger version where I'm a self-creating causal agent. I want the causal buck to stop with the my conscious decisions, as well as with the big bang and random quantum fluctuations.

The teleological level of causality is certainly a valid and useful description, but it doesn't arise from nowhere. The giraffe's neck only gets longer because a chance physical mutation occurred and survived at the biological level, and from there it's much more easy to reduce the cause to physics. Fundamentally there are always non-teleological causes as far as I can see. If not I'd like an example.

Similarly, when the teleological buck stops at my brain, there then has to a fundamental biological cause (firing of neurons etc) which then reduces to a physical cause, which is always - as far as science is currently aware - either deterministic/random.

Of course, Dennett knows all this, and I can't help but feel that such compatiblist arguments are really just trying to appease those of a physicalist mindset who are scared about losing autonomy.

So the teleological description is not good enough for me. For free will to exist in any meaningful way, we need a way for an agent to intervene in the deterministic/random unfolding of the world without appealing to dualist fantasies.

I admit that we'd probably need a paradigm-shifting discovery in science can do that, but I don't think there's reason to lose all hope yet.

Wrote a short piece on this recently referencing an experiment that casts further doubt on Libet's work back in the 50s:

http://informationvoyeur.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/to-be-free-again.html

Matt

Posted by: Matt | August 18, 2012 at 06:03 PM

[Steve]

Comment for
Daniel Dennett on Free Will Worth Wanting, Philosophy Bites August 18, 2012

My naive challenge to what I perceived as Dennett's view of free will:
1) Free will and "mental state" -- what we find to be persuasive, compelling. That which motivates us or fails to.
2) How much choice do we have in the response of our adrenal glands, pancreas, thyroid, thalamus, etc and how the action of these components each effect and in sum determine "who we are?"
3) Free of what? ("Thank Dawkins!" I do not attempt to address this question)

Do we choose what we will be pursue? What or who we are attracted by/to?
People often say that we are tempted by something but We decide what to do. Is this true? If so, are there not different ideas, things, and experiences that each of us find challenging or compelling to different degrees? How much choice do we have?
Could I have chosen a series of actions that would have led me to have become a competitive swimmer anywhere near the level of Michael Phelps? One could ask, "Does he freely choose or is he totally driven -- is it a mix of the two?" If even a mix, what does it mean to be free if we are just more or less compelled to do or not do something than another person? In a more nuanced way, I am for example asking, "where are we each on something like a spectra of desire/repulsion for the parameters that lead to or away from pursuing some end?"

Perhaps it is me, with a defective brain, that lacks free will that is so obviously present.

I hope this attempt is not entirely unsuccessful. If this does not make sense now, I will not be able to improve on it at this time.
Please accept my apology for wasting your time.

Steve

Posted by: Steve | August 18, 2012 at 10:14 PM

[Chrisallmanlovesyou]

I would like to begin by saying that I am a huge Daniel Dennet fan and consider him one of my role models soI was fascinated to hear his take on free will and like with all our role models there are areas where we don't see eye to eye. It reminded me of kind of why I left philosophy: It can be seductive to try and reframe the way we think about something in order to derive a solution when in reality we have just redefined terms in a way that obscures or disregards the troublesome, but still relevant details.

I would disagree with Dennet on his two main points:
To begin with, he claims that we need to address questions by looking at them on the appropriate level for the issue. That seems reasonable but if we want to get the whole truth of a situation (or as near as we can get) ALL levels are appropriate for the issue and if you ignore any then you aren't being thorough.

Like his example of the calculator of WHY does it answer 7 to the question of 3+4. He claims that you should not look at the atoms, you should look to the rules of Math. It was a bad example because I don't think the answer to that WHY is to look at the math, it is to look at the fact that a person punched in those numbers and the circuits behaved in a pre-arranged way that whenever the 3+4 buttons were pushed it would produce 7. So yes, you can look at it higher than the level of atoms, but even at a much much higher level, the level of things we can see with the naked eye like brain tissue or things that are relatively big, neurotransmitters and such, on THAT level all the answers of 'why' seem to point to a clear 'no free will'.
If you go to the level that he wants to, of what rules of math tell us 3+4=7, well then, I think you've gone way too far and are ignoring relevant detail to the degree of finding a calulator on a desk that has a '7' it's screen, asking how that number came to be there and saying it is irrelevant to know whether someone entered the buttons 7+4 AND that it and been programmed to spit out that particular number. Even if you did want to go to the atomic level you could and it would shed more light on the situation, but he is right that it wouldn't be most relevant to the situation.
As for his point about how we may attribute lack of free will when someone does something bad because of some physical or mental pathology, we don't do it when someone does something great. While he is right, we usually don't do it in those instances(barring idiot savants or child prodigies), it does not mean that we SHOULDN't. I personally believe we should. I do when i look at the world. Not in every moment, not usually at the gut level, but when I stop and think about it, that is how I see it. Greatness is no less based on unfree choices as badness in my opinion.

I guess the level to which I can agree with Dennet is that within the programming that a human has and the impact the environment has on that programming (also outside of an individuals control) there are certain conditions which would allow an individuals 'program' to express its uniqueness of character more than other conditions and those would be the sort of things he was talking about such as manipulation and refraining for always revealing your emotions etc.
Maybe Dennet considers that free will, but I don't. I guess it would be comparable to if you had two Roombas, each designed somewhat differently, for example they go in somewhat different patterns and respond somewhat differently to stimulation etc etc and both are a little glitchy, so they sometimes do something outside of their programing that is surprising, based on malfunctions of the physical hardware or a glitch within the programming itself ( if you want to tie this analogy to human evolution we could even say that originally Roomba was programmed for a somewhat different environment than it is now in) and that both's ability to intake stimulus or appropriate information is not perfect, which leads to occasionally responded to stimulus in ways one wouldn't expect based on it's programming.
If you put either in a little box or in a big carpet room( with lots of objects it would need to move around) their behavior in the small box would be different than in the large room. In the small box they would both act about the same, just move back and forth a few times, realize they are trapped then stop (i guess. I've never actually had a Roomba). Within the small box They are both being manipulated or their actions limited by an outside force, and because of this they would not have very much freedom to express the uniqueness of their programming/glitches. By Dennet's description these Roombas would then have less 'free will', because they are trapped by the Box.
If these two Roombas were let loose in a large room with a variety of objects, they have more 'freedom' to express the individuality of their programming/glitches. According to Dennetts presentation this would mean they have more 'Free Will'.
However, this freedom to express their uniqueness does not, in my opinion, mean that they are now free, moral agents capable of making different decisions than their program or glitches require of them. By the same turn, it does not mean that since certain environments allow humans to manifest the uniqueness of their programming better than others that we then have 'Free Will'.
BUT, if by Free-Will he DOES mean the sort of not-actually-free-in-a-technical-sense but the able-to-express-it's-uniqueness-with-varying-degrees-depending-on-the-environment sort of freedom described in my Roomba example, then I guess I can agree with him, I just don't know if I would call it 'Free-Will'.

Posted by: Chrisallmanlovesyou | August 20, 2012 at 07:57 PM

[Jim Vaughan]

I used to think Daniel Dennet was going a bit crazy e.g. when he compared us to a narrative writing robot called Gerald, thereby eliminating the need for subjective consciousness!

However, I must revise this opinion. I think his ideas here are brilliant.. to ask what meaningful level of free will we want to explain i.e moral decision making rather than getting stuck at the level of molecular level determinism.

Pinker's ideas of a self organising hierarchy of cognitive decision making daemons is supportive, the higher levels of which we call "my free will", the lowest levels of which might be the timing of a single neuron firing or not. Compatibalist freedom comes in at the top of the hierarchy of decision making daemons - not as simple addition, but as a complex and chaos driven dynamic integration of many factors.

Hubert Dreyfus mentions Walter Freemans neurodynamic research on "strange attractors" which form dynamically in the patterns of firing, and which could be the higher level daemons or "top down" decision makers, and thus our perceived free will. Libets work does not preclude this, as long as we accept that we are our brains at every level, that feedback interactions go both ways, and that his predictions were not 100% accurate.

In summary, I think Robinson Crusoe could still exercise free will, say, in deciding whether to sunbathe on the beach, or venture into the interior, without needing Friday, as an intentional agent. It would only require that he has different "intentional agents" competing within his own mind.

Posted by: Jim Vaughan | August 23, 2012 at 11:57 AM

[Jeff Pooley]

Dennet's view of free will worth wanting looks a lot like the autonomy enjoyed by many in the rich West of the present. It's strikingly culture-bound and parochial, yet Dennet presents this kind of "free will" as universally desirable. He sounds like Hegel, whose Berlin of the 1820s was the last stop on history's train ride.

Posted by: Jeff Pooley | August 23, 2012 at 07:40 PM

[Dhirendra Singh]

Hi Matt,

Your rejection of a teleological description is valid within the prevalent reductionist view of science - where everything should be explainable by looking "down there" at physics.

But down there, at the quantum/classical boundary or even beyond, there is little room for values, meanings, choices, and agency. At some point teleological language becomes useful in explaining agency and choice. Physical laws do not lead us there.

Certainly the reductionist viewpoint has been the cornerstone of scientific progress in the last few centuries. But a reductionist viewpoint also fails at explaining what Dennett is talking about. We do not have physical laws and theories to explain all the unfolding creativity around us.

For more on this viewpoint, see Stephen Hawking's article 'Godel and the End of the Universe' where he talks about why he has changed his mind on finding complete physical laws for the universe.

Human biology in general is another area where reductionism has been less successful so far. Despite medical science and current understanding of DNA and genetic function, physical laws do not yet extend to explaining life systems. Famously, Robert Rosen said about reductionism that if we keep insisting on chasing particles, then we will follow them right through an organism and miss the organism entirely. He was referring to the fact that the human body completely changes its ingredients many times over in our lifetimes (through metabolism, replication and repair), yet we remain who we are - functional complex agents with the same values and meanings - despite this. Stuart Kauffman makes similar arguments against the reductionist viewpoint in his book Reinventing the Sacred. However, interestingly and in line with your thinking, his work 'Five problems in the philosophy of mind' does in fact try to reconcile the problem of free will within the quantum/classical framework of physical laws.

Like you said, Dennett knows this view of science. However, I suspect he is saying that a teleological interpretation of agency is necessary, and not just convenient.

All the best,
Dhirendra.

Posted by: Dhirendra Singh | August 24, 2012 at 12:57 AM

[Matt]

Hi Dhirendra,

Thanks for your response.

I just read the Hawking essay - very interesting. It reminds me of Roger Penrose's similar use of Godel to address consciousness and human thought. Thanks also for the Kauffman tip. I've found it and will read later.

Without having fully digested the implications of what he's saying, I would offer one comment immediately in reference to a unified theory.

Although I'm fascinated with M Theory, the jury is still very much out on it, and personally I have a problem with it being background-dependent. The likes of Loop Quantum Gravity on the other hand is background-independent, and causality itself is therefore - in a sense - fundamental. I like that better, but of course have no idea as to which (if either) is correct. Perhaps they will turn out to be equivalent in a sense, part of something bigger? I'll certainly be annoyed if Susskind is wrong cos he's a great man!

However, what's for sure is that these are open questions. *Massive* open questions in the most fundamental of fundamental physics. What that leaves is equally huge gaps in our ultimate understanding of causality and emergence. And that, when combined with quastions surrounding consciousness, qualia and free will, creates gaps that leave a place for speculative ideas.

I'm thinking of Whitehead's process theory, Rosenberg's panpsychism, Chalmers' monistic proto-experiential properties, Penrose and Hammeroff's Orch-OR, or even the likes of David Hodgson, or Robert Kane. My point is that although such ideas are admittedly wild, in that they correspond to none of our current scientific understanding, it's also true that we have absolutely no idea about the *truly* fundamental constituents of the universe, and no thinking physicist would claim otherwise.

Therefore, when physicalist philosophers seem slightly scornful of such ideas, to me personally it seems rather presumptious. And to be frank, I suspect it's motivated by a (justified) fear of dualism and theism creeping in, coupled with a too strong adherence to the (wonderful) realisations of anti-anthropocentrism. No, we and our planet are not special, but that doesn't mean that consciousness, qualia and free will *have* to be imagined - they may just be not understood, given our lack of understanding of the most basic building blocks - or processes - of reality.

That said, I still think Dennett's great :)

Hmmm. It's 00.30 and the Foo Fighters are blaring at Reading Festival. Rant over. May come back when I've read more...

Matt IV (@matt37797)
informationvoyeur.blogspot.co.uk

Posted by: Matt | August 27, 2012 at 12:48 AM

[Matt]

Please note that I retract the word "arrogant" from my previous post. That's way too strong. I would like to replace it with "presumptuous".

I should never post gone midnight!

Matt

Posted by: Matt | August 27, 2012 at 08:28 AM

[Matt IV]

Hi Dhirendra,

I've now had a first read of the Kauffman essay - thanks for that.

I particularly like the way he summarizes the biological evidence that opens the possibility of the brain effectively being a quantum computer, and the reference to Penrose and Hammeroff.

Section 8.3 "Reversible Decohrence and Recoherence are Partially Lawless and may be subject to Abiotic Natural Selection Blind Final Cause" is fascinating. It has me pondering special relativity at tiny distances and tiny time scales. That's going to require me to do a lot more reading on the subject!

I'm also wondering about how backwards-in-time correlations may or may not fit into the picture. (I wrote a high-level summary of one of these here: http://informationvoyeur.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/heres-short-piece-i-wrote-last-month.html)

Again, thanks, and I'll get hold of the book ASAP. For my part, if you've not already read it, I'd recommend reading A Place For Consciousness by Gregg Rosenberg. There's some short videos of him talking about his positions here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL108A0B8562F33343&feature=plcp

All the best,
Matt

Posted by: Matt IV | August 27, 2012 at 01:31 PM

[Bob Rosenberg]

Matt,

You say, "I'm thinking of Whitehead's process theory, Rosenberg's panpsychism, Chalmers' monistic proto-experiential properties, Penrose and Hammeroff's Orch-OR, or even the likes of David Hodgson, or Robert Kane."

May I suggest you follow that train of thought to Kelly et al.'s _Irreducible Mind_ (2007)? The Cartesian either/or--materialism or dualism--begs fundamental questions about matter and mind.

Which leads to a rather deep, interesting place.

Best,

--Bob

Posted by: Bob Rosenberg | August 29, 2012 at 07:04 PM

[Matt]

Hi Bob,

Thanks for the suggestion - I've just had a look at the book's Wikipedia entry.

I must say that I've not previously been impressed by any argument for substance dualism. The furthest I've been prepared to go has been dual-aspect theories and property dualism.

The theories that attract me tend to be ones where the endpoint is that we've retained a physicalism, but have expanded its ontology to include mental properties, their relations, and an explanation of how they interface with all the currently known physical properties and laws.

In other words I suspect that our understanding of the physical is incomplete, and it's that fact that explains how we currently have no place in physics for consciousness, free will and qualia.

It's a middle position that tends to mean it's get assaulted from both sides!

I'm not interested in explaining or including proposed phenomena like NDEs or life after death. At the moment I'm far from being convinced such things are real, and I'm certainly not interested in bringing immortal souls or gods into the equation.

That all said, I'll pretty much read anything, and in fact do seek out views opposed to my main one (essential in attempting to counter confirmation bias), hence the many titles on my bookshelf by physicalist authors like Dennett.

Perhaps I do need to glance in the opposite direction occasionally, so I might take a look - cheers for the tip.

Matt

Posted by: Matt | August 30, 2012 at 08:40 AM

[Matt]

Hi Bob,

Thanks for the reply, I will try to take a look at that, although I must admit I'm slightly put off by the Wikipedia entry on the book.

I don't want to go in the direction of trying to explain questionable phenomena like NDEs, and I'm wholly uninterested in trying to get from fundamental physics to conclusions on immortal souls or god.

It's tricky enough trying to find scientific facts and philosophical theories to explain phenomena that we (prima facie) know exist, like consciousness and free will, let alone ones that we don't, like life after death or a divine being. Not my cup of tea!

However, like I said, I like to read all around the subject, and substance dualism is something I'm not attracted to, and should therefore read more about... so thanks for the recommend.

Matt
@matt37797

Posted by: Matt | September 02, 2012 at 04:34 PM

[Ramesh Raghuvanshi]

With my 70 years experienced I can say confidently that we have no freewill.All our life is governed by our unconscious mind.Our conscious mind dancing to tune on our unconscious mind.Even pick-up pencil from table that we do on command of our unconscious mind.This was proved by recent research in neuroscience

Posted by: Ramesh Raghuvanshi | September 03, 2012 at 04:44 AM

[Andrew D. Viceroy]

Dennett has a seemingly endless amount of rich, thought-provoking material to share with the world (just like this podcast!). I always enjoy interviews with him.

That said, I have never been able to reconcile what appears to be an inconsistency inevitably noted in his version of the free will discussion. He is blue in the face (as a compatibilist) telling us that neuroscientists absolutely, without question, entirely and completely, get it WRONG when they challenge the idea that we have free will. In fact, he's stated that it is even a public disservice to suggest as much. And yet, by his own account, many people do not have free will--worse, he concedes that being manipulated reduces our freedom to some extent. If this is so (and according to the well evidenced pervasive effects of priming alone, it is), then methinks he doth protest too much in the extent that he hand waves away the science. Even if there remains 'free will worth wanting,' it's still tainted in a fundamental way, like an entire wall being painted in a slightly different shade, rather than a portion of it remaining untouched.

ALSO, to my mind, it does NOT matter whether the thwarting of fulfillment of desires is intentional (via humans) or via nature (e.g. accidental priming). The goal of the agent is thwarted. Period. That seems like an origination fallacy to me.

Posted by: Andrew D. Viceroy | August 14, 2013 at 02:10 AM

question: What does the narrator things there needs to be for free-will to exist?

answer: For free-will to exist, a way for an agent to intervene in the deterministic/random unfolding of the world without appealing to dualist fantasies needs to exist.

question: How can you describe the overall theme of the discussion?

answer: The overall theme of the discussion is related to philosophy and free-will.

question: Who is the narrator disagree with?

answer: Dennett

question: What does the short piece the narrator wrote cast doubt on?

answer: The short piece casts further doubt on Libet's work back in the 50s.

question: Write a ~2 sentence summary.

answer: A discussion about what constitutes free-will is described between the narrator and Dennett. The narrator discusses his feelings on free-will and disagrees with Dennett's perspective.


text:
I've a pocket of prose for a little cunnilingus exchange. Over by the bass pounded walls, the ones timidly welded to the exit, they are the target. They aren't here of their own, nope, they’re the coerced coins in a roll.

I’m making my journey to the center of them, but let’s face it; I am not a bad person…just honest. Like everyone around, I am here for one thing; I am here for what’s mine. I blend between their congregated misfortunes, and grin cautiously with a slight lip quiver.
I am now one of them.

“You reckon there’s enough seizure lights in here” I lowly snicker out. They chuckle in unison, mostly forced, but one is sincere.

“Nope!“ I line myself with her, and leave a trail.

I am sincere and I am taking what is mine.

title: I Am Sincere

question: Who is the narrator?

answer: That information can’t be found.

question: Where does the story take place?

answer: That information can’t be found.

question: What does the narrator want?

answer: To get what is his.

question: Who is the woman the narrator is lining himself with?

answer: That information can’t be found.

question: Write a ~6 sentence summary.

answer: The narrator is in a room and on his way to the exit. He says he isn't a bad person, just honest. Like everyone else, he's here for one thing: to get what is his. He blends in with the other misfortunate people. The narrator lines himself up with a woman and leaves a trail. He insists that he is sincere.


text:
“COLORS” (stylized as COLORS) is Utada Hikaru's 12th Japanese-language single (14th overall), and is the only single she released in 2003. It was released on January 29, 2003 and debuted at number one on the Oricon charts with 437,903 copies sold in the first week, and became her fifth single to achieve two consecutive weeks at the number one slot, a comparatively rare feat. Two versions were released, CD and DVD.

Included as CD-Extras on this single was a multimedia section containing 13 exclusive screensavers and 13 exclusive wallpapers. A special feature on the “Colors” DVD single is the Kanzou-sensei Report, which is a mini-documentary showing the production that went into the DVD, as well as behind-the-scenes shots of Utada working. This single reached number one on Oricon charts and charted for 45 weeks, her longest charting single ever. Though Kazuaki Kiriya was behind the art direction for the single, he did not take an active part as usual, with the single photography going to Kaoru Izima and the PV directing going to Donald Cameron. On the cover and the inside covers, there are drawings done by Utada herself (some designs include musical notation, the word 'yes' and a drawing of the Vatican). It became the third-best selling single of 2003 in Japan.

“Colors” had an extremely long performance season, which included 11 performances spanning over two months (except for the last performance, which was a special). This single reached number 27 on the World Charts for single airplay, and reached number six for sales. The most recent figures (May 25, 2006) show that the single sold 893,790 units in total.[1] The song featured heavy ethereal and experimental tones for the first time in Utada's discography. It became her longest charting single ever with a 45-week trajectory on the Oricon Singles chart, selling 881,000 copies, and was number three on the Yearly Singles chart.

“Colors” was performed during Utada's two date concert series _Wild Life_ in December 2010.[2]

Commercial tie-ins

Two special remixes of “Colors”, an orchestral version and “Colors” (Godson Mix) were produced to promote the Toyota WISH in Japan, Taiwan, Thailand and Malaysia. These remixes are not included on this single or any of her releases.

“Simple and Clean” was the theme song for the US releases of _Kingdom Hearts_, _Kingdom Hearts: Birth by Sleep_, and _Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories_ instead of “Hikari”.

Track listing

TV performances

-   [2003.01.12] CDTV
-   [2003.01.29] Viewsic
-   [2003.01.31] Music Station
-   [2003.02.05] Sokuhou Uta no Daijiten
-   [2003.02.06] Ax Music TV
-   [2003.02.08] Pop Jam
-   [2003.02.08] CDTV
-   [2003.02.13] Utaban
-   [2003.02.17] Hey! Hey! Hey!
-   [2003.03.03] SMAPxSMAP
-   [2003.12.17] Asahi Special

Charts

JAPAN (ORICON)

  Release                        Chart                        Peak position   Sales total   Chart run
  ------------------------------ ---------------------------- --------------- ------------- -----------
  January 29, 2003               Oricon Daily Singles Chart   1
  Oricon Weekly Singles Chart    1                            800,790         45
  Oricon Monthly Singles Chart   1
  Oricon Yearly Singles Chart    3

[1] Colors - Wiki.theppn

[2]

title: Colors (Utada Hikaru song)

question: What does the text say about Utada Hikaru's song Colors?

answer: The song is the only single Utada Hikaru releases in 2003. It debuted at number one on the Oricon charts with 437,903 copies sold in the first week. Colors has  11 performances spanning over two months and reaches number 27 on the World Charts for single airplay, and reached number six for sales. The single sold 893,790 units in total.

question: What does the text say about Utada Hikaru's life?


text:
PAVEL PADRNOS (born 17 December 1970) is a Czech former professional road racing cyclist, most recently with Discovery Channel whom he was with between 2002 and 2007. His major individual success is the win in Peace Race in 1995. He competed at the 1992 Summer Olympics and the 2000 Summer Olympics.[1]

Major results

-   Rokycany criterium (2005)
-   Time Trial Championship (1996)

-   Tour of Slovakia - 2 stages (1996)
-   Kärntern Tour - 1 stage (1996)
-   Peace Race
    -   3 stages & Overall (1995)
    -   1 stage (1994)
-   Niedersachsen-Rundfahrt - Overall (1995)
-   Hessen Rundfahrt - Overall (1994–1995)
-   Bayern-Rundfahrt - Overall (1994)

[1]

title: Pavel Padrnos

question: What teams did Padrnos cycle for?

answer: The Discovery Channel team and presumably the Czechoslovakian team, though it doesn't say.


text:
JOHN HAROLD PICKERING (February 27, 1916 – March 19, 2005) was a founding partner of Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, which became one of Washington, D.C.'s most prominent law firms. He was best known for his role as an appellate lawyer in cases with national significance. He also had a long record of pro bono work for the poor and elderly and for the cause of civil rights.

John Harold Pickering was born in Harrisburg, Illinois. He graduated in 1938 from the University of Michigan and in 1940 from the University of Michigan Law School. He started his law career in New York with the firm now called Cravath, Swaine & Moore, where he met his future partner Lloyd N. Cutler. He then served for two years as a law clerk to Justice Frank Murphy of the United States Supreme Court, a former governor of Michigan known as a defender of civil liberties. Justice Murphy's belief in the importance of the law as a tool for the public good had a lasting influence on Pickering. In World War II, he served in the Navy, where he advanced to the rank of lieutenant commander.

After the war, he practiced law in Washington, D.C. One prominent Supreme Court case, in which he and Bruce Bromley were involved, was the steel seizure case in 1952, in which the Supreme Court set limits on presidential authority. In 1962, together with Lloyd N. Cutler and Richard Wilmer, he co-founded a firm called Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, which initially had 19 lawyers. The firm's strengths included regulatory matters, securities law, communications law, and antitrust. Over time, the firm opened offices in London, Brussels, Berlin, and New York and grew to several hundred lawyers. John Pickering was remembered by his colleagues as an exceptional mentor who always took a personal interest in young lawyers and staff. He also promoted the highest standards of ethics and professionalism in the law and was a strong advocate of pro bono service. In 2004, the firm merged with a Boston firm, Hale & Dorr, to become Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr (often called WilmerHale), one of the largest law firms in the world.

Pickering's practice focused on appellate work, in which he represented a number of major corporate clients. His pro bono work involved civil rights in Mississippi, doctor-assisted suicide, affirmative action in admissions at the University of Michigan, the financing of legal services for the poor, the rights of the elderly, and the House's expulsion of Representative Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., Democrat of New York. He was active in the D.C. Bar, serving on the Board of Governors from 1975-1978 and a term as president in 1979–1980, and in the American Bar Association. In 1999 he received the highest honor bestowed by the ABA, the ABA Medal, for “conspicuous service in the cause of American jurisprudence.” He received other awards noting his work in the areas of civil rights, social justice, and the needs of the elderly.

His first wife was Elsa Mueller Pickering of Newark, New Jersey, to whom he was married for 47 years and who died in 1988. He married his second wife, Helen Patton Wright, widow of Judge J. Skelly Wright of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, in 1990. He was survived by his wife Helen, two daughters, Victoria Pickering of Bethesda, Maryland and Leslie Pickering Francis of Salt Lake City, Utah, a stepson, James S. Wright Jr. of Washington, D.C., and five grandchildren, and predeceased by one grandchild.

His one million dollar philanthropic gift to the University of Michigan was used to establish a Frank Murphy seminar room.[1]

Sources

-   New York Times, March 22, 2005, “John H. Pickering, 89, a Founder of a Leading U.S. Law Firm, Is Dead”
-   John H. Pickering Dies at 89; Attorney Co-Founded D.C. Firm
-   Firm Mourns Loss of John H. Pickering
-   Commemoration and Dedication, Lloyd N. Cutler and John H. Pickering, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Door LLP, Sept. 6, 2006
-   Washington Lawyer (magazine published by D.C. Bar), May 2005, “John Pickering Dies”

Notes

[1] University of Michigan Law Quadrangle Notes on Frank Murphy.

title: John H. Pickering

question: Describe some interesting facts about John Harold Pickering.

answer: John Harold Pickering was best known for his role as an appellate lawyer in cases that had national significance. He started his law career in New York with the firm called Cravath, Swaine, and Moore. Pickering served in the Navy during World War II and became a lieutenant commander. The most important thing to note about Pickering was that he had a long record of pro bono work for the poor and elderly and advocated for the cause of civil rights.

question: Describe the work Pickering did.

answer: Pickering was a lawyer and his practice focused on appellate work. He represented a number of major corporate clients. Pickering also did a lot of pro bono work that involved civil rights in Mississippi. Pickering was also active in the D.C. Bar and served on the Board of Governors from 1975-1978 and in the American Bar Association.

question: What was Pickering's relationship like with his wife, Elsa Mueller Pickering?


text:
We all know how this ends; there's no need to continue. But if you feel the need to indulge yourself, I can't stop you. I will tell you one thing, though, it won't be a fun ride. This isn't the type of thing you discuss amongst your family around the dining room table. Even though you can feel in the air how much they want to ask you about it - as taboo as the subject is - there's no way they'll cross that line. But there's always that one friend who doesn't understand boundaries and why you shouldn't cross them. That ignorant bastard.

"So, did you kill anybody?"

I can feel my heart sink into my stomach, and with those five words all the memories I've tried so desperately to repress come flowing through my mind.

Images forever burned into my conscience.

How we got into this situation was the same for most of us: we wanted to heroes.  Granted, there is that one guy - down on his luck -  whose up to his knees in debt. They told him all his worries would disappear if he just signed on the dotted line. He needed a way out and couldn't think of any other options. But even then, in the back of his mind, the idea of ending another man's life without consequence, maybe even praise, had to impact his decision in some way. He could have chose a safer job... Anything but Combat Arms. But why fix the damage when you can inflict the damage?  You're a joke if you get a medal for making sure everyone gets paid on time.

In the long run all we really want is recognition.

One-hundred and thirty-eight days in country and not a single thing to write home about. You could feel the hostility in the air. Each and every one of us were growing tired of the monotony. All we wanted was a real reason to clean our weapons. And this is the insanity that the US Military inflicts among its indentured servants. Train a man to kill, give him guns and grenades, throw him into a desert and suddenly he wants to get shot at. We were all normal once-upon-a-time. Eventually everything fades to gray and you can't remember what exactly normal is anymore. At this point every man in Charlie Co. Fire Squad Alpha doesn't realize they've crossed the point of no return.

I couldn't see what I was shooting at, but it didn't matter. The gurgled screams let me know I was hitting something, though, and it felt good. The lesson I learned that day is that Positive Identification isn't always necessary. Before I get ahead of myself, let me explain. Those bastards thought they could run into a Mosque and they would be safe. Well, your Holy Place isn't mine. Your God can't judge me. Out here, life is a gift, and you have to be willing to take that gift away without a second thought about it.

Out here, standing by a road with a shovel can get you killed.

With my adrenaline pumping I guess I didn't notice what time it was... it just slipped my mind. All that matters is the target was eliminated; mission complete. The weight had immediately been lifted off my shoulders. I finally got what I was looking for and I felt vindicated.

After the C4 blast there wasn't much left of the Mosque, and the screams finally subsided. Sifting through the rubble, the pride I felt started to subside, and a sense of nausea overcame me. I stumbled upon what appeared to be a hand - a tiny little hand. I had never seen gore like this. A hand, a foot, an arm, a leg. Things unrecognizable as human. What have I done? These people weren't the enemy. These were human beings like you and I. Men, women, and children reduced to humps of body parts. I can never look at a hamburger the same way again.

"Soldier, you're about to learn a very important lesson today."

This was all too much to take in.

"Why do you think when we find a weapon cache every vehicle gets an RPG stowed in the back?"

Stunned, I didn't want to know.

Sergeant collected 3 RPGs and scattered them in the ruins of what once was a Mosque. stepping back and observing the scene, without a hint of emotion in his face, he took in a deep breath.

"When we get back to the FOB, CID will be there to conduct their investigation, so we'd better get our story straight. I'll tell you this, though, Soldier. Tomorrow you'll be on the cover of Stars & Strips. You're going to be a War Hero."

title: Collateral Damage

question: Why is the question "did you kill anybody?" asked?

answer: The question is asked because the narrator served in the army.

question: What is the narrator's occupation?

answer: The narrator is a soldier.

question: What is the narrator shooting at?

answer: The narrator is shooting at a mosque, but doesn't know who the targets are.

question: What is the lesson that the narrator learns?

answer: The narrator learns that soldiers will commonly plant weapons on corpses in order to justify the combatants deaths.

question: Write a ~4 sentence summary.

answer: The narrator recounts his experience in the army. He recounts an incident in which his team shoots into a mosque and kills the supposed enemy combatants. As they sift through the rubble during the aftermath of the firefight, the Sergeant reveals they will plant weapons at the scene in order to justify the individuals' deaths, even if they are not enemy fighters. The sergeant says the narrator is going to be a war hero.


text:
This story starts off at ground zero on the day of me hitting rock bottom. I had burned all my bridges, with nowhere to go, no one to call and I began to realize that I had no one to blame.
There was one friend who I believed would help me if I asked him, so I jumped into my car and raced over to his house.
He lives across town in an upper-class community and his house is immaculate inside and out. I'm so jealous of his house and of how much he puts into it. His house is big, beautiful and well-kept and I would never derserve to own or live in a house like that.
I pulled up to the curb of my friend's house and saw him outside watering his amazing lawn. I honked my horn and rolled down my window and yelled to my friend: "God...!" (My friends name is God) "God, I need your help, I messed up real bad!"
My friend dropped the garden hose and ran over to my car and said: "Brian, I knew something like this was going to happen, of course I will help you, slide over, I'm going to drive."
"Um....what?" I said: "No, no.... you don't need to drive God, I got it! I'm already here, just come around to the other side and get in."
God smiled at me and said: "Brian, I love you. I want to help you..... I'm going to help you, but in order for that to happen, you have to let me drive. I have a place I would like to take you, someplace safe."
Well I got angry as I replied: "Safe? Safe! Look God, I'm tired, I'm hungry, I'm going through withdrawl, I'm bitter and resentful, and I'm mad at the whole wide world! I don't think you understand what I need from you. See God, I need you to come with me to my home and I need you to change the mind of my spouse. Make them look at me with those adoring eyes again. Make them overlook my frequent infidelities and lack of comittment. And if I'm late coming home some nights, or even just don't make it home at all, mane that ok with them too. Maked them stop nagging about my smoking, drinking and drug use. Give them the strength and desire to love me more and more each day in spite of what I do or say. Then I want to take you to each of my friend's, and I need you to change their hearts about me also. Then we need to go and see my boss, and he needs to learn to overlook the sloppiness of my reports, accept the work hours that I select that work best for me. Then I need you to show me how to get all the euphoria out of getting high but without all of the psychosis, paranoia and negative consequences. I need you God to keep everyone off my back and keep my life together. So seriously God, please get in! We have a lot to do, a lot of stops to make and I'm tired. I want to be home and in bed within the hour....!"
"Oh B!....." (My friend God calls me "B" sometimes) "Oh B! That's quite a plan. We could do that, but I tell you what, let me take you some place you can rest a while and later we can talk about all that other.........'stuff'. You have to trust me on this B, the only decision that I am asking you to make is to just slide over and let me drive. Can you at least just trust me that much?"
And so I went out on faith, but mostly because I was so tired, I let my friend God drive.
A short time later, we pulled up to the Midnight Mission and we got out of the car.
"What is this place?" I asked God, and he put his hands on my shoulders, looked me dead in the eyes and said:
"This is my house Brian; I want you to stay with me for a little while. Here you can heal your wounds and let go of the hurt and pain. We will spend each day getting to know each other and you will make some lifelong friendships with other guests that I have staying here. You will transform from a taker to a giver and your heart will be full always. You will learn how to smile and laugh, and at times you will cry, especially when you realize just how much you don't deserve any of this. You will fall in love with me and I will be your first manogamous relationship. Your strength will be forged out of fire and tested, and I will prepare you to do great and amazing things in my name. You will bring lost people to me by telling them what I did for you when no one else would even look at you. I will remove from you the desire to smoke, drink and do drugs, and in time you will even surrender to me those things you think I don't know you secretly lust for. You will be on time and your word will be more reliable than any contract. The whole world will know your name and you will tell them all about me, and that's merely the beginning. So what do you say B? Will you stay with me?"
Well how could I say no to that offer? I said: "Yes!"
"Great, you just made the best decision of your life, now go through those doors and ask for Jackie Breland, and tell him that I sent you, and remember to call on me for whatever you need. I love you so much Brian, and I will see you soon."
Then my friend God gave me a huge hug and started to walk away.
"Wait God! I have a question.....If THIS is your house, then who's big, beautiful, well-kept house was that where I picked you up?" I asked.
God just looked at me and smiled and said: "That's your house B, I've been taking really good care of it for you until you are able to receive it, and that's just one of the many gifts I have for you my friend!"
The End

By: Brian D. Baltimore

title: God's House

question: What did Brian want?

answer: For his friend, God, to fix all his problems by altering them in such a way that he can keep committing mistakes but no longer have to go through the consequences.

question: Does God's proposal work?

answer: Brian agrees when asked to devote his life to God. To this point, the proposal is successful in getting a person to change their current bad habits. As for actually working as intended (reaching the goal of fixing the results of the mistakes that Brian made), there is no certainty that the values and traits Brian will learn and practice after his stay in the Midnight Mission would actually help him. While God has promised to give him a nice house, there is no certainty that the commitment Brian has agreed to will actually help him lose his addiction to his vices, fix his marriage, or allow him to return to his job. It is possible that Brian is exchanging his bad values to becoming a religious fanatic (which is actually more acceptable in society, though does not necessarily fix his problems).

question: What kind of message does the story want to convey?

answer:
It appears that the narrative was written in order to convince people in severe distress to turn towards religion (specifically, some form of Christianity) in order to fix their lives by promising that no matter how bad the situation is, committing to the Christian god would solve all their concerns and that they have a huge reward at the end.

Though in this narrative, one has to realize that a plausible interpretation is that the house promised to Brian at the end is symbolic of what Christians consider as Heaven. So if one takes the entirety of the narrative a one big metaphor, it actually means that a person in despair should become religious, and after spending the rest of their life rehabilitating, they only get their reward after they die.

question: What is wrong with Brian's way of thinking?

answer:
Brian turns to God to fix his problems because the fix he wants is something unrealistic: that the consequences of his bad actions be erased and even reversed to work in his favor.

While the alternative plan proposed by God may not work, it does point out the flaw in Brian's initial request: it is not what fixes the problem. And the problem is Brian's behavior and priorities.

question: Write a ~4 sentence summary.

answer: Brian has ruined his life through drugs, self-abuse, bad workplace habits, and being an unfaithful and unreliable husband. He goes to his friend, God, to as for help by changing all those things. God does not do as Brian asks but brings him to the Midnight Mission, there Brian is told that he will be committing himself to God and this would fix all the problems he has. Brian agrees and is told that the house he met God in was meant for him.