Report of the Treasurer

Cd In Dept. of Finance. Annual Report

The participatory mind : a new theory of knowledge and of the universe /

"We have taken IQ tests but, strangely, no Compassion Aptitude Tests (CATs). Yet mind and emotions need to be seen as two different parts of the same spectrum, says holistic thinker Henryk Skolimowski, if the human psyche, having taken an unprecedented battering this century, is to be mended. This cannot be accomplished, however, either through the offices of dusty philosophical treatises or popular psychological fixes, only by our arriving at a new way of looking at the world." "In a Grand Theory of participatory mind that builds on the insights of such thinkers as Teilhard de Chardin and Bergson as well as contemporaries Dobzhansky and Bateson, Skolimowski points to a new order, one brought about by a Western mind returning to, then reintegrating, the spiritual. This quest for fresh perspectives, as we approach the twenty-first century, has now become 'the hallmark of our times'."--BOOK JACKET.

List of changes to the Governor's budget.

At head of title -1974/75: State of California budget for the fiscal year.

Proceedings of the meeting of the Governor's Advisory Commission on Ocean Resources

Mode of access: Internet.

Connecticut digest of administrative reports to the Governor.

Report year 1956/57-1958/59 ends June 30.

On the Merits of Mixed Age Education: A Globalized Update

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-06

Evaluating Neural Futures: Good Technoscience and the Challenge of Co-Production

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 2016-06

Two envelope problems and the roles of ignorance

Four variations on Two Envelope Paradox are stated and compared. The variations are employed to provide a diagnosis and an explanation of what has gone awry in the paradoxical modeling of the decision problem that the paradox poses. The canonical formulation of the paradox underdescribes the ways in which one envelope can have twice the amount that is in the other. Some ways one envelope can have twice the amount that is in the other make it rational to prefer the envelope that was originally rejected. Some do not, and it is a mistake to treat them alike. The nature of the mistake is diagnosed by the different roles that rigid designators and definite descriptions play in unproblematic and in untoward formulations of decision tables that are employed in setting out the decision problem that gives rise to the paradox. The decision maker’s knowledge or ignorance of how one envelope came to have twice the amount that is in the other determines which of the different ways of modeling his decision problem is correct. Under this diagnosis, the paradoxical modeling of the Two Envelope problem is incoherent.