DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT

Contents

Religion has many definitions that can vary from "Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe" to "A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion." (quoted from Dictionary.com).

Religion probably began as a belief known as 'animism' (Frazer 1922). Animism imbues certain objects and most creatures with some form of intelligence and power. It is clear from the historical record (Herodotus c.450BC, Cicero c.60BC) and anthropological studies (cf: Frazer's "Golden Bough"), that animism predates other forms of religion in a society. Animism exists where people know very little about the causes of events.

It is easy to imagine how animism might come about. Suppose a river in a desert suddenly swelled and overflowed. This would seem quite mysterious to people who had no knowledge that the source of the river lay in a range of mountains where it had rained recently. It might seem reasonable to explain the unpredictable behaviour of the river in terms of some angry 'river god'. However, as knowledge of the world advances it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain a belief in animism. As communications improve people from the highlands can tell people from the lowlands that it has been raining recently. The lowlanders would remove the river god from their list of deities as they come to understand the world.

This process of elimination was well under way in Cicero's time (1st century BC) when the existence of all gods was being questioned, as is evident in his book "The Nature of the Gods", where he considers the periodic return of malaria (agues):

"Consider, I pray, if everything which is regular in its motion is deemed divine, whether it will not follow that tertian and quartan agues must likewise be so, as their returns have the greatest regularity. These effects are to be explained by reason; but, because you are unable to assign any, you have recourse to a Deity as your last refuge".

As the gods disappeared one God replaced them in Europe and the Middle East. Despite this change there is still evidence of pre-existing polytheism in the Bible and the Koran. A good example of this is the Genesis creation myth that uses the tale of creation as a mnemonic for the Babylonian seven day week.

 It is interesting that the monotheistic God dominates the whole week of gods and the names of the other gods are suppressed in Genesis. The God of the Old Testament was called Yahweh. The association of Yahweh, with the Sabbath has led to the obvious suggestion that Yahweh was a form of Ninurta. However, any of the gods would have rested on the sabbath. Others have suggested that Yahweh was Agni, the Hindu equivalent of Nabu, because Yahweh is, apparently, a name for Agni in the Hindu scripture called the Rig Veda (see Wikipedia entry for Yahweh). Yet others have suggested that Yahweh is Aten because Psalm 104 is probably a copy of the Egyptian prayer to Aten. All these suggestions for the origin of Yahweh are amusing history for Christians and followers of Islam who have long only believed in God (Allah) and do not normally use the primitive Hebrew term 'Yahweh'.

The Sabbath day (Hebrew 'shabbath') is probably named after Sabattu, the Babylonian word for "day of rest of the heart." (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia), again confirming the Babylonian connection with Genesis. Sabattu may have its root in the Akkadian 'Sapattu' which is the day of the full moon. Incidentally, the Babylonian day of rest was probably also bath day because in the Akkadian, Atrahasis myth the god Enki bathed on this day as well as on the first and seventh of the month.

This pattern of suppression of the names of gods occurs throughout the Old Testament, which was once part of a wider range of Hebrew literature including the Talmud and Hebrew mythology (Graves and Patai 1964). The final version of the Old Testament has been purged of such interesting myths as Adam's first wife, the 'night demon' Lilith, because the old gods had no explanatory value. Other stories such as the Creation and the Flood have been left in the text.

The Genesis creation story describes a universe that was typical of early Mesopotamian ideas, this is especially evident from: "Let there be a firmament
in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters" (Genesis 1:6) and " Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven" (1:14). The firmament is the crystal roof with stars stuck on it that is mentioned in other creation myths before people understood the sky. The waters are the waters personified as Tiamat in Akkadian mythology. Tiamat was divided by the god Marduk into the waters of heaven and the waters of earth (cf: Atrahasis myth). As religion evolves the polytheistic conception of the ruler Marduk and his small band of courtier gods replace the animist conception of water as the goddess Tiamat. Genesis represents a further level of sophistication where one God replaces Marduk et al.

The Flood story is particularly interesting because it can be traced back to early Akkadian/Sumerian accounts that predate Genesis by millennia. In the original Akkadian/Sumerian story a man named Utnapishtim built an ark to save his family and all the creatures from a flood, at the end of the flood his ark lands on Mount Nisir and he releases a dove. The tale of Utnapishtim is identical to the Old Testament flood story of Noah in almost every respect (Lorey 1997) except that the original story is replete with references to Akkadian gods but in the Old Testament these are all purged. Abraham came from Ur, which had been Akkadian, so it is not surprising that the Flood story is incorporated into the Bible.

The evolution of polytheism into monotheism in Europe and the Near East is clearly documented but why did any God remain? Philosophers were questioning the whole idea of theism over two millennia ago yet belief in God and even belief in gods persists to this day so there must be various factors that support such a belief.

The robust survival of theism, even in the West, is related to a host of factors. Religion plays an important role beyond personal belief. The sociological effect of a national religion is enormous and may have effects on variables as diverse as per capita income and self-expression (cf: Welzel et al 2000). Another important factor in the survival of religion is the way a government can use religion for controlling the population, Kings usually declare that they are appointed or supported by God and this gives them enormous authority. In the author's opinion however, the most important factor in the survival of theism is that gods just 'feel' right to many people.

The survival of religion in the East is less problematic because eastern religions integrate the mind into the religious practice of the whole population. This allows adherents of Hinduism or Mahayana Buddhism to continue to believe in gods in the context of an internal world of the mind even when they are demonstrably superfluous as explanations of the inferred physical world.

Western culture has, until the last century or so, tended to ignore the mind. At the beginning of the last century, when Freud and Jung were founding psychoanalysis, most ordinary westerners thought that considering your own mind was at best embarrassing and at worst plain 'nutty'. Many people in the west, especially those with a practical disposition, still believe this to be the case. This contrasts with Buddhist countries where even children are familiar with the idea of 'controlling the mind'.

One possible explanation for the Western reluctance to consider the mind is the shear strength of the belief in God that existed in Christendom in the Middle Ages. To a medieval Christian the contents of experience were a continuum of God's work and any thoughts that contradicted this concept were attributed to the Devil. Even in immediately post medieval times we find Descartes in his Meditations referring to God in almost every other sentence so that the reader would be reassured that he shared their worldview. The idea that the Devil could insert thoughts into a person's mind is a common theme in the bible:

"And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him;" John 13:2.

Even in the twenty first century there are several hundred thousand web pages on how the authors believe the devil may lead your thoughts astray. The combination of a belief that everything is God's work and a deep suspicion of thought combined to make the Christian and the follower of Islam attend to perception and the analysis of perception rather than the analysis of thought. This externalisation of experience reached its zenith in protestant countries where it was believed by some sects that God was so all pervading that there was no need even for churches. The identification of the objects in sensory perception with God or God's creation was very useful for improving the material conditions of the protestant masses because it meant that improving sewage systems was as much God's work as saying your prayers. This attitude led to the investigation of the physical world as if it were an extension of, or part of God or God's creation but it also led to discoveries in the seventeenth century that undermined the belief in God itself, as Leibnitz (1717) points out:

Science rapidly became a body of inferences that undermined the presence of God in the "physical world". It seems that protestant externalism abolished its own cause and continued as Western Materialism (cf: Huxley 1871) so completing the evolution of religion from animist to polytheist to monotheist and finally materialist. In doing so religion may have come full circle. If religion is "A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion" then the modern shopper or research scientist have found religion in their tireless attention to the excitement of the senses by the physical world. When we see the proud owner of a new car fondling its smooth metallic skin are we witnessing a new animism? The material world is now believed by many to have its own order and justice so that people only die if they eat too much of the wrong sort of lipoprotein or take too little exercise. This is believed even though it is obvious that people die for many reasons and will never be eternally secure.

It is interesting that Creationists and Materialists are both 'Externalists'. It is little wonder therefore that the battle between them has the intensity typical of internecine warfare.

Many Hindu sects and Buddhists value the mind above the inferred physical world. This approach seems to be associated with widespread poverty in nations where these religions have not been replaced by materialism (World Values Survey 1995-2001). The idea that all sensation, including thought, is a distraction from a 'true' path is not dissimilar to the core values of Christianity and Islam. But whereas many Protestants believe that God's creation is external and known through the senses, the Hindus and Buddhists do not believe that sensation is particularly useful as a method of joining with God or 'consciousness'.

Hinduism in particular has evolved in recent times and there have been many Gurus who have attempted to integrate a meditative lifestyle with Western Materialism. Unfortunately there is a deep gulf between the disciplines of Raja yoga and earning a living in the advertising industry.

Another approach to harmonising religious belief is the "New Age" movement. Although the New Age movement is a hotch potch of beliefs it contains a strong strand of belief in Shamanism. Shamanism integrates the consumption of psychotropic drugs with religious experience and was popularised by Carlos Castenada (1968). Shamanism postulates that whilst in a Shamanistic trance or state the Shaman can experience communications that are useful to the mind and body in everyday life. Most forms of Shamanism propose that there is a 'spirit world' where it is possible to communicate with beings that exist in various guises (often animal). This is actually a form of indirect externalisation with a new, parallel, external reality to enthrall the senses.

The corollary of the "internalisation" of belief is that each person is an individual mind whereas the corollary of the "externalisation" of belief is that society, genetics and the environment construct each person in some way, perhaps as a unique machine. Like all extremes it is probable that they are both incorrect.

The only thing we know for certain is our present experience, other things can be inferred and we assign them probabilities of existence. Externalists believe the inferred physical world is a certainty and assume that it is identical to our perceptual experience (see Naive Realism in Chapter 1). Internalists believe the inferred physical world is of little consequence or even a delusion:

" The deluded cannot see the soul either when departing the body or when established in the body, enjoying (the sense objects) under the influence of the gunas. Only those with the eyes of wisdom can see." (Bhagavad Gita 15:10).

But this dismissal of the senses does do not deal adequately with the fact that consciousness and sensation are both experiences in the extended present. There is no "internal" and "external"; there is only experience and inference.

Materialism received an immense boost in 1776 when the United States of America was founded. The philosophical movement that led to the foundation of the USA considered that the material welfare of the people was of vital importance (cf: Paine (1776)). The movement was a product of the radical Protestantism that had been central to the English Civil War (1642-46) and its constitutional roots lay in the English Bill of Rights (1689) in which the power of the monarchy in England was replaced by Parliament. The preamble to the Declaration of Independence is a poetic statement of the aspirations of much of the world's population:

In the mid-nineteenth century another materialist movement was founded by Karl Marx. This movement was a reaction to the industrialisation and commercialisation that British, European and American development was inflicting on the world. The definitive statement of Marxism is the "The Manifesto of the Communist Party" (1848):

This rift in materialism was between the Anglo-American emphasis on the individual and the emphasis on collectivism prevalent elsewhere. The most disturbing policy in the Manifesto for an Anglo-American is "Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies..." The idea that a State can directly order the life of an individual is an anathema to those who believe that individuals have "certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".

Communism had a brief period of expansion in the twentieth century but became deeply unpopular amongst the populations that it controlled. The key to this unpopularity is that the Communists did not allow the people sufficient liberty to pursue their own happiness. Although subjective happiness varies between countries and religions, it turns out that only communism has a truly marked effect across an entire nation, leading people to rate themselves as exceedingly unhappy compared with other countries:

"The number of years of communist rule experienced by a society shows a major negative impact on well-being.." (Inglehart & Klingemann 2000).

The strange feature of modern communism is that, despite being rejected by the people wherever it has been introduced, there are still many Marxists, especially amongst western intellectuals who, dismissing the evidence of history, are foolish enough to believe that these ideas are likely to create happiness.

The British period of global materialism has been replaced, especially since World War I, by vigorous American expansionism. As Rome replaced Greece to establish classical culture so the USA has replaced Britain to establish Western Materialism and this double strike by materialists has set the world reeling in disarray. Marxism was the first reaction to the growth of Western Materialism, seeking to re-establish a form of paternalistic feudalism, as can be seen when the Communist Manifesto states: "The bourgeoisie, wherever it has got the upper hand, has put an end to all feudal, patriarchal, idyllic relations". Marxism is now being replaced by two distinct opposition movements, Islamic Extremism and the materialistic "Post-isms" (Post Marxism, Post Structuralism and Post Modernism) which are the heirs to Marxism. Strangely both Islam and the Post-isms are externalist philosophies.

The Post-ists believe they are opponents of the status quo and they are at the cutting edge of modern materialist philosophy. They are radical materialists with an unshakeable belief that arbitrary external processes may structure human beings. They are employed by newspapers, television channels etc. because of their fanatical commitment to materialist values, especially perpetual change. They have brought a revolutionary fervour to materialism and, paradoxically regard themselves as anti-capitalists. The essence of post-modernism is the idea that truth and self are socially constructed. Derrida has extended this analysis to the level of perception where it is proposed that perception itself is a theory that may be false. Derrida emphasises the way that process precedes experience for example:

These effects are well known in Gestalt psychology and the neuroscience of edge and pattern discrimination but Derrida uses "DifferAnce" to suggest that any form can be multiple. In the context of the theory of consciousness Derida's theory is Indirect Realist because, although it proposes that something 'sees' the output of the processes that create DifferAnce, it ignores this problem. Despite this evident flaw, Derrida goes on to suggest that "DifferAnce" is the central feature of being and that time and space would be impossible without it. Derrida's describes 'being' as a chain of differences:

The claim that time and space are the product of DifferAnce is hard to sustain because there could be no DifferAnce without time and space. Certainly DifferAnce is an aspect of our Relational Knowledge, but relational knowledge (for example that streets have houses and that houses have windows) is only a part of experience (see Chapter 1). Derrida's achievement is to understand relational knowledge in the context of literature and art and realise that relations can be changed.

Derrida extends his reasoning about the relational nature of knowledge to demonstrate that even opposites can often be related so that they appear harmonious. For example "black is white" can be shown to be reasonable because blackness only has meaning as an opposite of white so black and white are aspects of the same thing (ie: 'black not white' is 'white not black' is really demonstrating that the two concepts of difference are the same). This analysis into opposites and then demonstrating the relationships between things is known as "deconstruction". Deconstruction can be defined as analysing a text to support seemingly irreconcilable positions.

Science has been attacked by post modernists on the basis that our understanding of science is mediated by language. The attack on science begins with a reasonable proposition:

It is then proposed that reality is only "known" through language and process and that language and processes are things without any intrinsic meaning. Again this is a reasonable statement. As a type of externalism post modernism stops here with a denial that 'reality' can be known. Internalists could counter this viewpoint by pointing out that the processes are not sufficient in themselves, they provide an input into experience and this experience is an undeniable reality. This means that processes mediate between the form of the world and the form of experience (where the forms are not simple 3D objects). What is called 'science' is a set of consistent inferences between experiences; it is a set of hypothetical processes that link undeniable experiences. Post modernists can test the validity of scientific statements by diving into a deep ocean with lead weights around their waists, if scientific knowledge is like literature, a set of words that can be deconstructed, they should be able to argue their way out of sinking.

Post modernism is deeply flawed as an 'explanation' of consciousness because, as was explained in "The Empirical Description of Conscious Experience", we do not experience processes, experience is the output of processes. One of the achievements of postmodernism is to demonstrate that processes are relational and so, without external constraints from the environment and from the experience of consciousness they produce arbitrary results and are devoid of meaning. In other words Derrida and the Post Modernists have misunderstood the connection between processes and conscious experience, declaring that conscious experience is processes and therefore meaningless rather than realising that conscious experience is a form that gives meaning to non-conscious processes (see chapters 1-4).

 Although of little application to consciousness studies, Derrida's approach satisfies the materialist test of acceptability because it is extremely saleable, it allows critics to analyse any work in an apparently intelligent way that can be understood by students who have taken the requisite courses. It allows the immediate conversion of some harmless statement such as "men work hard" into a dialectical argument about the rights of women, comparative values of work and how 'hard' has a different meaning if you are underprivileged. The analysis is allowed to end with a discussion of the political correctness of deconstructing the statement in a media friendly fashion. The only game that is not permitted is for one of the players to hold a firm opinion.

The lesson of Post Modernism is that there is a continuum from structured physical systems to the almost arbitrary language and propositions found in literature. Subjects such as the "nature of self" fall midway along this continuum. Literary individuals or thespians may consider themselves to be a construct of literary and media influences in their lives and sociologists may consider that people in general are socially constructed so that their ideas and behaviour originate in their social environment. According to this thesis the 'self' of a meditator, hermit or Trappist monk should be missing. This does, in part, seem to be the case because the 'social self' disappears in speechless or process-less meditation, what is left behind is conciousness and a sense of joining. The often invented, social processes that people call 'self' fall away leaving an underlying form that exists without language (see Meditation, Dreams and Reality).

It seems that if people want happiness or rapture they could avoid language and process (especially continuous change) and eschew the socially constructed 'self'.

Postmodernism has a political aspect called Post-Marxism. After the fall of the Soviet Union in 1989 many Marxists underwent a transformation into Post Marxists. Curiously Derrida and the postmodern Post Structuralists are "Post" Marxists. Derrida(1994) writes:

This is astonishing for a Post Structuralist because the most complete, pseudo-scientific and rigid structure ever imposed on our view of human society was Marxism. How disappointing that the old men have returned to Marxism when they could have introduced an analysis that might actually work and be acceptable to people.

The presentist, mechanistic, Euclidean beliefs of Postmodernism are the same as those of capitalist materialists and hence stand little chance of undermining capitalism, instead they have helped produce a new, revolutionary capitalism where change and process are the only constants.

Unlike Postmodernism, the rise of Islamic Fundamentalism has produced a vigorous opposition to Western Materialism amongst the poorer classes in the Middle East. The oil rich Arab states have financed Islamic Fundamentalism and have promoted Sharia Law and Islamic education across the Islamic world. Islamic Fundamentalism has become linked to terrorism as a result of American involvement with Israel.

The background to the problem of Israel is interesting and it appears as if the Arabs have a historical case. The establishment of the state of Israel is usually traced back to the Balfour Declaration (1917):

It is clear from this that there was no intention to establish a "State of Israel" because the declaration states that a multicultural community was intended. Various groups in the USA sponsored a massive migration of Jews into Palestine in the 1930's and 40's that resulted in widespread unrest. In 1947 Britain handed the affairs of Palestine to the UN. On May 14th 1948 the Zionists proclaimed a State of Israel and that same day the US announced its support for Zionist Israel even though the country was called Palestine:

There is considerable evidence that the US support for Israel was motivated to a large degree by Cold War diplomacy and Israel was established as a Western outpost in the Middle East (see bibliography 1). The US subsidises Israel to the extent of 2-4 billion dollars per annum depending on whose figures are used. The history of Israel means that there is enormous scope for Arab discontent with the USA so it is difficult to disentangle anti-materialism from anti-Americanism as a source of Islamic terrorism.

Given the overwhelming military, economic and media power of Western Materialism in the twenty first century it is unlikely that any external threat will affect it and it seems that postmodernist, materialist dissent is actively strengthening it.

"Evolution" describes how living organisms change in form over millions of years. It is a result of the obvious fact that things that survive continue and things that die cease to continue.

Many living things begin life as a single cell, such as a fertilised ovum, that then divides scores of times to become a creature or plant etc. The original single cell contains all the information that is needed to specify the form of the mature organism. This cell dies within weeks or months, as do most of the cells that make an organism. It is the form of the organism that survives and also a copy of the instructions and apparatus that are needed to turn a single cell into this form. Most organisms differ from each other; this is mostly because the instructions and apparatus are different between different organisms and between different generations of any type of organism.

If the environment changes then some organisms may not survive long enough to pass on their instructions to sufficient numbers of offspring. This means that that particular set of instructions and apparatus dies out. This causes a set of organisms to 'evolve' because, over many generations, only those organisms with characteristics that are suited to a particular environment continue to be present. This process of selection of characteristics is known as "Natural Selection".

It is tempting to think of the instructions as being like a set of symbols on a sheet of paper but they are far more complex than this. As a fertilised ovum divides it separates itself into two parts and makes copies of the 'chromosomes' that contain both the instruction set and the control apparatus for reading the set. The chromosomes are complicated and are mainly composed of DNA, proteins and RNA, all of which are copied as the cell divides. Part of the DNA is a code for RNA molecules that specify the proteins that will be used in the cell and the organism, this part is known as the 'genes'. Another part of the DNA is a code for RNA molecules that do not specify proteins although some of these control the expression of the genes. The rest of the DNA is of unknown function or has functions that are difficult to understand such as the lengths of DNA called 'transposons' which, according to our current knowledge, seem to be disruptive. The proteins in the chromosomes are known as 'histones' and are also replicated and passed on from generation to generation. The histones are quite varied and control the conversion of DNA into RNA and hence, along with the non-protein encoding RNA, control protein synthesis. The DNA, protein and RNA of the chromosomes form a tiny, controlled, RNA synthesising machine.

There are about 1.8 metres of DNA in a human cell that encodes about 23,000-25,000 genes that specify as many proteins (roundworms have about 20,000 genes)(Human Genome Project (2003)). Perhaps as much as a half of the DNA does not specify genes.

It is often suggested that the 'purpose' of an organism is to perpetuate its instruction set. This would be a reasonable hypothesis if it were possible to determine where the instruction set ends and the organism begins. The chromosome is a tiny machine for producing RNA. It is a complex apparatus that would not be viable if every part of the DNA strand produced RNA in equal amounts. The production of RNA must be carefully controlled by the chromosomal apparatus. Each part of the chromosome is dependent on the other and the chromosomes in turn are dependent on the rest of the cell. At cell division this entire apparatus is passed on to both of the cells that are produced. It is therefore more accurate to say that the 'purpose' of an organism is to perpetuate the form of its cells. Given that an organism is its cells then the 'purpose' of an organism is to perpetuate itself. But this is a mere statement of existence, obviously organisms exist if they exist. There is no grand 'purpose' to be understood from the study of evolution beyond "organisms exist if they exist". There is however a fascinating interplay of processes, forms and environment that is equally interesting.

The theory of evolution can be used to predict that certain behaviours may disappear from society and others may increase in frequency if the environment changes. As an example, the avoidance of the smell of sewage might have had considerable survival value over the last two millenia of urban living. If it can be demonstrated that behaviour is inherited then there would be evidence for a biological evolution of behaviour. The science of Evolutionary Psychology is dedicated to investigating the links between genetics and behaviour (see bibliography 3).

Richard Dawkins (1976), a fervent atheist, has proposed that the concepts of evolution theory can be applied to human culture and beliefs. This idea is known as "Memetics".

UNDER CONSTRUCTION

1. The United States and the Recognition of Israel: A Chronology. Compiled by Raymond H. Geselbracht from Harry S. Truman and the Founding of Israel (Westport, Connecticut, 1997) by Michael T. Benson .

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/israel/palestin.htm

2. Contemporary Philosophy, Critical Theory and Postmodern Thought. Martin Ryder. University of Colorado

http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/postmodern.html

3. The Evolutionary Psychology FAQ. Edward Hagen

http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/projects/human/evpsychfaq.html

References

Balfour Declaration (1917)

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00pp0

Castenada, C. (1968). The Teachings of don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge. Now a web E-book at:

http://www.prismagems.com/castaneda/

Cicero, M.T. (60BC) The Nature of the Gods (Oxford Worlds Classics) by Authors: Marcus Tullius Cicero, PG Walsh Released: June, 1998

http://trisagionseraph.tripod.com/Texts/Cicero.html

Derrida, J. (1982a). Differance. In J. Derrida (Ed.), Margins of Philosophy, pp. 3-27. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Derrida, J. (1994) Spectres of Marx.

English Bill of Rights (1689).

http://www.constitution.org/bor/eng_bor.htm

Frazer, J. G. (1922) The Golden Bough. New York: Macmillan, 1922; Bartleby.com, 2000.

http://www.bartleby.com/196/

Graves, R., Patai, R. (1964). Hebrew Myths. New York: Doubleday.

Herodotus.(450BC?) Voyages and Travels: Ancient and Modern. Vol. XXXIII. The Harvard Classics. New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1909-14; Bartleby.com, 2001. www.bartleby.com/33/

Human Genome Project (2003). How Many Genes Are in the Human Genome?

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/faq/genenumber.shtml

Huxley (1871). Collected Essays.

http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE6/Berk.html

Inglehart, R. Klingemann, H.(2000). Genes, Culture, Democracy and Happiness. Ed Diener and E.M. Suh (eds.) Subjective Well-Being Across Cultures, Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2000.

http://wvs.isr.umich.edu/papers/genecult.pdf

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia on the Sabbath

http://www.christiancommunitychurch.us/dovenet/satencyl.htm

Kau, A. Deconstruction and Science: How Post-Structuralist Literary Theory Applies to Scientific Understanding.

http://www.physics.orst.edu/~stetza/COURSES/ph407h/Deconstruction.pdf

Leibnitz (1717). Collection of Papers which passed between the learned late Mr. Leibnitz and Dr. Clarke .-1717. In Huxley's Collected Essays 1871.

http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/CE6/Berk.html

Lorey, F. (1997). The Flood of Noah and the Flood of Gilgamesh. IMPACT No. 285 March 1997. Institute for Creation Research.

http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-285.htm

Marx, K., Engels, F. (1848). The Manifesto of the Communist Party.

http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html

Paine, T. (1776). Common Sense.

http://www.constitution.org/tp/comsense.htm

Weaver, J.A. (2001). (Post) Modern Science (Education): Propositions and Alternative Paths. Eds Weaver, J.A., Marla, M., Appelbaum, P. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2001.

Welzel, C., Inglehart, R. Klingemann, H. (2000?). Human Development as A Theory of Social Change.

http://wvs.isr.umich.edu/papers/KRISEJPR.pdf 

World Values Survey 1995-2001. (ICPSR archive at the University of Michigan)

http://wvs.isr.umich.edu/find.shtml