What extras can I put in my newspaper? (horoscopes, comics, etc.)?
I’m writing up a newspaper and I need to add some extra things in, like a joke column for example. But I want to do something different from comics and horoscopes and all that, because that’s what everyone else is doing.
Answer by Maz =]
ads for anything – schools, shops, etc
and those ’embarrassment pages’, oh how i love them hahahah
thats if its a magazine though, a newspaper might be quite different
more serious stuff like weddings and funerals and christenings and births and those opinion articles etc
Answer by Green bows , x
Gossip from the area your from , the horoscope for your town maybe , ? you can get alot of ideas from magazines and stuff , good luck with it
answer mine please http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhKedPIKQdrdytU2Fe5eHb_sy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20090814033040AAaHutJ
Answer by David Firepig
i think daily horoscope would be fun, or you can try the relationship horoscope – everyone love it
What do you think? Answer below!
What does it mean that psychoanalysis and marxism are not falsiable?
Answer by John
Ah, falsifiability and defeasibility! Good question.
Psychoanalysis, Marxism, astrology, etc. are what rigorous scientific practitioner call “pseudo-sciences. A hallmark of scientific method is falsifiability. A good hypothesis should not only account for what it hopes to see but, additionally, what results will falsify the hypothesis. So if I say that “If A, then B” but I do A and get C, then C is a falsifying condition for my hypothesis. I have set up strict criteria for my hypothesized outcomes and ANY OTHER outcome falsifies my hypothesis/theory.
The above mentioned “sciences” do not have this characteristics. Let’s take astrology, for instance. I can say that a person with the astrological sign of Leo has this, that, and the other character traits. I can also make predictions of their future. But these things are always vague enough to allow them to be slippery. So, your local newspaper horoscope says that you will have, I don’t know, an unexpected surprise coming soon. What does this mean? It isn’t actually predicting anything of substance. It is saying something that a million different things could satisfy. Thus, it is not falsifiable. There is nothing that could happen that would prove it wrong (false).
Marxism predicts distinct stages of historical-economic-socal development; hence, historical materialism. Marxism predicts that the final and natural stage of society is communism. But if we look at the former Soviet Union, what happened? Well, Marxism is so vague that it escapes reproach (i.e. it wasn’t proven wrong even if it failed). A Marxist could say “Well, the USSR went straight from feudalism to socialism, so they skipped the stage of capitalism” or some other such excuse.
The problem, in general, with social “sciences” is that they cannot be controlled. There are no ideal environments, by the very nature of society, like in a scientist’s laboratory. So, should we abandon things like psychoanalysis for description and, perhaps, a degree of explanation? Probably not, if they can be useful tools. But we should be careful about how we think of the word “science” in reference to them.
Check out 20th century philosopher Karl Popper, He had a lot to say about falsifiability.
Add your own answer in the comments!
Das tägliche Kurz-Horoskop im Video mit Pascale Portmann.