Since the COVID-19 pandemic started to gain space on the front page of the Mainstream Media and then prompted the “closure” of entire countries, following medieval ways to fight epidemics, as exposed by Donald G. McNeil Jr, on his article published by the New York Times in February 28, 2020 titled: “To Take on the Coronavirus, Go Medieval on It”, several phenomena caught my attention. Acting in my role as Gig Economy driver, delivering food in this small and nice town named Huntersville (57K Inhabitants and me: Legal Alien), in North Carolina, United States, was able, first hand to witness different approaches people and companies use to face this pandemic, like: · Use of face masks of any kind, everywhere, everyday=? · Compulsive hoarding of Toilet Paper=? · Installation of small plexiglass dividers or huge plastic curtains on customer service areas=? · The Olympic walking, as pictured by Trevor Noah, Host of the Daily Show, renamed because of the quarantine: “The Daily Social Distancing Show”, mocking people performing pirouettes to avoid being even near other human beings=? · People asking their FOOD to be delivered at the mat of their front doors=? · Closing Doors and forcing people to walk in/out through arbitrary design patterns in stores=? · Washing hands= OK These and other crazy behaviors published by news and people made me think: How was it in other Pandemics, on Part One will try to bring light on those past behaviors. On Part Two will browse facts and most amazing behaviors on this actual Pandemic and on Part Three will work on the question: Was this epidemic, with epicenter in Communist Governed China, convenient for other Governments around the globe?

This edited collection focuses on the moral and social dimensions of ignorance—an undertheorized category in analytic philosophy. Contributors address such issues as the relation between ignorance and deception, ignorance as a moral excuse, ignorance as a legal excuse, and the relation between ignorance and moral character. In the moral realm, ignorance is sometimes considered as an excuse; some specific kind of ignorance seems to be implied by a moral character; and ignorance is closely related to moral risk. Ignorance has certain social dimensions as well: it has been claimed to be the engine of science; it seems to be entailed by privacy and secrecy; and it is widely thought to constitute a legal excuse in certain circumstances. Together, these contributions provide a sustained inquiry into the nature of ignorance and the pivotal role it plays in the moral and social domains.

In this book, the Bible passage that really pointed out the main problem faced by humanity was quoted; Hosea 4:6 says, My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge . . . . Here, God is actually referring to His people or chosen ones. We may say, the so-called children of God. But the question is why will the people who are called Gods children still get into judgment of destruction, since it is God who created all things, has all good things, and owns all powers? The simple answer is exactly what God said. If we read further, we will discover that the priest was mentioned. This means no one was left behind in this matter. The issue of ignorance and knowledge is a great issue that does not only attack the people who did not know or believe in God but also the people who knows and believes. This book will give you the deep meaning and truths about ignorance and knowledge. This book will also open your eyes of understanding to weapons that ignorance uses to capture its victim and how to be free from them.

There are two forms of atheism, not just one, and in the death of ignorant atheism, James Duncan shows how important it is for both believers and non-believers to understand the difference between the two. The book addresses and debunks the common objections raised by modern atheists against the existence of the creator, and convincingly demonstrates how atheism is just empty fiction that exists within western society due to wide spread ignorance, and that most professing atheists would renounce the idea if they were truly aware of its self-contradictory and illogical nature. This book exposes modern atheism for what it really is.

The underdevelopment of Africa mostly stems from corruption, ignorance and indifference. I know of an ignorance which is rooted in ignorance and sadly it seems most of Africans are infected with this disease which never learns to change looked at him a dead mind and oblivion, so closed, asleep and seeped in his ignorance; yet indifference to his situation. Hence I asked myself is there any hope for such? Certainly, there is the medicine that transforms through practical knowledge which calls for understanding. But if people think educating oneself formally in information is expensive then try ignorance. This is the firm belief of the author that ignorance and indifference are the greatest obstacles to progress. However, positive change is possible if it is fuelled by passion and determination.

This book argues that ignorance of law should usually be a complete excuse from criminal liability. It defends this conclusion by invoking two presumptions: first, the content of criminal law should conform to morality; second, mistakes of fact and mistakes of law should be treated symmetrically. The author grounds his position in an underlying theory of moral and criminal responsibility according to which blameworthiness consists in a defective response to the moral reasons one has. Since persons cannot be faulted for failing to respond to reasons for criminal liability they do not believe they have, then ignorance should almost always excuse. But persons are somewhat responsible for their wrongs when their mistakes of law are reckless, that is, when they consciously disregard a substantial and unjustifiable risk that their conduct might be wrong. This book illustrates this with examples and critiques the arguments to the contrary offered by criminal theorists and moral philosophers. It assesses the real-world implications for the U.S. system of criminal justice. The author describes connections between the problem of ignorance of law and other topics in moral and legal theory.

These are my simple and practical notes for all of the books of the Bible. I am currently in the process of still writing all of my notes out, so not all of the chapters are there yet, but I have quite a few books of the Bible done, and am about 25% of the way through the rest of the Bible. I will update this ever time a book is finished, so it updates to the purchaser, but if you'd like to pay ahead of time you can get the books quicker and cheaper now. The more books I add, the more expensive it will become. I've been working on this for about two years now, and will continue to work on it for another (likely another six more years to finish the entire Bible (hopefully sooner)). Thank you for supporting my work, and I hope it's a useful tool for you as you dig deeper into God's Word. It should also be understood, I am not a scholar by any means (I just like to dig around in scripture, and answer difficult questions, hence the title of the book). Some of my thoughts are taken from much smarter men than me, and if I know where the source comes from, I will do my best to make mention of it and give credit where credit is due. Otherwise, these are things I got from my own personal studies, and all the stories I give are from personal experience.

This is a book about the legal fiction that sometimes we know what we don't. The willful ignorance doctrine says defendants who bury their heads in the sand rather than learn they're doing something criminal are punished as if they knew. Not all legal fictions are unjustified, however. This one, used within proper limits, is a defensible way to promote the aims of the criminal law. Preserving your ignorance can make you as culpable as if you knew what you were doing, and so the interests and values protected by the criminal law can be promoted by treating you as if you had knowledge. This book provides a careful defense of this method of imputing mental states based on equal culpability. On the one hand, the theory developed here shows why the willful ignorance doctrine is only partly justified and requires reform. On the other hand, it demonstrates that the criminal law needs more legal fictions of this kind. Repeated indifference to the truth may substitute for knowledge, and very culpable failures to recognize risks can support treating you as if you took those risks consciously. Moreover, equal culpability imputation should also be applied to corporations, not just individuals. Still, such imputation can be taken too far. We need to determine its limits to avoid injustice. Thus, the book seeks to place equal culpability imputation on a solid normative foundation, while demarcating its proper boundaries. The resulting theory of when and why the criminal law can pretend we know what we don't has far-reaching implications for legal practice and reveals a pressing need for reform.