In historiography, the Idea of Progress is the theory that advances in technology, science, and social organization can produce an improvement in the human condition. That is, people can become happier in terms of quality of life (social progress) through economic development (modernization), and the application of science and technology (scientific progress). The assumption is that the process will happen once people apply their reason and skills, for it is not divinely foreordained. The role of the expert is to identify hindrances that slow or neutralize progress.

The Idea of Progress emerged primarily in the Enlightenment in the 18th century.^[1][2] Significant movements in this period were Diderot's Encyclopedia, which carried on the campaign against authority and superstition, and the French Revolution.

Some scholars consider the idea of progress that was affirmed with the Enlightenment, as a secularization of ideas from early Christianity, and a reworking of ideas from ancient Greece.^[3][4][5] Darwin's (1809-82) theory of evolution by natural selection made progress a necessary law of nature and gave the doctrine its first scientific formulation. The idea was challenged by many in the 20th century who argued that technological progress could lead to large-scale destruction, as seen in World War I and World War II, and run counter to the basic premise of the Idea of Progress. It remains a matter of debate among intellectuals.^[6]

Criticisms[edit]

In the 19th century Romantic critics charged that progress did not automatically better the human condition, and indeed in some ways it may make it worse.^[33]

Thomas Malthus (1766–1834) reacted against the concept of progress as set forth by William Godwin and Condorcet because he believed that inequality of conditions is 'the best calculated to develop the energies and faculties of man.' He said, 'Had population and food increased in the same ratio, it is probable that man might never have emerged from the savage state.' He argued that man's capacity for improvement has been demonstrated by the growth of his intellect, a form of progress which offsets the distresses engendered by the law of population.^[34]

A fierce opponent of the Idea of Progress was German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900), who became the prophet of decadence, scorning the 'weakling's doctrines of optimism,' and in his diagnoses of the times undermining the pillars of modernism, including faith in progress, to allow the strong individual to stand with his radical value system above the plebeian masses. An important part of his radically critical thinking consists of the attempt to use the classical model of 'eternal recurrence of the same' to dislodge the Idea of Progress.^[35]

A cyclical theory of history was adopted by Oswald Spengler (1880–1936), a German historian who wrote a very influential pessimistic study of the end of progress called The Decline of the West (1920). The horrors of World War I challenged the unblinking optimism of the modernizers. Clearly progress would not be automatic, and the rise of totalitarianism in the 20th century undercut the idea that technological improvement guaranteed democracy and moral advancement. Spengler was challenged by the optimism of British historian Arnold J. Toynbee (1889–1975), who felt that Christianity would help modern civilization overcome its challenges.^[36]

The strongest critics of the Idea of Progress complain that it remains a dominant idea in the 21st century, and shows no sign of diminished influence. As one fierce critic, British historianJohn Gray (b. 1948), concludes:^[37]

"Faith in the liberating power of knowledge is encrypted into modern life. Drawing on some of Europe's most ancient traditions, and daily reinforced by the quickening advance of science, it cannot be given up by an act of will. The interaction of quickening scientific advance with unchanging human needs is a fate that we may perhaps temper, but cannot overcome... Those who hold to the possibility of progress need not fear. The illusion that through science humans can remake the world is an integral part of the modern condition. Renewing the eschatological hopes of the past, progress is an illusion with a future."

Myth of Progress[edit]

Some 20th-century authors refer to the "Myth of Progress" to challenge the Idea of Progress, especially the assumption that the human condition will inevitably improve. In 1932 English physician Montague David Eder wrote: "The myth of progress states that civilization has moved, is moving, and will move in a desirable direction. Progress is inevitable... Philosophers, men of science and politicians have accepted the idea of the inevitability of progress."^[38] Eder argues that the advancement of civilization is leading to greater unhappiness and loss of control in the environment.

Sociologist P. A. Sorokin argued, "The ancient Chinese, Babylonian, Hindu, Greek, Roman, and most of the medieval thinkers supporting theories of rhythmical, cyclical or trendless move­ments of social processes were much nearer to reality than the present proponents of the linear view."^[39]

Philosopher Karl Popper emphasized the inadequacies of the Idea of Progress as a scientific explanation of social phenomena.^[40] More recently, Kirkpatrick Sale, a self-proclaimedneo-luddite author, wrote exclusively about progress as a myth, in an essay entitled "Five Facets of a Myth".^[41]

Iggers (1965) says the great failing of the prophets of progress was that they underesti­mated the extent of man's destructiveness and irrationality. The failing of the critics of the Idea of Progress, he adds, came in misunderstanding the role of ra­tionality and morality in human behavior.^[42]

Environmentalism[edit]

Among environmentalists, there is a continuum between two opposing poles. The one pole is optimistic, progressive, and business-oriented, and endorses the classic Idea of Progress. For example, bright green environmentalism endorses the idea that new designs, social innovations and green technologies can solve critical environmental challenges. The other is pessimistic in respect of technological solutions,^[43] warning of impending global crisis (through climate change or peak oil, for example) and tends to reject the very idea of modernity and the myth of progress that is so central to modernization thinking.^[44] Similarly, Kirkpatrick Sale, wrote about progress as a myth benefiting the few, and a pending environmental doomsday for everyone.^[45] An example is the philosophy of Deep Ecology.

The Sephirot in Jewish Kabbalah
	Category:Sephirot	v t e

Da'at or Daas ("Knowledge", Hebrew: דעת [ˈdaʕaθ]) is a Hebrew word that means belief. In the branch of Jewish mysticism known as Kabbalah, Da'at is the location (the mystical state) where all ten sephirot in the Tree of Life are united as one.

In Da'at, all sephirot exist in their perfected state of infinite sharing. The three sephirot of the left column that would receive and conceal the Divine light, instead share and reveal it. Since all sephirot radiate infinite self-giving Divine Light, it is no longer possible to distinguish one sephirafrom another, thus they are one.

Da'at is not always depicted in representations of the sefirot, and could in a sense be considered an "empty slot" into which the gem of any other sefirot can be placed. Properly, the Divine Light is always shining, but not all humans can see it. The concealment or revelation of the Divine Light shining through Da'at does not actually happen in Da'at itself. It only seems that way from the human perspective within Malkuth. The perception of change can only occur in Malkuth. Humans who become self-giving (Altruism) like the Light become able to see it, and for them the benefits of Da'at's light seem "revealed". However, humans who remain selfish (Selfishness) cannot see it, and for them its benefits seem "hidden".

As a representative sephirah[edit]

Properly, Da'at is not a sephirah, but rather is all ten sephirot united as one. Nevertheless, Da'at is sometimes counted as a sephirah instead of Keter, from the perspective of finite creation using Da'at to represent the "reflection of" (the "inner dimension" of) the infinity of Keter. Thus Da'at appears in the configuration of the sephirot along the middle axis, directly beneath Keter. It corresponds to theTzelem elohim (the "image of God embedded in humanity") and to the cerebellum (i.e. the "posterior brain").^{[citation needed]} Alternate countings of the sephirot produce 10 powers ("10 and not 9, 10 and not 11" - Sefer Yetzirah) by either including Keter or Da'at. In the scheme of Moshe Cordovero, Da'at is omitted, while in the scheme of Isaac Luria, Keter (Will) is omitted. Cordovero describes the sephirot as one light in ten vessels. Luria follows this, but lists sephirot beginning with Chokhmah (Wisdom) to describe their outer dimensions.

The Sephirot in Jewish Kabbalah
	Category:Sephirot	v t e

Keter (Hebrew: כֶּתֶר (help·info), lit. Crown) also known as Kether, is the topmost of the Sephirotof the Tree of Life in Kabbalah. Since its meaning is "crown", it is interpreted as both the "topmost" of the Sephirot and the "regal crown" of the Sephirot. It is between Chokmah and Binah(with Chokmah on the right and Binah in the left) and it sits above Tiphereth. It is usually given three paths, to Chokmah, Tiphereth, and Binah.

Keter is so sublime, it is called in the Zohar "the most hidden of all hidden things", and is completely incomprehensible to man. It is also described as absolute compassion, and RabbiMoshe Cordovero describes it as the source of the 13 Supernal Attributes of Mercy.

Keter is invisible, colorless.^[1]

Description[edit]

According to the Bahir: "What are the ten utterances? The first is supreme crown, blessed be His name and His people." ^[2]

The first Sephirah is called the Crown, since a crown is worn above the head. The Crown therefore refers to things that are above the mind's abilities of comprehension. All of the other Sephirot are likened to the body which starts with the head and wends its way down into action. But the crown of a king lies above the head and connects the concept of "monarchy", which is abstract and intangible, with the tangible and concrete head of the king.

This first Sefirah represents the primal stirrings of intent in the Ein Soph, or the arousal of desire to come forth into the varied life of being.^[2] But in this sense, although it contains all the potential for content, it contains no content itself, and is therefore called 'Nothing', 'The Hidden Light', 'The air that cannot be grasped'. Being desire to bring the world into being, Keter is absolute compassion.^[3]

The name of God associated with Keter is Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh (Hebrew: אהיה אשר אהיה), the name through which he revealed himself to Moses from the burning bush.^[4] "It is from the name Ehyeh that all kinds of sustenance emanate, coming from the source, which is the infinite".

Keter, although being the highest Sephirah of its world, receives from the Sephirah of Malkuth of the domain above it (see Sephirot). The uppermost Keter sits below no other Sephirah, although it is below Or Ein Soph which is the source of all Sephirot.

Da'at and Keter are the same Sephirah from two different aspects. From one aspect this Sephirah is referred to Keter and from another aspect it is referred to as Da'at. Therefore when Da'at is counted then Keter is not counted and when Keter is counted Da'at is not counted^{[citation needed]}.

Abraham Miguel Cardozo (also Cardoso; c. 1626–1706) was a Sabbatean prophet and physician born in Rio Seco, Spain.^[1] A descendant of Marranos from around the city of Celorico, in the province of Beira, Portugal, he studied medicine at the University of Salamanca together with his older brother Fernando Isaac, and while the latter was given to his studies, Michael spent his time in singing serenades under ladies' balconies. After having completed his education, he left Spain for Venice. There, probably at the instigation of his brother, he embraced Judaism and received the name "Abraham". Later he established himself as a physician atLivorno, but did not meet with much success until his recommendation by the Grand Duke of Tuscany to Othman, the bey of Tripoli.

Becoming thereafter fairly prosperous, Cardoso married two wives, and began to devote himself to kabbalistic speculations, in which he appears to have been previously initiated at Livorno by Moses Pinheiro. With the appearance of the Shabbethaian movement, he assumed the character of a prophet, pretending to have had dreams and visions, and sent circulars in all directions to support the Messianic claim of Sabbatai Zevi. Cardoso's pretended or actual belief in the Messiah was not renounced even when Zevi embraced Islam; he justified the latter on the plea that it was necessary for him to be counted among the sinners, in order that he might atone for Israel's sins, in a common messianic interpretation to Isaiah LIII that resembles in many ways the early Christian messianic interpretation of that chapter. Later Cardoso gave himself out as "Messiah ben Ephraim", asserting that the Messiah is he who teaches the true conception of God. This conception Cardoso expounded in nearly all his writings: that the true God is not the "En-Sof", but the "Keter 'Elyon", the first being a passive power which has no connection with the world.

Life[edit]

Being endowed with great eloquence, Cardoso had many followers, but many enemies as well. An influential personage, Isaac Lumbroso, by spending much money, obtained his banishment from Tripoli. Cardoso then wandered from place to place, trying to lead people astray by his prophecies and visions, but meeting no success, as the rabbis had issued warnings against his vagaries. In 1703 he settled at Cairo and became the physician of the pasha of Egypt. Three years later, in 1706, he was assassinated by his nephew during a discussion on money matters.

4000 YEARS OF JEWISH HISTORY
From 'A History of the Jews'

By Paul Johnson (Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1987)

Writing this epic history covering 4,000 years
Paul Johnson starts with a Prologue explaining
why he, a Christian, decided to write this epic.
His Epilogue is what he found out

Prologue

Why have I written a history of the Jews? There are four reasons. The first is sheer curiosity. When I was working on my History of Christianity, I became aware for the first time in my life of the magnitude of the debt Christianity owes to Judaism. It was not, as I had been taught to suppose, that the New Testament replaced the Old; rather, that Christianity gave a fresh interpretation to an ancient form of monotheism, gradually evolving into a different religion but carrying with it much of the moral and dogmatic theology, the liturgy, the institutions and the fundamental concepts of its forebear. I thereupon determined, should opportunity occur, to write about the people who had given birth to my faith, to explore their history back to its origins and forward to the present day, and to make up my own mind about their role and significance. The world tended to see the Jews as a race which had ruled itself in antiquity and set down its records in the Bible; had then gone underground for many centuries; had emerged at last only to be slaughtered by the Nazis; and, finally, had created a state of its own, controversial and beleaguered. But these were merely salient episodes. I wanted to link them together, to find and study the missing portions, assemble them into a whole, and make sense of it.

My second reason was the excitement I found in the sheer span of Jewish history. From the time of Abraham up to the present covers the best part of four millennia. That is more than three-quarters of the entire history of civilized humanity. I am a historian who believes in long continuities and delights in tracing them. The Jews created a separate and specific identity earlier than almost any other people which still survives. They have maintained it, amid appalling adversities, right up to the present. Whence came this extraordinary endurance? What was the particular strength of the all-consuming idea which made the Jews different and kept them homogeneous? Did its continuing power lie in its essential immutability, or its capacity adapt, or both? These are sinewy themes with which to grapple.

My third reason was that Jewish history covers not only vast tracts of time but huge areas. The Jews have penetrated many societies and left their mark on all of them. Writing a history of the Jews is almost like writing a history of the world, but from a highly peculiar angle vision. It is world history seen from the viewpoint of a learned and intelligent victim. So the effort to grasp history as it appeared to Jews produces illuminating insights. Dietrich Bonhoeffer noticed this same effect when he was in a Nazi prison. 'We have learned', he wrote in 1942, 'to see the great events of world history from below, from the perspective of those who are excluded, under suspicion, ill-treated powerless, oppressed and scorned, in short those who suffer.' He found it, he said, 'an experience of incomparable value'. The historian finds a similar merit in telling the story of the Jews: it adds to history the new and revealing dimension of the underdog.

Finally the book gave me the chance to reconsider objectively, in light of a study covering nearly 4,000 years, the most intractable of human questions: what are we on earth for? Is history merely a series of events whose sum is meaningless? Is there no fundamental moral difference between the history of the human race and the history, say of ants? Or is there a providential plan of which we are, however humbly, the agents? No people has ever insisted more firmly than the Jews that history has a purpose and humanity a destiny. At a very early stage in their collective existence they believed they had detected a divine scheme for the human race, of which their own society was to be a pilot. They worked out their role in immense detail. They clung to it with heroic persistence in the face of savage suffering. Many of them believe it still. Others transmuted it into Promethean endeavours to raise our condition by purely human means. The Jewish vision became the prototype for many similar grand designs for humanity, both divine and man-made. The Jews, therefore, stand right at the centre of the perennial attempt to give human life the dignity of a purpose. Does their own history suggest that such attempts are worth making? Or does it reveal their essential futility? The account that follows, the result of my own inquiry, will I hope help its readers to answer these questions for themselves.

Epilogue  Top

In his Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus describes Abraham as 'a man of great sagacity' who had 'higher notions of virtue than others of his time'. He therefore determined to change completely the views which all then had about God'. One way of summing up 4,000 years of Jewish history is to ask ourselves what would have happened to the human race if Abraham had not been a man of great sagacity, or if he had stayed in Ur and kept his higher notions to himself, and no specific Jewish people had come into being. Certainly the world without the Jews would have been a radically different place. Humanity might eventually have stumbled upon all the Jewish insights. But we cannot be sure. All the great conceptual discoveries of the intellect seem obvious and inescapable once they have been revealed, but it requires a special genius to formulate them for the first time. The Jews had this gift. To them we owe the idea of equality before the law, both divine and human; of the sanctity of life and the dignity of the human person; of the individual conscience and so of personal redemption; of the collective conscience and so of social responsibility; of peace as an abstract ideal and love as the foundation of justice, and many other items which constitute the basic moral furniture of the human mind. Without the Jews it might have been a much emptier place.

Order of Christ (Ordem Militar de Cristo)
Emblem of the Order
Award of  Portuguese Republic
Type	Honorific Order
Religious affiliation	Secular
Ribbon	Red
Eligibility	Portuguese and foreign military personnel
Awarded for	Outstanding military merit
Status	Currently awarded
Grand Master	President of the Portuguese Republic
Established	1319 (founded) 1789 (secularized)
Precedence
Next (higher)	Order of the Tower and Sword
Next (lower)	Order of Aviz
Decorations of the Order

The Military Order of Christ (Ordem Militar de Cristo) previously the Order of the Knights of Our Lord Jesus Christ (Ordem dos Cavaleiros de Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo) was the former Knights Templarorder in Portugal, after the suppression of the Templars in 1312, by direct order of the Pope Clement V. It was founded in 1318, with the protection of the Portuguese King Dinis I, who refused to pursue and persecute the former knights as had occurred in all the other sovereign states under the Catholic Church influence.

Under heavy influence from Philip IV of France, Pope Clement V had the Knights Templar annihilated throughout France and most of Europe on charges of heresy, but King Denis of Portugal re-instituted the Templars of Tomar as the Order of Christ, largely for their aid during the Reconquista and in the reconstruction of Portugal after the wars. King Denis negotiated with Pope Clement's successor John XXII for the new order's recognition and right to inherit the Templar assets and property.

Contents

  [hide] 

• 1 History
• 2 Grades and Badges
  • 2.1 Insignia
• 3 People associated with the Order of Christ
• 4 Locations associated with the Order of Christ
• 5 Entities using the cross of the order in their insignia
• 6 See also
• 7 References
• 8 Bibliography

History[edit]

Main article: History of the Order of Christ

The order's origins lie in the Knights Templar, founded circa 1118. The knights saw their persecution by the King of France and eventual disbandment by the Pope in 1312. With this, the King Dinis I of Portugal created the Order of Christ in 1317 for the knights that were able to survive their mass slaughter throughout Europe.^[1] In Portugal, the order saw great riches and importance within the Age of Discoveries.

In 1789, the Queen Maria I of Portugal secularized the order.^[1] In 1910, with the end of the Portuguese monarchy, the order was extinguished. However, in 1917, the order was revived and the Grand-Master of the Order was to be the President of Portugal. The Military Order of Christ, together with the Military Orders of Aviz and of St. James of the Sword form the group of the "Ancient Military Orders", governed by a Chancellor and a Council of eight members, appointed by the President of the Republic, to assist him as Grand Master in all matters concerning the administration of the Order. The Order, despite its name, can be conferred on civilians and on military, Portuguese and foreigners, for outstanding services to the Republic, in parliament, in the government, in the diplomatic service, in the Courts of Justice, on public authorities or on the Civil Service.^[2]

Amaterasu (天照^?), Amaterasu-ōmikami (天照大神／天照大御神^?) or Ōhirume-no-muchi-no-kami (大日孁貴神^?) is a part of the Japanese myth cycle and also a major deity of the Shinto religion. She is the goddess of the sun, but also of the universe. The name Amaterasu derived from Amateru meaning "shining in heaven." The meaning of her whole name, Amaterasu-ōmikami, is "the great august kami (God) who shines in the heaven".^{[N 1]} The Emperor of Japan is said to be a direct descendant of Amaterasu.

Contents

  [hide] 

• 1 History
• 2 Worshipping the Sun Goddess
• 3 In popular culture
• 4 See also
• 5 Notes
• 6 References

History[edit]

The oldest tales of Amaterasu come from the ca. 680 AD Kojiki and ca. 720 AD Nihon Shoki, the oldest records of Japanese history. In Japanese mythology, Amaterasu, the goddess of the sun, is the sister of Susanoo, the god of storms and the sea, and of Tsukuyomi, the god of the moon. It was written that Amaterasu had painted the landscape with her siblings to create ancient Japan. All three were born from Izanagi, when he was purifying himself after entering Yomi, the underworld, after failing to save Izanami. Amaterasu was born when Izanagi washed out his left eye, Tsukuyomi was born from the washing of the right eye, and Susanoo from the washing of the nose.

She became the ruler of the sun and the heavens along with her brother, Tsukuyomi, the god of the moon and ruler of the night. Originally, Amaterasu shared the sky with Tsukuyomi, her husband and brother until, out of disgust, he killed the goddess of food, Uke Mochi, when she pulled "food from her rectum, nose, and mouth" ^[2] This killing upset Amaterasu causing her to label Tsukuyomi an evil god and split away from him; separating night from day.

The texts also tell of a long-standing rivalry between Amaterasu and her other brother, Susanoo. When he was to leave Heaven by orders of Izanagi, he went to bid his sister goodbye. Amaterasu was suspicious, but when Susanoo proposed a challenge to prove his sincerity, she accepted. Each of them took an object of the other's and from it birthed gods and goddesses. Amaterasu birthed three women from Susano's sword while he birthed five men from her necklace. Claiming the gods were hers because they were born of her necklace, and the goddesses were his, she decided that she had won the challenge, as his item produced women. The two were content for a time, but her brother became restless and went on a rampage, destroying Amaterasu's rice fields, hurling a flayed pony at her loom, and killing one of her attendants in a fit of rage. Amaterasu, who was in fury and grief, hid inside the Ama-no-Iwato ("heavenly rock cave"), thus effectively hiding the sun for a long period of time. Though she was persuaded to leave the cave, Susanoo was punished by being banished from Heaven. Both later amended their conflict when Susanoo gave her the Kusanagi-no-Tsurugi sword as a reconciliation gift.

According to legend, Amaterasu bequeathed to her descendant Ninigi: the mirror, Yata no Kagami; the jewel, Yasakani no Magatama; and the sword, Kusanagi-no-Tsurugi. This sacred mirror, jewel, and sword collectively became the three Imperial Regalia of Japan.