We show that Notch signaling converges

Our experiments reveal integral roles for the nutrient sensor kinase mTOR and its substrate defining protein Rictor, which regulates the activation of Akt for Notch mediated survival. Both biochemical approaches and the analysis of site directed mutants identify AktS473 activity as the downstream target of the NIC mTORC2 signaling cascade. You might have to put up with pain and discomfort throughout the healing time, which is not more than 3 to 6 weeks. However, cheap nfl jerseysit is important to remember to never attempt to treat yourself. New Balance 247 hombre Discount Jerseys Free Shipping You could inflict a permanent damage to the rib by disturbing its alignment. Yep, looks like its going to be a lot of linemen and kickers and things like that. Let’s go take a look and see what quarterbacks Cheap Jerseys Supply we have. Adidas Pas Cher We got Drew Brees, and Bulger and McNabb still left. nike tn noir femme Vladimir Guerrero (234) Vladimir Guerrero is not only the leader in this franchise’s history in home runs with 234, he also ranks in the Angels’ all time top 10, and has only been playing there since 2004.

  • Nike Air Max 2017 Donna Bianche
  • This guy is one of the game’s greatest, somewhat unheralded,nfl jerseys cheap modern day sluggers. Guerrero played in Montreal from 1996 to 2003, and his best season there was 2000, when he hit.345 (career high), with 44 home runs (also a career best) and 123 runs batted in. Matthew Stafford UGA Jersey Vocational training dates all the way back to the Middle Ages. Sac À Dos Fjallraven Kanken It relies on the notion that actual work experience is as valuable as sitting in a classroom and being told about it. adidas tubular boost Know how to cobble a shoe as well as the person teaching you? Congratulations, you’re now a cobbler. Then we felt like, because of everything that was happening all over the world, that it really not soon enough, he said, this is Cheap NBA Jerseys China a message of love and people coming together. Fjallraven Kanken Big And so we felt like, it was very important to do this, but do it right. Said there was added pressure because, in such a Discount Wholesale Authentic Jerseys Free Shipping small community, knows somebody who was directly affected by this.. Now let me move on to our golf business. http://www.cheapjerseys2013.comWe’ll continue the divestment process for TaylorMade, Adams, and Ashworth.

  • Air Max 90 Donna 2017
  • It is strategically Wholesale Authentic Jerseys Free Shipping the right decision that’s been taken. FLYKNIT LUNAR3 For a speedy recovery, the patient must follow the guidelines or instructions given by the doctors. One must refrain from any activity that may strain the abdominal muscles. While complete bed rest would be required for a while, one can perform mild activities in a few days.

    We show that Notch signaling converges

    Further notes on hospitality 1

    Let us say yes to who or what turns up, before any determination, before any anticipation, before any identification, whether or not it has to do with a foreigner, an immigrant, an invited guest, or an unexpected visitor, whether or not the new arrival is the citizen of another country, a human, animal, or divine creature, a living or dead thing, male or female.
    Jacques Derrida: On Hospitality

    To consider adversity, affliction, as a friend and poison as invaluable influence. If we don’t produce our own rituals of terror, terrorism will come from the outside as though unwanted and as if not of our own making. I know I can speak for the country I come from; we really think it’s not us. That’s insane. We’re way beyond complicit with the way we’re being attacked. We created that, and it’s the last thing United States wants to look at. That’s the medicine we can’t swallow, there.
    Robert Kocik


    to accommodate, accommodation
    alienation
    attack
    border
    borderland
    boundary
    bound/less/ness
    difference
    endosymbiosis
    fear
    foreign, foreigner, foreignness
    guest
    hospitable, hospitality
    (to) host
    hostibility
    hostile, hostility
    hostis (host or enemy)
    identity
    immigration
    invitation
    to invite
    to include, inclusion/exclusion
    inside/outside
    interdependence
    limit/less/ness
    master
    to (be) open, openness
    other, otherness
    to own, ownership
    poison
    porousness
    reception
    rejection
    stranger, strangeness
    territory
    terror, terrorism
    unknown
    violence
    to visit, visitor
    to welcome
    within
    xein
    xenias
    xenos


    Among the serious problems we are dealing with here is that of the foreigner, who, inept at speaking the language, always risks being without defense before the law of the country that welcomes or expels him; the foreigner IS first of all foreign to the legal language in which the duty of hospitality is formulated, the right to asylum, its limits, norms, policing, etc. He has to ask for hospitality in a language which by definition is not his own, the one imposed on him by the master of the house, the host, the king, the lord, the authorities, the nation, the State, the father, etc. This personage imposes on him translation into their own language, and that’s the first act of violence. That is where the question of hospitality begins: must we ask the foreigner to understand us, to speak our language, in all the senses of this term, in all its possible extensions, before being able and so as to be able to welcome him into our country? If he was already speaking our language, with all that that implies, if we already shared everything that is shared with a language, would the foreigner still be a foreigner and could we speak of asylum or hospitality in regard to him?
    Derrida: On Hospitality, p. 15

    If we wanted to pause for a moment on this significant fact, we would have to note once again a paradox or a contradiction: this right to hospitality offered to a foreigner “as a family,” represented and protected by his or her family name, is at once what makes hospitality possible, or the hospitable relationship to the foreigner possible, but by the same token what limits and prohibits it. Because hospitality, in this situation, is not offered to an anonymous new arrival and someone who has neither name, nor patronym, nor family, nor social status, and who is therefore treated not as a foreigner but as another barbarian. We have alluded to this: the difference, one of the subtle and sometimes ungraspable differences between the foreigner and the absolute other is that the latter cannot have a name or a family name; the absolute or unconditional hospitality I would like to offer him or her presupposes a break with hospitality in the ordinary sense, with conditional hospitality, with the right to or pact of hospitality. — To put it in different terms, absolute hospitality requires that I open up my home and that I give not only to the foreigner (provided with a family name, with the social status of being a foreigner, etc.), but to the absolute, unknown, anonymous other, and that I give place to them, that I let them come, that I let them arrive, and take place in the place I offer them, without asking of them either reciprocity (entering into a pact) or even their names.
    Derrida: On Hospitality, p. 25

    That, following one of the directions it takes, is the question of the foreigner as the question of the question. Does hospitality consist in interrogating the new arrival? Does it begin with the question addressed to the newcomer (which seems very human and sometimes loving, assuming that hospitality should be linked to love – an enigma that we will leave in reserve for the moment): what is your name? tell me your name, what should I call you, I who am calling on you, I who want to call you by your name? What am I going to call you? It is also what we sometimes tenderly ask children and those we love. Or else does hospitality begin with the unquestioning welcome, in a double effacement, the effacement of the question and the name? Is it more just and more loving to question or not to question? to call by the name or without the name? to give or to learn a name already given? Does one give hospitality to a subject? to an identifiable subject? to a subject identifiable by name? to a legal subject? Or is hospitality rendered, is it given to the other before they are identified, even before they are (posited as or supposed to be) a subject, legal subject and subject nameable by their family name, etc.?
    Ibid., p. 27

    Now if my “home,” in principle inviolable, is also constituted, and in a more and more essential, interior way, by my phone line, but also by my e-mail, but also by my fax, but also by my access to the Internet, then the intervention of the State becomes a violation of the inviolable, in the place where inviolable immunity remains the condition of hospitality. — All these techno-scientific possibilities threaten the interiority of the home (“we are no longer at home!”) and really the very integrity of the self, of ipseity. These possibilities are experienced as threats bearing down on the particular territory of one’s own and on the law of private property. They are obviously behind all the purifYing reactions and feelings of resentment. Wherever the “home” is violated, wherever at any rate a violation is felt as such, you can foresee a privatizing and even familialist reaction, by widening the ethnocentric and nationalist, and thus xenophobic, circle: not directed against the foreigner as such, but, paradoxically, against the anonymous technological power (foreign to the language or the religion, as much as to the family and the nation), which threatens, with the “home,” the traditional conditions of hospitality. The perversion and pervertibility of this law (which is also a law of hospitality) is that one can become virtually xenophobic in order to protect or claim to protect one’s own hospitality, the own home that makes possible one’s own hospitality. (Remember as well the xenotransplantation we were talking about last time.) I want to be master at home (ipse, potis, potens, head of house, we have seen all that), to be able to receive whomever I like there. Anyone who encroaches on my “at home,” on my ipseity, on my power of hospitality, on my sovereignty as host, I start to regard as an undesirable foreigner, and virtually as an enemy. This other becomes a hostile subject, and I risk becoming their hostage.
    Ibid., p. 51-54

    No hospitality, in the classic sense, without sovereignty of oneself over one’s home, but since there is also no hospitality without finitude, sovereignty can only be exercised by filtering, choosing, and thus by excluding and doing violence. Injustice, a certain injustice, and even a certain perjury, begins right away, from the very threshold of the right to hospitality.
    Ibid., p. 55

    But current technological developments are restructuring space in such a way that what constitutes a space of controlled and circumscribed property is just what opens it to intrusion. That, once again, is not absolutely new: in order to constitute the space of a habitable house and a home, you also need an opening, a door and windows, you have to give up a passage to the outside world [/’etrangerl. There is no house or interior without a door or windows. The monad of home has to be hospitable in order to be ipse, itself at home, habitable at-home in the relation of the self to itself.
    Ibid., p. 61


    Where do these strange processes of hospitality lead? These interminable, uncrossable thresholds, and these aporias? It is as though we were going from one difficulty to another. Better or worse, and more seriously, from impossibility to impossibility. It is as though hospitality were the impossible: as though the law of hospitality defined this very impossibility, as if it were only possible to transgress it, as though the law of absolute, unconditional, hyperbolical hospitality, as though the categorical imperative of hospitality commanded that we transgress all the laws (in the plutal) of hospitality, namely, the conditions, the norms, the rights and the duties that are imposed on hosts and hostesses, on the men or women who give a welcome as well as the men or women who receive it. And vice versa, it is as though the laws (plural) of hospitality, in marking limits, powers, rights, and duties, consisted in challenging and transgressing the law of hospitality, the one that would command that the “new arrival” be offered an unconditional welcome.
    Ibid., p. 77

    “Enter quickly,” quickly, in other words, without delay and without waiting. Desire is waiting for what does not wait. The guest must make haste. Desire measures time since its abolition in the stranger’s entering movement: the stranger, here the awaited guest, is not only someone to whom you say “come,” but “enter,” enter without waiting, make a pause in our home without waiting, hurry up and come in, “come inside,” “come within me,” not only toward me, but within me: occupy me, take place in me, which means, by the same token, also take my place, don’t content yourself with coming to meet me or “into my home.” Crossing the threshold is entering and not only approaching or coming. — This is always the situation of the foreigner, in politics too, that of coming as a legislator to lay down the law and liberate the people or the nation by coming from outside, by entering into the nation or the house, into the home that lets him enter after having appealed to him. It’s as if (and an as if always lays down the law here) the stranger – some Oedipus, in fact, in other words the one whose guarded secret about the place of death was going to save the city or promise it salvation through the contract we have just read-as if, then, the stranger could save the master and liberate the power of his host; it’s as if the master, qua master, were prisoner of his place and his power, of his ipseity, of his subjectivity (his subjectivity is hostage). So it is indeed the master the one who invites, the inviting host, who becomes the hostage – and who really always has been. And the guest, the invited hostage, becomes the one who invites the one who invites, the master of the host. The guest becomes the host’s host. The guest (hôte) becomes the host (hôte) of the host (hôte).
    Ibid., p. 123

    First let us consider the distinction between unconditional hospitality and, on the other hand, the rights and duties that are the conditions of hospitality. Far from paralyzing this desire or destroying the requirements of hospitality, this distinction requires us to determine what could be called, in Kantian language (in an approximate and analogical way, since in the strict sense they are in fact excluded in this case, and this exclusion needs to be thought about), intermediate schemas. Between an unconditional law or an absolute desire for hospitality on the one hand and, on the other, a law, a politics, a conditional ethics, there is distinction, radical heterogeneity, but also indissociability. One calls forth, involves, or prescribes the other. In giving a right, if I can put it like that, to unconditional hospitality, how can one give place to a determined, limitable, and delimitable – in a word, to a calculable – right or law? How can one give place to a concrete politics and ethics, including a history, evolutions, actual revolutions, advances – in short, a perfectibility?
    Ibid., p. 147

    Should one hand over one’s guests to criminals, rapists, murderers? or lie to them so as to save the people one is putting up and for whom one feels responsible? In Genesis (I9:Iff), this is the moment when Lot seems to put the laws of hospitality above all, in particular the ethical obligations that link him to his relatives and family, first of all his daughters. The men of Sodom demand to see the guests whom Lot is putting up, those who came to his home that night. The men of Sodom want to see these guests in order to “penetrate” them, says one translation (Chouraqui’s: “Get them to come out to us: let’s penetrate them!”), to “get to know” them, another modestly puts it (Dhorme’s in the Pleiade collection: “Get them to come out to us so that we can get to know them”).
    Ibid., p. 151

    Further notes on hospitality 1

    Being-with

    Being singular plural means the essence of being is only as co-essence. In turn, co-essence, or being-with (being-with-many), designates the essence of the co-, or even more so, the co- (the cum) itself in the position or guise of an essence…. if Being is being-with, then it is, in its being-with, the “with” that constitutes the being; the “with” is not simply an addition. This operates in the same way as collective (collégial) power: power is neither exterior to the members of the collective (collège) nor interior to each one of them, but rather consists in the collectivity (collégialité) as such…

    According to these conditions, Being as being-with might no longer be able to say itself in the third person, as in “it is” or “there is”. Because there would no longer be a point of view that is exterior to being-together from which it could be announced that “there is” being and a being-with of beings, one with the other. There would be no “it is” and, therefore, no longer the “I am” that is subjacent to the announcement “it is”. Rather, it would be necessary to think the third-person singular in the first person. As such, then, it becomes the first-person plural. Being could not speak of itself except in this unique manner: “we are”. The truth of the ego-sum is the now sums; this “we” announces itself through humanity for all the beings “we” are with, for existence in the sense of being-essentially-with, as a Being whose essence is the with.

    Jean-Luc Nancy: Being Singular Plural

    Quote

    Books and Essays

    Affect and Empathy
    Lisa Blackman: Immaterial Bodies: Affect, Embodiment, Mediation
    Blackman and Venn: Body & Society
    Gregg and Seigworth (ed.): The Affect Theory Reader
    Mark Johnson: The Meaning of the Body
    Ruth Leys: Both of Us Disgusted in My Insula
    Ruth Leys: The Turn to Affect: A Critique
    Brian Massumi: Parables of the Virtual
    Reynolds and Reason: Kinesthetic Empathy
    Jeremy Rifkin: The Empathetic Civilization

    Body
    Erin Manning: Politics of Touch (Introduction)
    Erin Manning: Politics of Touch (Chapter 6)
    Stelarc: Zombies & Cyborgs

    Cognitive Science and Neurology
    Antonio Damasio: The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness
    Shaun Gallagher: How the Body Shapes the Mind
    Mark Johnson: The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason
    Stephen W. Porges: The Polyvagal Theory
    Varela, Thompson and Rosch: The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and the Human Experience
    Varela and Shear: The View from Within: First-person Approaches to the Study of Consciousness
    Bruce Wexler: Brain and Culture: Neurobiology, Ideology, and Social Change
    Dan Zahavi: Subjectivity and Selfhood: Investigating the First-Person Perspective

    Cultural Adaptation
    William Cronon (ed.): Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature
    Horst Hendriks-Jansen: Catching Ourselves in the Act: Situated Activity, Interactive Emergence, Evolution, and Human Thought
    Adrienne Goehler (ed.): Examples to Follow! Expeditions in Aesthetics and Sustainability
    Alan Weissman: Countdown. Our Last, Best Hope for a Future on Earth
    Ben Woodard: On an Ungrounded Earth
    de Young and Princen: The Localization Reader: Adapting to the Coming Downshift

    Ecology
    Gregory Bateson: Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology
    Felix Guattari: Three Ecologies
    Tim Ingold: Being Alive: Essays on Movement, Knowledge and Description
    Ellen LaConte: Life Rules: Nature’s Blueprint for Surviving Economic and Environmental Collapse
    Timothy Morton: Ecology Without Nature: Rethinking Environmental Aesthetics
    Timothy Morton: The Ecological Thought
    Timothy Morton: Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World

    Economy and Politics
    Georges Bataille: The Accursed Share: an Essay on General Economy
    Hardt and Negri: Commonwealth
    Naomi Klein: This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate
    Bruno Latour: Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences Into Democracy
    Bruno Latour: Waiting For Gaia: Composing The Common World Through Arts And Politics
    Khatib, Killjoy, etc. (ed.): We Are Many: Reflections on Movement Strategy from Occupation to Liberation

    Energy and Resources
    Heinberg and Lerch (ed.): The Post Carbon Reader
    Ville Lähde: Niukkuuden maailmassa
    Reza Negarestani: Cyclonopedia
    Tere Vadén: Energia ja kokemus
    Partanen, Paloheimo, Waris: Suomi öljyn jälkeen

    Evolution and the Future
    James Lovelock: A Rough Ride to the Future

    Nature
    David Abram: The Spell of the Sensuous
    David Abram: Becoming Animal: An Earthly Cosmology
    Mark Mcmenamin: Hypersea: Life on Land
    Mensvoort and Grievink: Next Nature: Nature Changes along with Us
    George Monbiot: Feral: Rewilding the Land, Sea and Human Life
    Alan Weissman: The World Without Us (suom. Maailma ilman meitä)

    Nonhuman and Animal
    Donna Haraway: The Companion Species Manifesto
    Donna Haraway: When Species Meet
    Brian Massumi: What Animals Teach Us about Politics
    Dinesh Wadiwel: Three Fragments from a Biopolitical History of Animals

    Materialism
    Jane Bennett: Vibrant Matter
    Levi Bryant, Nick Srnicek, Graham Harman: The Speculative Turn: Continental Materialism and Realism
    Levi Bryant: The Democracy of Objects
    The Dew Lab: Introduction to Object-Oriented Ontology
    Graham Harman: Object-Oriented Philosophy Blog
    Quentin Meillassoux: After Finitude
    Quentin Meillassoux: Speculative Materialism
    Joshua Simon: Neo-Materialism
    McKenzie Wark: Hacker Manifesto

    Media and Technology
    Evgeny Morozov: To Save Everything, Click Here
    Jussi Parikka: Insect Media

    Performance Theory
    Esch-van Kan, Packard, Schulte (ed.): Thinking – Resisting – Reading the Political
    Susan Foster: Choreographing Empathy
    Hölscher and Siegmund (ed.): Dance, Politics & Co-Immunity
    Baz Kershaw: Theatre Ecology: Environments and Performance Events
    Petra Sabisch: Choreographing Relations
    André Lepecki: 9 variations on things and performance

    Philosophy
    Giorgio Agamben: Potentialities. Collected Essays in Philosophy
    Karen Barad: Meeting the Universe Halfway
    Henri Bergson: Creative Evolution
    Campbell and Sitze (ed.): Biopolitics
    Cross and Donovan (ed.): Supple Science: A Robert Kocik Primer
    Elizabeth Grosz: Chaos, Territory, Art: Deleuze and the Framing of the Earth
    Mackay and Avanessian: #Accelerate#
    Manning and Massumi: Thought in the Act: Passages in the Ecology of Experience

    Posthumanism and Transhumanism
    Karen Barad: Posthumanist Performativity
    Ian Bogost: Alien Phenomenology, or What It’s Like to Be a Thing
    Rosi Braidotti: The Posthuman
    Donna Haraway: Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature
    Donna Haraway: Crystals, Fabrics, and Fields: Metaphors of Organicism in Twentieth-Century Developmental Biology
    Lummaa ja Rojola (toim.): Posthumanismi
    Reza Negarestani: The Labour of the Inhuman
    Robert Pepperell: The Posthuman Conception of Consciousness

    Spirituality and Ecology
    Joanna Macy: World as Lover, World as Self: A Guide to Living Fully in Turbulent Times
    Joanna Macy: Coming Back to Life: Practices to Reconnect Our Lives, Our World
    Joanna Macy: Active Hope: How to Face the Mess We’re in without Going Crazy
    Arnold Mindell: The Shaman’s Body
    John Seed, Joanna Macy, Pat Fleming: Thinking Like a Mountain: Towards a Council of All Beings

    Science
    Thomas Kuhn: Structure of Scientific Revolutions

    Other
    Gins and Arakawa: Making Dying Illegal. Architecture Against Death. Original to the 21st Century
    Faïn, Hannula, Kocik, Prohm, etc: The BodyBuilding Project
    Does It Matter: Reader

    Books and Essays

    Articles

    Climate.gov
    NOAA Climate.Gov on FB

    Global Warming: The Weather Channel Position Statement (The Weather Channel, Oct 30 2014)
    The Climate Crisis: Which Way Out? (Real News, Oct 3 2014)
    Are We Approaching the End of Human History? (Bill Moyers, Sept 9 2014)
    Climate Science as Sensory Infrastructure (The White Review, Issue 11)
    Unohdetaan planeetan pelastaminen (Vihreä lanka, Aug 28 2014)
    The Climate Swerve (The New York Times, Aug 23 2014)
    How to Talk About Climate Change So People Will Listen (The Atlantic, Aug 13 2014)
    Global warming: it’s a point of no return in West Antarctica (The Guardian, May 17 2014)
    What Your Body Tells You About Your Emotional State (The Mind Unleashed, May 13 2014)
    Scientists Warn of Rising Oceans From Polar Melt (The New York Times, May 12 2014)
    It’s the End of the World as We Know It (The New York Times, April 17 2014 )
    Hope in the Age of Collapse (Thoreau Farm, April 14 2014)
    We Are All Very Anxious (We Are Plan C, April 4 2014)
    Epävakaa ilmasto rantautuu Suomeen (HS, March 30 2014)
    Self-administered EMDR (Brave New Whatever, March 29 2014)
    About that Popular Guardian Story on the Collapse of Industrial Civilization (Discover Magazine, March 21 2014)
    Respirer tue – Rationnons l’air pur (Pièces et main d’oeuvre, March 19 2014)
    Without clean air, we have nothing (The Guardian, March 17 2014)
    Suomalaistutkija sivilisaatiomme romahdusuhasta: “Ei muuta kun tulta päin!” (IS, March 22 014)
    Nasa-funded study: industrial civilisation headed for ‘irreversible collapse’? (The Guardian, March 14 2014)
    Good For Nothing (The Occupied Times 4.3.2014)
    Naomi Klein: How science is telling us all to revolt (New Statesman, Oct 29 2013)
    #Accelerate Manifesto for an Accelerationist Politics (Critical Legal Thinking, May 14 2013)
    Polyvagal Theory, Sensory Challenge and Gut Emotions (sott.net, Jan 10 2013)
    Ilmastotutkija: Jos metaani vapautuu ilmakehään… (yle.fi, Oct 2 2012)
    The Occupied Times: Madness

    Link