Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?  (Read 126144 times)

Mina

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #510 on: January 18, 2009, 09:15:20 PM »


This has come to be known as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The physicist Werner Heisenberg suggested that just by observing quantum matter, we affect the behavior of that matter. Thus, we can never be fully certain of the nature of a quantum object or its attributes, like velocity and location. This idea is supported by the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Posed by the Danish physicist Niels Bohr, this interpretation says that all quantum particles don't exist in one state or the other, but in all of its possible states at once. The sum total of possible states of a quantum object is called its wave function. The state of an object existing in all of its possible states at once is called its superposition. According to Bohr, when we observe a quantum object, we affect its behaviour. Observation breaks an object's superposition and essentially forces the object to choose one state from its wave function. This theory accounts for why physicists have taken opposite measurements from the same quantum object: The object "chose" different states during different measurements.


Speaking of Heisenberg, the inventor of the 'uncertainty principle': he thought Heraclitus (you know who Heraclitus is, don'tcha) views only needed a bit of tweaking to bring them totally up-to-date:

Quote
Modern physics is in some ways extremely near to the doctrines of Heraclitus. If we replace the word 'fire' by the word 'energy' we can repeat this statement word for word from our modern point of view. Energy is in fact the substance from which all elementary particles, all atoms and therefore all things are made, and energy is that which moves... Energy may be called the fundamental cause for all change in the world.

By the way, Heraclitus was an aristocrat who lived on the Ionian cost of Greece. His preference for composing short, almost paradoxical philosophical epigrams later earned him the sobriquet 'the Dark'. But it is an innocuous-looking dictum about rivers that has made his reputation. You cannot step into the same river twice. Heracliteanism became a doctrine encapsulated by Plato as the view that "all is flux." But Plato himself was echoing Cratylus, who had only earlier decided for himself what it was that Heraclitus must have meant. Cratylus' idea that everything was changing all the time was then taken up by Empedocles, who embellished the other Heraclitean notion of a world continually torn between the two evocatively named forces, 'love' and 'strife', in order to reveal its essential character. The world becomes a sphere of perfect love in which strife, like a swirling vortex, has infiltrated. Whose idea was it, then? Heraclitus', or Cratylus', or...? It keeps changing.

But in any case, the point about the river seems to have been a more prosaic one to do with the nature of human experience. We encounter things all the time as being different, but behind the appearance of diversity is a more important and more fundamental unity: "cold things grow hot, the hot cools, the wet dries, the parched moistens." Not that Heraclitus is saying that the senses are deceived, for "whatever comes from sight, hearing, experience, this I privilege," he adds. Even life and death are as one, Heraclitus continues. "The same living and dead, what is awake and what sleeps, young and old... for those changed are those, and those changed around are these." The opposites are united by change: they change into each other. And change is the fundamental reality of the universe. The highest, 'divine' perspective sees all the opposites: "day and night, winter and summer, war and peace, plenty and famine," all are the same. With the divine perspective, even good and evil are the same.

Two thousand years later, Professor Hegel found in Heraclitus' swirling vortex of the unity of opposites the kernel of a new 'world philosophy', the origins of 'speculative logic', and the historical notion of perpetual change. For your information, it was not the first time Hegel was borrowing or echoing, whatever you wanna call it. In 1766, Johan Titius translated into German "Contemplation de la Nature" by the French natural philosopher Bonnet, where the latter remarks that maybe there are more planets in our solar system than were known at his time. Titus added to this remark that one may notice that the distances of the planets from one another can be approximated by a sequence of numbers that can be generated by an algorithm that is known as the 'Titius Bode Law.' Hegel's dissertation (1801) "De orbitis planetarum" revolves around the discussion of the Titius-Bode law and likely influenced his concept of history as a series of successive epochs from the Prehistoric and Asian, through Ancient, Feudal, Industrial and post-Industrial Stages. The predictive power of the Titus-Bode Law was improved by Stephen Phillips' formulation of the Titius-Bode-Phillips Spiral Algorithm, after he interposed Hegelian dialectic spiral of historical development on the photograph of the Whirlpool Galaxy, captured by the Hubble telescope.

At any rate, Hegel's battle between thesis and antithesis, searching for synthesis, led directly both to Marx's dialectical materialism and to the fascist idealogy of the purifying powers of conflict and war. But then, Heraclitus himself had declared: "You must know that war is common to all things, and strife is justice." It is only the heat of battle that can "prove some to be gods and others to be mere men, by turning the latter into slaves and the former into masters." Actually, there is another way of looking at Heraclitus. At the same time as he was outlining his theory of perpetual, cyclical change, the Chinese sage Lao Tzu was explaining the cyclical nature of the Tao, manifested in the famous interplay of yin and yang. But that is another story altogether.

 

This was pretty good.

Just some cautionary notes:

1. Heraclitus views are second-hand. He did not write a book, and the stuff we have from Heraclitus are a few fragments found in other historians recollection of him.

2. No one really agrees on his theory of fire, some co-opted it for their own use

3. His theory on unity of opposites is very complex. Under some interpretations it is completely incompatible with Hegel. For example, one idea of Heraclitus' theory of opposites holds the logos (logic) of the cosmos corresponds to the deepness of the soul, and thus even when we percive opposites, we are percieving the same logos. According to this interpretation, there can be no thesis, anithesis, or synthesis, since the unity of opposites would be a matter of perception of the logos. That is, the logos is the unity, and our perception creates the opposites. There would be no room for this idea of thesis or antithesis, or change, since everything stays the same.   

Another interpretation, would be that the unity of opposites was statement that each opposite is different from the other according to degree. For example, 1% Cold, is really 99% not hot.

Several others exist. The interpretation this quoted author proffers is not supported by arguments, but co-opted Heraclitus quotes (which is very easy to do). Readers beware!

Orietta

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #511 on: January 19, 2009, 06:35:06 AM »

2. No one really agrees on his theory of fire, some co-opted it for their own use


Go Mina Go!


nano

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Doctors exploited; patients suffer, too
« Reply #512 on: January 22, 2009, 12:37:51 PM »

No doubt about it, besame. Even moreso if we'd be talking about foreign doctors looking to practice in the US. A government program to address a national health care crisis by placing foreign doctors in America's rural towns and inner cities is being undermined by employers - mostly U.S. doctors who profit by exploiting the physicians and diverting them from the patients who need them. Stories of abuses within the program, which receives little government oversight, are whispered among foreign doctors in hospital corridors, reported online and heard by colleagues in foreign medical schools. And the abuse appears to be a primary reason that fewer of them are participating in the program. Some of the foreign doctors are cheated financially and worked to dangerous levels of exhaustion, and they can't easily escape the jobs because the employers sponsor their visas. The doctors are sharing their experiences with colleagues back home - in places such as Ghana, Haiti, India and Pakistan - who are now finding other paths to U.S. residency to avoid being bullied and treated as indentured servants.

The dire consequences of the program's problems may be no clearer than in the Nevada town of Beatty, population 1,154, "the gateway to Death Valley." The community is about to lose its only doctor, who is from the Philippines. She has fulfilled her commitment under the government program, and the non-profit organization that runs the clinic, Nevada Health Centers, has had no luck finding a replacement. Nevada Health Centers by all accounts treats the doctors fairly and as intended under the law. Several years ago, it was receiving about 100 applications a month from foreign physicians for openings at its 27 clinics. But now it gets no applications and recruiting efforts have been fruitless. The government program, adopted by Congress, is known both as the J-1 visa waiver program and the Conrad 30 program, for its author, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. It makes immigration concessions for foreign medical school graduates who are nearing the end of their medical residency training in the United States. The foreign doctors hold J-1 visas, which require them to return home when they finish their residency. If they return home, they must stay there for at least 2 years, and if they want to return to the United States, they must start the immigration process all over again.

Rather than go home after their medical training, foreign physicians can qualify for J-1 waivers to stay in the United States as long as they commit to at least 3 years of service in a federally designated physician shortage area - usually a rural or blighted urban area. And at the end of the term, these J-1 doctors can begin the U.S. residency process. About 3,100 foreign doctors participate in the program, a number that is declining year by year. Nationally, doctors who come from foreign medical schools say they are forgoing the J-1 visa for what they consider a more attractive option, called the H-1 visa. The H-1 visa takes more steps to acquire and limits where a doctor can do residency training, but it leads more quickly to a "green card." The downside for rural and inner city America is that the H-1 visa, unlike the J-1 visa, does not require foreign doctors to return home for 2 years after they finish their training. That eliminates any motive for foreign doctors to commit to 3 years of service in a medically underserved area. Nationwide, the numbers of J-1 visas and requests for waivers to work in underserved areas are plummeting, according to the statistics available.

J-1 doctors say that because of the buzz around the program in the international physician community, some medical residents are waiting longer for H-1 visas or, if they can get only a J-1 visa, are returning home for 2 years instead of taking a waiver to work in an underserved area. Dr. Wahab Brobbey, a J-1 doctor in Iowa who told the Sun he was exploited by his previous employer in Tennessee, said he advised his cousin and other medical school classmates to avoid the J-1 visa. The cousin is now doing his residency on an H-1 visa. "And they tell their brothers, and they tell their friends - there are lots of us," said Brobbey, who is from Ghana. Brobbey said the exploitation has gone on for so long, with no accountability for employers, that the J-1 visa waiver program is "basically dead." "The boat has sailed already," Brobbey said. "I don't know anyone who will do J-1 now." Given the Internet chatter, the problems with the J-1 waiver are widely known in the medical community, and the jobs carry a stigma. Some of the participating doctors refer to themselves as "J-1 positive" as if they're afflicted with a disease. It is unknown whether J-1 doctors have been sexually abused, though one doctor reported she had been sexually harassed. Many factors could explain why more foreign residents are pushing for H-1 visas over J-1 visas said Greg Siskind, a superstar immigration lawyer, but it's possible some foreign doctors who know about the "real and perceived problems" are deciding to "vote with their visa" by choosing the H-1.

In 2005, the American Medical Association adopted a resolution saying the foreign doctors often find themselves "in abusive and intolerable" employment situations and should be able to transfer to other employers without being forced to restart their three-year commitment in an underserved community. An AMA official said anecdotal accounts are heard frequently of J-1 doctors working unfair call schedules, suffering pay and salary disparities and having the terms of their contracts switched against their will. The J-1 doctors are in a "vulnerable position," said the AMA official, who because of association policy was not allowed to be quoted by name. "They know it's a privilege to be in our country. They don't want to make any waves, but they're totally being abused and taken advantage of." Employers who adhere to the J-1 waiver guidelines say they've heard the reports of other bosses flouting the J-1 laws. Saul Blair, executive director of the Phoenix region of IPC, a company that provides doctors to hospitals, employs 17 J-1 doctors, including several who came to him after being exploited by employers in other states. No one monitors where the doctors work or whether "I'm paying them 10 cents or $100,000," Blair said. It would be easy to audit a company's medical records to confirm that J-1 doctors are treating federally designated underserved patients, Blair said, but the government has not. J-1 doctors feel conflicted about staying in the United States. "If I had known about this I would have never done it here," one foreign doctor said. "I advise everyone I know not to come here on J-1. Go to Australia."


I am a foreign doctor (originally from Iraq) who was laid off several years back by my employer who sponsored my J-1 visa (I won the lottery fortunately that is how I got the residency) I remember it very well how hard it was to find employment - any type of employment - I guess it was because of my language skills that I got a job to survive during those hard years (I was employed by a contractor in need of translation services from Dari to English - Dari is the name given to classical Persian poetry and court language, as well as to Persian dialects spoken in Afghanistan. Various dialects of Dari are also spoken by a few people in Iran and by many in Pakistan.


J-1 doctors refer to themselves sarcastically as J-1 positive -- that's how horrible is to be on such a visa.

opinion

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #513 on: January 22, 2009, 01:22:23 PM »

[...]

[...] and the stuff we have from Heraclitus are a few fragments [...]

[...]


Quite the opposite, Mina! It appears other philosophers have appropriated his "fragments" (which must be fragments from his books that are no longer available due to the long time has passed since they must have been written) and compiled books of their "own" :)

gigo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Doctors amputate Mariana Bridi da Costa's hands, feet
« Reply #514 on: January 23, 2009, 01:22:00 PM »

You've got to be kidding me, just sex - you are dissapointed with doctors because they may have used as pawns homeless people! Doctors and medical professionals are absolutely not champions in this field - how about intelligence agencies having conducted non-consensual human experiments (e.g., trauma-based mind control, etc).


I'm not a doctor and I am certainly not knowledgeable in medicine, but don't you think doctors are being at least negligent in this case?


Mariana Bridi da Costa

The family of a 20-year-old Brazilian model who is fighting for her life after having her hands and feet amputated have urged her supporters around the world to keep praying for their daughter. Mariana Bridi da Costa fell ill in December and is now on life support. "Mariana is (a) warrior and will win this battle," her family said in a message on her Web site.

Doctors removed both kidneys and in the most recent surgery last night removed part of her stomach. "They say her situation is very critical and that her chances (of survival) are not really significant, but she keeps on surprising everyone," Henrique Fontes, executive director of Miss World Brazil told CNN. "Two weeks ago the doctor gave her 24 hours to live and she's been fighting and resisting -- she's quite amazing." Less than one month ago, Mariana Bridi was a healthy 20-year-old who was well on the way to achieving her dream of becoming a world class model. She placed sixth in the Miss Bikini International competition in China last year and took first place for the "Best in Swimsuit" category. In 2006 and 2007 she came fourth in the contest to become Brazil's entrant for the Miss World pageant. Fontes told CNN Bridi had recently been selected to compete in a national modeling contest by the same person who discovered Brazilian modeling sensation Giselle Bunchen. Mariana had saved space in her diary for the competition in Sao Paolo this coming April.

That wasn't the only thing she had planned. Fontes said Bridi also dreamed of becoming a journalist. She was planning to move to Sao Paulo this year to begin her studies. She'd been living with her boyfriend, Thiago Simões, who is now spending as much time as he can by her bedside. The pace of Mariana Bridi's deterioration from a vibrant, energetic young woman to a fragile patient in intensive care has been swift and shocking. Mariana first sought medical advice after feeling ill in late December. Doctors said she had kidney stones but her condition soon worsened. Bridi was eventually diagnosed as suffering a urinary tract infection. By the time the infection was detected it had developed into septicemia -- an infection of the blood. Doctors decided to amputate first her hands and then her feet after the condition reduced the amount of oxygen being delivered to her limbs. Dr Charles Clarke, Honorary Consultant Neurologist for the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery in the United Kingdom, told CNN that the development of a urinary tract infection to septicemia requiring amputation is "very rare."

However he added that "it's not a very rare thing" that septicemia is caused by a urinary tract infection. "That will happen dozens of times in any big district general hospital," he said. "The difficulty clinically is that when most of these things start off, they just start off looking like an infection. "And it can be very difficult to diagnose: you have a temperature and you're not very well. And you treat it and it goes on to the full blown picture. There may be no clinical evidence of that." Mariana Bridi is now on life support and the only recent communication she's had with her family is through her eyes. "She doesn't talk, she responds by blinking her eyes and she said that she wanted to live under this critical situation," Fontes told CNN. He described her as very persistent and determined, "a person who enjoyed life and went after what she wanted without fears." He told a story about when she first contacted him about entering a modeling competition in Brazil.

"When she first wrote to us asking for information on how to participate in the pageant, Mariana herself went after what she needed to compete at national level." "In order to compete she traveled more than 20 hours on a bus going from Victoria to Curitiba," he said. News of Bridi's condition spread quickly throughout Brazil and then worldwide. A message on her Web site said that the volume of traffic to the Web site had caused it to crash, and that the site had received more than 15,000 hits in two days. "The whole world, I repeat, the whole world is touched by the case of Mariana." The message said they had received "emails of solidarity from all corners of the world: Australia, Ukraine, Czech Republic, France, Italy, USA, Russia, etc. "

qiverori

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #515 on: February 01, 2009, 12:12:58 PM »


Hmm, the motive of the famous Greek sirtaki -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpMW1Z1FiTo&feature=related


Not really - Sirtaki appears as the first on the left - the actual video URL posted is just some Ourania and Spiro * & ^ %!

I really hate it when people try to be smart asses!


Orietta, what are you talking about??!

cossetta

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #516 on: February 01, 2009, 01:41:25 PM »

Wow - great post AmyL! Good for ya!

Love, and only love, will save the world!


so, Luzhi, still thinking Love, and only love, will save the world?

zotzschca

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Residency "MATCH Formula" GUIDE for IMGs
« Reply #517 on: February 03, 2009, 07:47:18 PM »

2. Years After Graduation: Score 1 to 5 (MD Diploma)

5 points for recent graduate
Every year after - deduct a point, if 5+ years after your MD 1 point

Max = 5 points, Min= 1 point


I do not know what the deal is with medical schools and residency programs in the US, but in many countries they do not allow you to complete residencies 5+ years after you have graduated.

Sagapo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« Reply #518 on: February 03, 2009, 09:56:30 PM »

Wow - great post AmyL! Good for ya!

Love, and only love, will save the world!


so, Luzhi, still thinking Love, and only love, will save the world?


I am not Luzhi, cossetta, but I answer "Yes" to your inquiry: I thought that Love, and only love, will save the world on December 17 and I still do. I refuse to believe that hate and destruction will change the world for better, even when it appears that they sometimes do.

d Artagnan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Hegel After Derrida
« Reply #519 on: February 04, 2009, 05:52:50 PM »

Two thousand years later, Professor Hegel found in Heraclitus' swirling vortex of the unity of opposites the kernel of a new 'world philosophy', the origins of 'speculative logic', and the historical notion of perpetual change. [...]

At any rate, Hegel's battle between thesis and antithesis, searching for synthesis, led directly both to Marx's dialectical materialism and to the fascist idealogy of the purifying powers of conflict and war. [...]
 


Hegel's dialectic


We will never be done, says Derrida, with the reading of Hegel. When we think we have gotten beyond Hegel in trumpeting our escape from the strictures of reason, teleology, metanarratives, idealism, we are most Hegelian. Yet we frequently find, even in the most theoretically naive works, claims to have "deconstructed" prevalent interpretations or notions of reason, identity, consciousness, nature and the natural, morality, history, and so forth. Such trends may lead us to believe that we are done with Hegel, but, as Barnett says and this volume demonstrates, not only does Hegel define "the modernity that our postmodern era seeks to escape," but there is a Hegel that we have yet to examine. Just what deconstruction is still remains obscure for many. Sometimes confused with critique, at other times reduced to the absurdity of being unconcerned with truth, deconstruction has entered the vocabulary as something of a ghost, to borrow a figure from Derrida frequently invoked in this collection: its presence is felt but its features remain obscure. One reason for this ghostly presence is our refusal, or inability, to confront Hegel, whom Derrida calls in "Of Grammatology" "the last philosopher of the book and the first thinker of writing." Hegel, says Barnett, "taught philosophers to examine all fields of knowledge as quasi-autonomous language games... Yet Hegel emphasized the cultural and historical specificity of language games; he also devoted a good deal of his thought to dissecting the internal logic of various language games" These games, then, are not mere games. Hegel narrates the unfolding of spirit in world history and its culmination in the Absolute, but he also historicizes reason, charting its contradictions and limitations. He is both the philosopher of unitary reason and the thinker of difference. Ultimately, it is the role of the negative in speculative idealism, the otherness operating within reason, that makes Hegel's philosophy the limit that defines the modernity our postmodernity remains within.

In its confrontation with speculative idealism and the Aufhebung (a term that designates the negation, conservation, and elevation of a previous stage in consciousness), deconstruction is "to disrupt the virtual self-realization of onto-theology in speculative idealism." This disruption is not critique, the investigation of the criteria for philosophy, for it is not a work of making distinctions and judgments (in a Kantian sense) but a questioning of these very categories. Deconstruction operates from within the text, responds to its irreducible alterity. If Hegel's text, the "Phenomenology of Spirit" in particular, can be characterized as the totalizing thought of absolute spirit, Derrida's "text" can be defined as structurally infinite, a network without boundaries or closure. Derrida's "text" opens the self-identity implied in the traditional notion of the text by locating an unsublatable remainder that makes totalization impossible. The text, therefore, is governed by the traits of referral that make representation, self-reflection, and reference possible (impossibilities). This remainder reveals that the text, in this special sense, is already inhabited by its non-phenomenal other, its ghost, which both situates deconstruction within and against Hegelian speculative philosophy.

When Derrida called Hegel "the last philosopher of the book and the first thinker of writing," he indicated that Hegel was both the culmination of Western metaphysics and the beginning of its deconstruction. Barnett says as much when he writes, "Hegel's text, in its performance of the thinking of difference, comprises the enabling condition of the strategies of deconstruction." If we are to overcome Hegel (and modernity), then we must inhabit him -- which we do, whether we know it or not. And to overcome him is to repeat him, with a difference. This contradictory structure is to be found already in Hegel: insofar as the truth of consciousness is self-consciousness, consciousness is already self-consciousness. Absolute self-relation is attained only when consciousness has returned from its other back to itself as self-consciousness. But this pathway is never smooth; it is marked by disruption, relativism, and plurality. Christianity, for instance, is the absolute religion but must be superseded by philosophy, Absolute Knowing; yet, the Aufhebung of religion into philosophy is disrupted by what makes it possible, the holy family. In short, we are confronted with two ways of reading Hegel, which will amount to two ways of reading Derrida. Either Hegel's text needs to be deconstructed or it is already deconstruction; either Derrida's reading of Hegel is an intervention that disrupts the system or it reveals a Hegel who is a thinker of difference as well as the philosopher of Absolute Knowledge. Our either/or is more properly a both/and: what unites these essays is a strategy of reading that asks, what remains in Hegel's text after the holocaust of Absolute Knowledge/after the text is deconstructed? What remains is the necessity of reading Hegel for these remains, that is, for what does not allow itself to be superseded or appropriated in the name of Absolute Knowledge. The Absolute is fissured, divided or fractured, like the columns in Derrida's most sustained reading of Hegel, Glas.

In asking why Hegel figures so prominently in Glas when Derrida's analysis of the family and phallocentrism points to psychoanalysis, Suzanne Gearhart proposes that the Aufhebung is equivalent to Freud's concept of repression, which cannot be understood in terms of what is repressed "but only in terms of repression itself" as an ongoing process that serves the system of idealization; it does not merely forget or suppress but "also creates signification and value." The Aufhebung is the equivalent of repression insofar as it constitutes rational self-consciousness but is itself prerational, as is revealed in Derrida's analysis of the Hegelian family. Gearhart advises us to address the question of sexuality or gender from the concept of repression or else we lapse into a pre-Freudian logic of fetishism.

The relation between Hegel and Marx. Marx can be thought of as a better reader of Hegel than the Marxists. Beginning with the well-known statement from The German Ideology, "It's not consciousness that determines life ... but rather life determines consciousness," shows that Marx's reading is a deconstruction, "an operation of inversion and reinscription." The contradictions and negations of life cannot be sublated into a determinate negation because life is not a positive, given fact but is the product of human labor. Consciousness can become itself, self-consciousness, only by converting life into a "phenomenal figure for consciousness," which means that consciousness is as much a material production of history as life is. Hegel's text is fissured, and it is this Hegel, the other Hegel, whom Marx reads and reinscribes so that he might become Marx. This transformational reading makes Marx a deconstructor.

Derrida's treatment of the family, above all the brother-sister relationship and the figure of Antigone, points to a place in "the Hegelian system where an ethics is glimpsed that is irreducible to dialectics and cognition, which [he] would call an ethics of the singular," a recognition that ethics begins when the other is grasped not as "an object of cognition or comprehension, but precisely [as] that which exceeds my grasp and powers." The unsublatable is not a sign of Hegel's failure; deconstruction is intrinsic to the dialectic. The brother and sister relation, unlike all other relations, is "excluded from the circular constitution of Geist," but their intrinsic opposition "is necessary for the Aufhebung of the conflict between divine and human law and thus the circular closure of the sphere of Sittlichkeit." The natural diversity of brother and sister is both necessary to and excluded from the self-relation of Geist, and as such reveals that diversity functions as a quasi-transcendental, permitting "the movement from abstract to determinate negation, the logic of Aufhebung." The affinity between deconstruction and speculative thought raises the question whether différance, being intrinsically opposed to the dialectic, is constrained by it.