In cosmology and philosophy of science, the anthropic principle, also known as the observation selection effect, is the proposition that the range of possible observations that could be made about the universe is limited by the fact that observations are only possible in the type of universe that is capable of developing observers in the first place. Proponents of the anthropic principle argue that it explains why the universe has the age and the fundamental physical constants necessary to accommodate intelligent life. If either had been significantly different, no one would have been around to make observations. Anthropic reasoning has been used to address the question as to why certain measured physical constants take the values that they do, rather than some other arbitrary values, and to explain a perception that the universe appears to be finely tuned for the existence of life.

スイス政府は２日、超富裕層の遺産に対する高額な相続税の是非を巡り、11月30日に国民投票を行うと発表した。
スイス社会民主党青年部（ＪＵＳＯ）は、死後に譲渡される5000万フラン（約90億5000万円）以上の資産について、国が半分を徴収できるようにすると提案し、支持する10万人の署名を集めた。ＪＵＳＯは、この税収を気候変動対策に充てるとしている。
議会や連邦政府はこの提案に反対しているが、スイスの直接民主制の規定により、国民投票の実施が義務付けられる。

Science is the product of the culture in which it is developed and, in its turn, helps define that culture. It walks along paths created by others and opens paths on which others can walk. Do not for a minute believe that science is disengaged from culture. Science is a very human creation, the product of the same curiosity that has moved our collective imagination for thousands of years. It is an expression of our deeply-ingrained desire to make sense of the world and to know our place in the big scheme of things.

The passage from the physics of the brain to the corresponding facts of consciousness is unthinkable. Granted that a definite thought, and a definite molecular action in the brain occur simultaneously, we do not possess the intellectual organ, nor apparently any rudiment of the organ, which would enable us to pass by a process of reasoning from the one phenomenon to the other. They appear together but we do not know why. Were our minds and senses so expanded, strengthened and illuminated as to enable us to see and feel the very molecules of the brain, were we capable of following all their motions, all their groupings, all their electric discharges, if such there be, and were we intimately acquainted with the corresponding states of thought and feeling, we should be as far as ever from the solution of the problem. How are these physical processes connected with the facts of consciousness? The chasm between the two classes of phenomena would still remain intellectually impassable…Let the consciousness of love, for example, be associated with a right-handed spiral motion of the molecules of the brain, and the consciousness of hate with a left-handed spiral motion. We should then know, when we love, that the motion is in one direction, and, when we hate, that the motion is in the other; but the “Why?” would remain as unanswerable as before.

マレーシア：圧倒的中国派
インドネシア：圧倒的中国派
東ティモール：圧倒的中国派
タイ：中国派が優勢
ブルネイ：中国派が優勢
ラオス：僅差で中国派が優勢
シンガポール：僅差で米国派が優勢
カンボジア：米国派が優勢
ミャンマー：米国派が優勢
ベトナム：圧倒的米国派
フィリピン：圧倒的米国派

ラッパムシが収縮するか分離して泳ぎ去るかの確率は、きれいに半々。このことから、細胞が分子レべルでどのようにプログラミングされているかをうかがい知ることができる。
細胞は分子レベルでコイン投げをしている。でも、私たちはこのコイン投げのメカニズムを知らない。
体内にある一つひとつの細胞がとりうる行動は、まだ解明されていない。細胞は、複雑な生態系のなかで、あたかもプログラムされているかのように行動する。細胞は、互いに話し合い、交渉し合い、信号に応答し、決定を下している。
単一の細胞が複雑な情報処理とそれに対応する意思決定、つまり何らかの細胞の認知について、もっと知りたい。
細胞が意思決定をするというのなら、分子は、原子は、そして素粒子は、何らかの意思決定をするのだろうか？ 電子や陽子や中性子に認知機能はあるのだろうか？