To exemplify this understanding of philosophy, this paper is written as fiction. It follows two people as they try to determine what romantic love is, and why it was a neglected or minimized philosophical object for centuries. As the characters converse, they develop the concept of philosophy described above, discuss the place of women, passion, and reason in philosophy, and determine – to the extent they are able – that romantic love is something people do, rather than a feeling or state of being, and is based on an unjustifiable attraction to another person and Aristotle's concept of friendship, specifically philia.

The idea of romantic love being a practice, rather than an emotion or a state of being, seems to be uncommon in philosophical work on the topic. It seems just as rare, especially historically, to think of romantic love as being between equals, who mutually care for each other and commit equally to the relationship. This paper aims to point out the holes I have found in my reading on romantic love in philosophy and to provide new perspectives on romantic love in the hopes of prompting further and broader discussion on the topic.

There are several arguments against U.S. ratification, such as a concern that the CRC could undermine parental authority, more specific concerns relating to issues such as children’s education and access to abortion, and a concern that the CRC would interfere with U.S. sovereignty. Close examination of various CRC articles handily dispels most of these worries, however. There are areas in which the U.S. could improve its policies related to children, but these improvements would not be necessary prior to CRC ratification. Instead, policy improvement should be an ongoing process after ratification. Finally, if the U.S. were to ratify the CRC, it might encourage State Parties who have already ratified to re-examine their own efforts toward making the world a better place for children. It is time for the U.S. to put aside its pride and commit to building a brighter future for the youngest citizens of the world by ratifying the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

In the spring of 1940, roughly twenty two thousand Polish officers, the cream of Poland’s intelligentsia, were executed in Katyn forest. While the Soviet Union blamed Nazi Germany for the massacre, in the past seventy years all gathered evidence including documents from the Soviet archives, point out to the Soviet Union as responsible for the killings. However, the British and American governments, who had knowledge of the Katyn Massacre, were engaged in a suppression of the truth, during the war and into the early years of the Cold War, even while they confronted the Soviet Union over Poland’s independence. The question is why? By examining the memoirs of the main officials in Truman administration who were involved in the cover-up—Dean Acheson, George Kennan, William Averell Harriman and Truman himself—as well as studying the recent declassified 1951-1952 Congressional Report on Katyn Massacre, which shows that several U.S. governmental agencies, particularly the State Department, were directly responsible for suppressing information about this event, this study offers explanations for the United States’ decision to withhold that evidence from the American public.

2017 Diversity Research Award Winner

Purpose

To explore the effect of individuals running in various size packs on their place and finish time in the Fukuoka Marathon. This race has seen some of the most talented runners in history, as the world record has been broken twice at the Fukuoka Marathon, in 1967 and 1981.

Methods

The data set of results was received through a collaboration with Dr. Michael Joyner, of the Mayo Clinic. Subjects running in the Fukuoka Marathon in Fukuoka, Japan were all male (n=240). Marathon race times and splits was analyzed from the year 1967 through 2014. Race splits were recorded every five kilometers and at the halfway point. Only runners who finished in the top five were used to record pack sizes. Pack sizes were counted for every top five finisher at each split and a mean pack size was calculated. Finish times were normalized to the winning time of each race. One-way ANOVA test was performed to quantify the effect of mean pack size on finish time.

Results

No significant correlation was found between mean pack size and finish time for top five finishers (p=0.793). Regressions of mean pack size during the first half, second half, and entirety of the race yielded a slope of zero.

Conclusion

Although pack size and finish time were not significantly correlated, there were non- significant trends within the data that showed possible relation between place, size, and the duration of a pack that an individual ran with. Further studies should explore psychological benefits of racing in a pack, pack sizes outside of the top ten finishers, whether place within an individual pack is relevant to finish time, how individuals changing packs effects race dynamics, and if top finishers should be excluded from the pack pacing hypothesis.

In this study, candidate cold tolerance genes were identified using RNAseq of maize seedlings exposed to multiple cold stresses. Quantitative trait loci analysis were conducted on 95 lines of the IBM population and their parents (B73 and Mo17). These analyses elucidated the differences in cold response between initial and repeated cold exposure as well as the difference between cold susceptible B73 and cold tolerant Mo17 maize lines.

Through support of phenotypic measurements (total height, leaf greenness, chlorophyll concentration, and a 3-point visual scale), it was concluded that previous cold exposures offered no benefit to the maize seedlings after stress. Four QTL regions on chromosomes 1, 3, 5 and 7 were well supported with combinations of the phenotype data. Differential expression data from cold stress experiments were used to identify 13 significantly differentially expressed genes within the QTL regions and identify 20 candidate cold memory genes by comparing transcriptomes of trained and untrained plants. These genes potentially explain the difference in response to initial versus secondary cold exposures and cold stress response between B73 and Mo17.