Negotiating to Stop Iran's Nuclear Ambitions

Of course it’s easy to sympathize with Israel’s view on Iran. When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says, as he did over the weekend, “Iran must not be armed with nuclear weapons”—well, that’s a nice ringing declaration. When French President François Hollande, on his visit to Israel,says more or less la même chose—“France will not make concessions on nuclear proliferation”—I’m sure we can all empathize with France.

But if you’re an Iranian president who after engaging in a single phone call with Barack Obama, discovers on his return to his home country demonstratorsthrowing shoes at his limo (in Islamic culture, the sole of a shoe is considered particularly disgusting, a sign of total contempt), you have ample reason to, as it were, tread carefully. And yet, for some reason, neither Israel nor France seems to grasp all that. In fact, France in particular has pretty much shoved Rouhani into the kind of tight corner that practically forces him to lash out. (So did Netanyahu, who called the Iranian leader “a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” but I’m betting Rouhani doesn’t worry overmuch about Israel’s character assessment.)But ringing declarations, empathy, sympathy—what do they have to do with what’s actually going on? With what could be going on, with a bit of negotiation and good fortune? How do they help the world gain concessions from a famously paranoid nation? Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, at first seemingly pliable, has recently done an about-face. After initially sending signals that if sanctions were dropped, he might be amenable to a nuclear enrichment freeze, Rouhani now, after France’s declaration and the suspension of talks, says otherwise. His country, Rouhani nowinsists, has a right “to enrichment” of uranium, and sanctions imposed by the West, he adds, will do nothing to cause Iran to back down on that enrichment project. This of course is a ringing declaration in its own right. And a dangerous one as well, since Iran may be only months away from being capable of producing a nuclear weapon.

France, for example, is adamant that operations at the nuclear reactor at Arak—not yet online, by the way—be halted. While that, of course, will be an important part of any agreement, how prudent was it for the French to insist on such a measure so early in the negotiations? That the nation of Talleyrand, the country famous for the delicacy and skill of its diplomacy, would abandon these traits at such a crucial moment is not an accident or oversight.

Netanyahu of course has his own reasons for distrust, ones that are close by and existential. Personally, I think Netanyahu sees existential threats around every corner. It is both his strength (with his electorate) and his central, irredeemable weakness in conducting foreign policy, one that France is busy exploiting right now.

No one is suggesting blind trust should be the order of the day in negotiations with Iran. But consider this: In October, Rouhani ordered a nationwide survey to find out if most Iranians support or oppose improved relations with the US. A decade earlier, previous pollsters examining the same question were jailed for conducting just such a survey because the results disturbed the country’s despots. At the time, roughly 70 percent of respondents favored restoring ties between Washington and Tehran.

So the question is this: If Rouhani is as untrustworthy, obdurate, and intransigent as the French and Israelis make him out to be, why would he have ordered a similar poll last month? He knows the likely results. We all do. Given an opportunity, given the chance and encouragement, he might just act on them.

The Himalayas

The Himalayas are mountains that are located in southern Asia. They are a part of in Nepal, India, Pakistan, Tibet and Bhutan. The mountains are the highest in the world, reaching almost 9,000 meters above sea level. The Himalayas separatethe Indian subcontinent from the inner part of Asia. The word Himalaya means “home of snow”.

14 mountains are over 8,000 meters high, among them the K2 , Nanga Parbat and Mount Everest, at 8,848 meter the world’s highest mountain. The Himalayas extendover 1,500 miles (2,400 km) from the Indus Valley in the west to the Brahmaputra Valley in the east. They are between 100 and 250 kilometers wide.

Many of the mountain peaks are sacred to the people who live in the surrounding areas. Hindu and Buddhist pilgrims go there and pray to God.

 

How the Himalayas were formed

The Himalayas belong to the youngest mountain ranges in the world. They were formed when the Indian subcontinent, which wasoriginally a part of the southern landmass, drifted to the north and crashed into Asia. This movement started about 70 million years ago and has been going on up to the present day. The Himalayas are still becoming taller, moving at about 7 cm per year. Earthquakesand volcanoes are evidence that the area is still very active.

How the Himalayas collided with Asia

 

Rivers and Lakes

Glaciers and permanent snow fields cover the higher regions of the Himalayas. They are the source of streams that flow into the two big rivers of the region.The Indus flows to the west and through Pakistan into the Arabia Sea. The Ganges and Brahmaputra flow to the east and get together in Bangladesh. They form  the largest delta in the world.

Climate

Almost every type of climate can be found in the different altitudes of themountain range. The lower slopes in the south are home to tropical plants and tea. Trees grow up to a height of 4000 meters. Wheat and other cereals are grown in higher regions.

The Himalayas influence the climate in both India and Tibet. They form a barrier for monsoon winds that blow from the Indian Ocean over India. On the front side of the mountains it rains heavily while dry air blows across the plains of Tibet.

 

Population

The Himalayas are very sparsely populated because of the harsh climate.  Most people live on the lower Indian slopes. Many people earn their living as sherpas, guiding tourists and mountaineers to the peaks of the mountain range.

The mountains have been a natural barrier for thousands of years. They stopped people from China and the inner part of Asia to mix with the Indian population. Genghis Kahn, emperor of the Mongols, was stopped from expanding his empire to the south by the tall mountains.

Most of the passes that cross the Himalayas are over 5,000 high. They are covered with snow during the winter period and almost impossible to pass.

Tourism

Mountain climbing has become the main tourist activity in the Himalaya Mountains. It started towards the end of the 19th century when many mountaineers started climbing the peaks. In 1953 Edmund Hillary and Sherpa Tenzing Norgay were the first to reach Mount Everest, the world’s highest mountain.

Pass in Ladakh with Buddhist prayer flags

Digital Heaven

If you had the opportunity to live forever, would you take it? The obstacles to keeping your body alive indefinitely still seem insurmountable, but some scientists think there is another possibility opened up by digital technology: creating a digital copy of your "self" and keeping that "alive" online long after your physical body has ceased to function.

In effect, the proposal is to clone a person electronically. Unlike the familiar physical clones - offspring that have identical features as their parents, but that are completely separate organisms with a separate conscious life - your electronic clone would believe itself to be you. How might this be possible? The first step would be to map the brain.

How? One plan relies on the development of nanotechnology. Ray Kurzweil - one of the prophets of artificial intelligence - predicts that within two or three decades we will have nanotransmitters that can be injected into the bloodstream. In the capillaries of the brain they would line up alongside the neurons and detect the details of the cerebral electronic activity. They would be able to transmit that information to a receiver inside a special helmet or cap, so there would be no need for any wires protruding from the scalp.

As a further step, Ray Kurzweil also envisages the nanotransmitters being able to connect you to a world of virtual reality on the internet, similar to what was depicted in the film 'Matrix'. With the nanotransmitters in place, by thought alone, you could log on to the internet and instead of the pictures coming up on your screen they would play inside your mind. Rather than send your friends e-mails you would agree to meet up on some virtual tropical beach.

For Ray this would be, quite literally, heaven. Once you upload the brain onto the internet and log on to that virtual world the body can be left to rot while your virtual self carries on playing Counter Strike for ever.

Generations of Christians believed in Christ partly because his resurrection held out the promise that we too might be able to enjoy life after death. But why wait for the Second Coming when you can have a shot of nanobots and upload your brain onto the internet and live on as an immortal virtual surfer?

Who needs faith when you've got broadband?

(One snag: to exist on the net you will have to have your neural network parked on the computer of a web-hosting company. These companies want real money in real bank accounts every year or they will wipe your bit of the hard disc and sell the space to someone else. With your body six feet underground how will you pay? Here the anology with heaven really breaks down. God keeps heaven going for free, but the web is something you have to pay for.)

Imam Hussein (a.s.): “The Chief of the Youth of Paradise”

I have taken this stand not out of arrogance or pride, neither out of mischief or injustice. I have risen to seek reform in the community of my grandfather. I would like to bid good, forbid evil, and follow the tradition of my grandfather and my father ‘Ali bin Abi Talib.” – Imam Hussein

It is generally believed that Imam Hussein was buried at Karbala, Iraq. In time, the mausoleum shown above was built to honour his memory. It is the most visited pilgrimage centre in Shi‘i Islam after the Ka‘ba.

Editor’s note: The following introduction is taken from Dr. Azim Nanji’s article on Imam Hussein. The link to the complete article is provided below.

INTRODUCTION: Imam Hussein (a.s.) was born in Medina in 626 CE and, as a child, is believed to have been held in great affection by the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.s.). As a young man, he participated in the work of his father, Imam ‘Ali (a.s.), including in his military campaigns. After the death of his father in 661 CE and the accession to power of Muawiyah, Imam Hussein maintained a low profile and, although dismissive of the usurpation of power by Muawiyah, did not seek to foment open rebellion. However, when Muawiyah sought to impose his son Yazid as successor and thereby to institutionalise the rule of the Umayyad dynasty, Imam Hussein declined to offer allegiance (baya). He was approached by the people of Kufa to oppose Yazid and accept the mantle of leadership, which they believed was his right. In response to their call, Imam Hussein – together with a small band of followers and members of his family – left Mecca for Kufa. On his way, he learned of the executions of some of his closest supporters by the Umayyads and decided to urge those from his group who were not willing to put their lives at risk to voluntarily depart. He continued on his way to Kufa with the rest of the group, camping at a place called Karbala. In the meantime, a contingent from Yazid’s army of about four thousand members arrived at the scene and ordered the small band to acknowledge Yazid’s authority while also cutting off their access to the river for water.

The final confrontation  is the tragic account of the encirclement and massacre of Imam Hussein and his small army, which was said to number seventy-two men. They fought gallantly, but they were soon overpowered, and Imam Hussein, his brother, and some of his closest relatives were slaughtered. Imam Hussein’s head was taken to Damascus to be displayed before Yazid and his court.

Imam Hussein’s memory and death is commemorated in particular with great religious fervour and intensity during the first ten days of the Islamic month of  Muharram, known as Ashura, which simply means tenth in the Arabic language.  The 10th day marks the climax of the remembrance of Muharram.

The minute and stunning details of this tragic event have been written and survived from the very first day by eye witnesses. For the last fourteen hundred years, the battle of Karbala reflects the collision of the mind of Yazid and the Faith of Hussein.

Ali Akbar ibn Hussain (AS)

Ali Akbar ibn Hussain was born on 11th of Shabaan 44 AH and he was the son of Imam Hussain ibn Ali and Umm-e-Laila. He was a handsome young man of eighteen. He was also a brave soldier. He had been taught fencing and archery by his half-uncle, Abbas ibn Ali.

Ali Akbar ibn Hussain resembled the Holy Islamic Prophet Muhammad so much that Hussain ibn Ali was often heard saying that whenever I remember the Holy Islamic Prophet Mohammed I always look at Akbar.

Ali Akbar ibn Hussain had a loud beautiful voice. It was he who always recited Adhan. On the morning of the day of Ashura, Ali Akbar ibn Hussain recited the Adhan. Every one knew that it was the last time they would hear Ali Akbar ibn Hussain's Adhan. Hussain ibn Ali began to weep when Ali Akbar began his Adhan. The ladies could also be heard crying in their tents.

After the morning prayers Ali Akbar stood in front of Hussain ibn Ali. He said, "Father I request for permission to go and fight the enemies of Islam." Hussain ibn Ali looked at his son lovingly. He said, "Akbar, you have my permission. May Allah be with you! But Akbar, you know how much your mother, sisters and aunts love you. Go and say farewell to them." Ali Akbar went into the tent of his mother. Every time he wanted to come out of the tent the mother, aunts and sisters would pull his cloak and say, "O Akbar, How can we live without you?" Finally Hussain ibn Ali had to go in and plead with all to let Ali Akbar go.

Hussain ibn Ali helped his youthful son to mount the horse. As Ali Akbar ibn Hussain began to the ride towards the battlefield, he heard foot steps behind. He looked back and saw his father. He said, "Father, we have said good-bye. Why are you walking behind me?" Hussain ibn Ali replied, "My son, had you been a father of a son like me, you would surely have understood!"

Ali Akbar fought very bravely. No one dared come close to him in single combat after he had killed many well known warriors. Umar ibn-e-Sa'ad ordered his soldiers to finish off the young man saying, "When he dies, Hussain will not want to live! Ali Akbar is the life of Hussain." While a few soldiers attacked Ali Akbar another (Haseen ibn-e-Nameer) slowly crept up to him and threw a spear at his chest with such ferocity that it penetrated his chest and he felt faint. As he was falling from his horse, he cried out. "O Father, my last salaam to you!" As he hit the ground the spear broke but the blade remained lodged in Akbar's chest.

When Hussain ibn Ali heard Akbar's salaam he looked at Euphrates, where Abbas ibn Ali’s body was laying and said, “Abbas! Now that this brother of yours needs you the most, where have you gone?" With all his strength sapped by the anguish in Akbar's voice, Hussain ibn Ali began to walk towards the battlefield.

If you guys didn’t read about the battle of Khaybar, then do so because it is related to this article is so many ways. The Jews of Khaybar had revolted against the Holy Prophet Muhammad. The Prophet Muhammad and the Muslims of Medina laid a siege on Khaybar. They surrounded the fortress in which the Jews had taken shelter. The Muslims could not get victory unless they entered the fortress. There was a moat surrounding the fortress. Hazrat Ali had been unable to accompany the Muslims due to his illness. Three days passed and the Muslims could not find any solution. Even if they got across the moat they would face the famous gates of the fortress. These were made of steel, and it is said that at least twenty men were needed to push open or close each gate.

On the third day, after the morning prayers, the Islamic Prophet Muhammad summoned Ali ibn Abu Talib. Ali immediately responded. He jumped his horse over the moat and with one hand swung open both the gates of the fortress with such force that they broke off their hinges. He carried them and put them across the moat to form a bridge. The Muslims rode into the fortress and conquered Khaybar.

Now let us go back to Karbala. When Hussain ibn Ali got to where Akbar lay he took him in his arms. Akbar had his right hand on the chest. He placed his left arm over the shoulder of his father. Hussain said "Akbar, why do you embrace me with one arm only?" Akbar would not reply. Hussain tried to move Akbar's hand. Akbar resisted. Hussain ibn Ali gently moved the hand. Then he saw it! He saw the blade of the spear. Hussain ibn Ali laid Ali Akbar ibn Hussain on the ground and sitting on his knees he put both his hands on the blade of the spear. He then looked at Najaf, and cried out, "Father, I too have come to my Khaybar!" He pulled out the blade. Angel Gabriel cried out "Marhaba! Marhaba!" Akbar took a deep sigh and then lay still.

Geologic History of the Earth

Geologists are scientists who study the structure of rocks and the history of the Earth. By looking at and examining layers of rocks and the fossils they contain they are able to tell us what the Earth looked like at a certain time in history and what kind of plants and animals lived at that time.
Scientists think that the Earth was probably formed at the same time as the rest of our solar system, about 4.6 billion years ago. The solar system may have be-gun as a cloud of dust, from which the sun and the planets evolved. Small par-ticles crashed into each other to create bigger objects, which then turned into smaller or larger planets. Our Earth is made up of three basic layers. The cen-tre has a core made of iron and nickel. Around it is a thick layer of rock called the mantle and around that is a thin layer of rock called the crust.
Over 4 billion years ago the Earth was totally different from the planet we live on today. There were no plants or animals, only rock, desert, water and ice. The atmosphere probably consisted of carbon dioxide and steam with almost no oxygen to breathe.
The Precambrian Era
The oldest period of the Earth’s history lasted from the beginnings four and a half billion years ago to about 600 million years ago. At first, simple forms of one-celled life developed in the oceans. Later on bacteria and algae evolved. Towards the middle of the Precambrian, about 2 billion years ago, more com-plex organisms, sponge-like creatures and soft-bodied animals lived in the seas. During this time there was no life on land because there was not enough oxygen to breathe.

cont....................

Dreaming the dream team for Pakistan

That the bunch of talented and spoiled boys we have raised as the national cricket team is in for a shake-up after the Champions Trophy debacle will be the understatement of the season. They may all be fired summarily, without benefits, for all we care.

It is not about this tournament though, which was only a catalyst, or about Team Pakistan which has been seriously ill for a long time. It’s the cricket officialdom in Pakistan. We have created a shady organisation headed by a political appointee and filled with cronies and lackeys of all shades. This rag tag administration has given us more scandals than cricket matches and more crooks, druggies, slackers and gamblers than professional cricketers and inspiring sportsmen. Sending them all back home will be neither unfair nor shocking for anyone.

The big question is who do we replace them with? That this country of nearly 200 million is teeming with talent is a given. The occasional display of excellence and triumph on the field is proof that regardless of the system’s hindrances some of the talent does filter through. Only, people charged with spotting talent and grooming it cannot decide on the definition of talent and the location of the talent pool. And so, we have a cricket board that has been looking for a batsman wicket keeper for many years but it casts its net only in the Akmal household. It selects Imran Farhat for every tournament in the hope that the opener’s talent will finally unlock, that he’ll find his groove eventually. It pits one player and group of players against the other and watches them fight their locker room fights on the ground.

So who decides what’s good for Pakistan cricket? It’s the president of Pakistan who is patron-in-chief of Pakistan Cricket Board. He has the authority to appoint a senile and withering old man who played a couple of Test matches in the days of black-and-white television, or a banker, a bureaucrat, a retired or serving army general, a medicine doctor … as head of the board. He receives Shoaib Malik and his Indian tennis star wife, Sania Mirza, at the presidency and that makes Malik – thrown out of the team for consistently bad performance, breach of discipline, and financial misconduct – fit to be in the team again. Every criminal activity by the players – abusing and smuggling drugs, match and spot fixing etc – is not only tolerated and never investigated (unless arm-twisted by ICC) but defended in foreign courts with your money and mine (we paid a million dirhams to get Mohammed Asif out of a UAE jail where he ended up for drugs possession, according to newspaper reports).

But cricket is our game. We pay the board its ridiculously generous salaries, allowances and privileges, shamefully disproportionate to their responsibilities. We pay the players for representing us at the international level and when they do well we make them our heroes and fill the stadium to cheer them up. The entire structure of cricket exists in this country because of us, because of our passion for cricket and because of our money. It is, therefore our right to guide the PCB in finding and retaining cricketing talent. Here is a set of suggested guidelines that you are welcome to add to:

1- Talent means cricketing talent, not the talent to whack every ball with closed eyes or hit the deck hard with a mindless regularity or to produce and sell cricket gear. For the example of a well-rounded and committed cricketer as role model for today’s young we have to go back to Javed Miandad who, in addition to being a class batsman, was a live wire in the field in the days when fielding wasn’t as glamorous and as crucial as it is today. Since him we have only been getting bowlers and batsmen, not cricketers.

2- The game of cricket is all about making runs. It starts and ends with making a certain number of runs in a certain number of overs. If you aren’t making runs, at the required pace, you have no place in the team. At present, half our team cannot bat because they see themselves only as bowlers or wicket keepers. No more. The Dream Team will bat, and make runs, all the way to the last pair. Exceptions will be very few. You can be allowed to bat like Mohammed Irfan only if you can bowl better than Wasim Akram.

3- Our batsmen follow either the Afridi or the Misbah school, sometimes both in the same innings, like making six runs in 30 balls and then getting out trying to hit a big one, and as a result wasting five overs and a wicket. Afridi and Misbah are merely states of mind, one is flashy and hurried, the other is painfully slow and both are self-defeating, and for that reason redundant in modern limited overs cricket. We need batsmen who can defend well all the time and attack fearlessly when required. The followers of the two above-mentioned styles will automatically be disqualified.

4- Regardless of how seriously we take our cricket, it remains a sport. It’s a game to be enjoyed. And so, it follows that, players are partly entertainers. They entertain us with their mastery of the sport. They use international fixtures to showcase their skill and innovation. Even during the hardest and slowest of toils a batsman will find a ball now and then to flash his bat at, to wow the spectators. The fielder will pull off an impossible catch; the wicket keeper will perform a stunt of a stumping under the influence of spectators-induced adrenalin. If the player enjoys what he is doing, and does it well consistently, he is entertaining.

5- Physical fitness is all well and good but cricket is essentially a mind game. It’s a clash of wills between a batsman and 11 opponents. As the weaker side starts accepting the opponent’s domination, the match is over, mentally. For this reason we need young men with brains, those who are strong of will and have power of passion and conviction. We need 18-year-old men, not 30-something-year-old boys.

6- And before any of the above, the PCB must be made accessible to players and accountable to people. It should be run by cricketers, cricket lovers, and professional administrators, not Zardaris, Musharrafs and their chamchas, They need to play their own game and leave ours to us

Ms Dhoni

"I would consider him as great because when it comes to Indian cricket, you're under the microscope throughout, He's seen the format change, right from start in 1989. From that time, Test cricket has changed significantly. ODI cricket, there have been a plenty of changes. The introduction of T20 has come, and overall it had an impact on each and every thing," 

"It's not only the cricketing aspect; I think what's difficult is handle success in India, the expectations of the people. We're expected to win each and every game, which is not possible. Yes, there are other greats, but there was one thing they didn't have to deal with, and that's the level of expectations. When you're doing well that itself puts pressure on you. But imagine when you're going through a lean patch, the expectations go up, they never come down,"

"So you've to handle all those things. I have seen some of the foreign cricketers, they handle the cricketing pressures well. But when it comes to handling the pressures that are not really related to cricket, they buckle under... So he's been fantastic, and there's plenty to learn from him. Right from 1989 he became big star, for a quarter of century he's played for India, and he's always been a star."

Literary Criticism

Criticism is the analysis and judgment of works of art. It tries to interpret and to evaluate such works and to examine the principles by which they may be understood. Criticism attempts to promote high standards among artists and to encourage the appreciation of art. It also helps society remain aware of the value of both past and present works of art.

Criticism plays an important part in every art form. This article emphasizes literary criticism. Kinds of literary criticism. Criticism can be divided into four basic types. They differ according to which aspect of art the critic chooses to emphasize. Formal criticism examines the forms or structures of works of art. It may also compare a work with others of its genre (kind), such as other tragic plays or other sonnets. Formal criticism is sometimes intrinsic–that is, it may seek to treat each work of art as complete in itself. Rhetorical criticism analyzes the means by which a work of art affects an audience. It focuses on style and on general principles of psychology. Expressive criticism regards works as expressing the ideas or feelings of the artist. It examines the artist’s background and conscious or unconscious motives. Mimetic criticism views art as an imitation of the world. It analyzes the ways that artists show reality, and their thoughts about it. The four types of criticism can also be combined. For example, a critic who looks at the form of a work might also study the way this form affects an audience.

History of Literary Criticism

The ancient Greek philosopher Plato was the first known literary critic. He accused poetry of imitating the mere appearance of things. Aristotle, his pupil, defended epic poetry and tragic drama. In his Poetics, Aristotle said that poetry is an instructive imitation, not of things but of actions. Other essays on criticism tended to be rhetorical handbooks that taught writers how to achieve certain effects. They included Art of Poetry by the Roman poet Horace and On the Sublime by the Greek writer Longinus.

During the late 1500′s, such critics as the English poet Sir Philip Sidney praised literature as the image of an ideal world. During the 1600′s and 1700′s, critics turned their attention to defining the rules by which they thought works should be written and judged. The three most important English critics during this period were John Dryden, Samuel Johnson, and Alexander Pope.

In the early 1900′s, the poet T. S. Eliot argued for a criticism that would be the servant of poetry, not of society. I. A. Richards, an English critic, developed methods of close reading. He asked readers to pay attention to the exact meaning of the text, not to impose their own ideas on it. In the mid-1900′s, a movement called the New Criticism was popular in the United States. Such New Critics as CleanthBrooks and John Crowe Ransom analyzed a work of literature as a self-contained whole, without reference to its historical period, the author’s life, or other external influences.

Secrets of Death

Secrets of Death

Death is literally described as the end of life. Every living thing eventually dies, but human beings are probably the only creatures that can imagine their own deaths. Most people fear death and try to avoid thinking about it. But the awareness of death has been one of the chief forces in the development of civilization.

Throughout history, people have continually sought new medical knowledge with which to delay death. Philosophers and religious leaders have tried to understand the meaning of death. Some scholars believe that much human progress results from people’s efforts to overcome death and gain immortality through lasting achievements.

Medical Aspects of Death

Scientists recognize three types of death that occur during the life of all organisms except those consisting of only one cell. These types are necrobiosis, necrosis, and somatic death. Necrobiosis is the continual death and replacement of individual cells through life. Except for nerve cells, all the cells of an organism are constantly being replaced. For example, new skin cells form under the surface as the old ones die and flake off.

Necrosis is the death of tissues or even entire organs. During a heart attack, for example, a blood clot cuts off the circulation of the blood to part of the heart. The affected part dies, but the organism continues to live unless the damage has been severe.

Somatic death is the end of all life processes in an organism. A person whose heart and lungs stop working may be considered clinically dead, but somatic death may not yet have occurred. The individual cells of the body continue to live for several minutes. The person may be revived if the heart and lungs start working again and give the cells the oxygen they need. After about three minutes, the brain cells–which are most sensitive to a lack of oxygen–begin to die. The person is soon dead beyond any possibility of revival. Gradually, other cells of the body also die. The last ones to perish are the bone, hair, and skin cells, which may continue to grow for several hours. Many changes take place after death. The temperature of the body slowly drops to that of its surroundings. The muscles develop a stiffening called rigor mortis. The blood, which no longer circulates, settles and produces reddish-purple discolorations in the lowest areas of the body. Eventually, bacteria and other tiny organisms grow on the corpse and cause it to decay. Defining death. Traditionally, a person whose breathing and heartbeat had stopped was considered dead. Today, however, physicians can prolong the functioning of the lungs and heart by artificial means. Various machines can produce breathing and a heartbeat even in a patient whose brain has been destroyed. These new medical procedures led many people to call for a new definition of death.

The Uniform Determination of Death Act, which was drafted in 1980, has been adopted by most states of the United States. Under this act, a person is considered dead when breathing and the heartbeat irreversibly stop, or when brain function totally and irreversibly stops, which is a condition also called brain death. The act permits physicians to use reasonable medical standards in applying this legal definition.

The brain-death definition of death raises important medical, legal, and moral questions. People who support this definition argue that it benefits society by making vital organs available for transplants. In most cases, the organs of a person who has died under the traditional definition are damaged and cannot be transplanted. But many vital organs remain alive and functioning in an individual whose body processes are maintained by machine, even though brain activity has stopped. Physicians can use these organs in transplants–if brain death is accepted as a legal definition. Critics of the brain-death definition point out that there are many unanswered questions regarding this concept. Such questions include: Who should decide which definition of death to use? When has brain death reached the point where it cannot be reversed?