Features of Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook PDF
Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook PDF-Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook:
Full Guide on How to Naturally & Safely Lower Your Blood Pressure Fast in Less than 3 Weeks; Plus Foods to Consume & Avoid to Improve Your Overall Health & Lots More
Are you struggling with the issue of high blood pressure, and you are looking for the best approaches to improve your condition permanently? Do you need an approach or guide that will restore your health to normalcy? Have your attempted other options of trying to reduce your blood pressure but they have not given you the result you truly desire? If this is the situation, then the mind-blowing guide will permanently put an to this challenge of yours!Furthermore, high blood pressure is also called hypertension, and surprisingly one may have it years without you knowing or without signs. And to add to this, it can cause destruction to vessels of the blood, and other vital body parts. More so, when it is not controlled or managed, it can lead to severe health issues like stroke as well as heart attack or even death. Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook PDF-Therefore, it should be properly managed.Hopefully, this guide reveals how you can lastingly tackle high blood pressure to a stand-still, plus its management by simply applying the techniques and approaches explained in this guide, and you should start seeing results immediately.Also, in this guide, you will learn:*What high blood pressure is*The symptoms/signs and the causes, and the complications related to high blood pressure that you should know*The things you need to do to remain or stay health*Systolic and diastolic blood pressure points or values, and the risk factors related to high blood pressure*The right and healthy foods you need to consume*Quiz for you and their answers*Alternative treatment for high blood pressure… And lots more…These and many other great and useful things are discussed in this breath-taking guide. Scroll up to download your copy by clicking the BUY Button NOW! You will be glad you did!-Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook PDF
Recommended Books For You
Description of Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook PDF
Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook PDF is one of the best medical books for students and for emergency medical doctors . It is a must download.
Stormie Omartian is the best-selling author of The Power of a Praying series with over 32 million books sold worldwide. In high demand as an international speaker, Stormie’s passion is to help people know God and love Him in a deep way. A survivor of child abuse, Stormie brings a deep understanding of recovery issues to her work.
In 2014, Stormie Omartian and her daughter-in-law, Paige Omartian launched a new online community called, Omartian.net. This online community gives its members an opportunity to receive exclusive, members only content from Stormie and Paige. Request an invite when you visit: www.Omartian.net
STORMIE OMARTIAN es la autora de la serie de éxitos de librería «El poder de la Oración»®, (más de 32 millones de libros vendidos) la cual incluye El Poder de la Esposa que Ora, El Poder del Esposo que Ora y El Poder de los Padres que Oran.
En el 2014, Stormie Omartian y su nuera, Paige Omartian, lanzaron una comunidad virtual llamada Omartian.net. Los miembros de esta comunidad virtual tienen la oportunidad de recibir contenido exclusivo de Stormie y Paige que es sólo para miembros. Visite nuestra página de web y solicite su invitación: www.Omartian.net
Dimensions and Characteristics of Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook PDF
- Publisher : Independently published (December 1, 2019)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 49 pages
- International Standard Book Number-10 : 171338275X
- International Standard Book Number-13 : 978-1713382751
- Item Weight : 2.24 ounces
- Dimensions : 5 x 0.13 x 8 inches
- Book Name : Lower Your Blood Pressure Handbook PDF
Reality Check “I purchased this book because I am interested in the idea that morals may be inborn — part of human nature — and that each culture shares certain basic values. I started reading the book enthusiastically, but by the end I was skimming pages and dismayed that the author had so seriously failed to provide any solutions to our political problems.
Haidt starts by dividing the human mind into what he calls the elephant and the rider. The rider is the reasoning, rational mind, whereas the elephant is the irrational, impulsive and intuitive mind. He argues that human moral decisions are guided by the elephant, and that the rider just comes up with a rationalized, post-facto “reasonable” justification after the decisions have been made by the elephant. Of course, anyone who has been alive for more than a couple decades may have noticed this kind of “logic” in his fellow humans. It goes like this: “Here are my biases, now how do I make an argument to justify it.”
Later in the book, he goes into more detail and lists the specific intuitions that may bias people towards certain moral conclusions: care/harm, liberty/oppression, fairness/cheating, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, sanctity/degradation.
However, he doesn’t call them biases (that’s my own terminology). He describes them as something like the taste buds of morality, whereupon one may develop certain “tastes” over a lifetime that cause one to be liberal (progressive) or conservative. Just like we may have a preference for sweet food, we might also have partially inborn and partially acquired intuition for, to make an example, loyalty, which may lead one to make statements like “My country, right or wrong” in the face of unethical behavior by one’s government.
Haidt rejects rational thinking entirely. Indeed, he goes so far as to label those who engage in systematic rational thinking as “autistic” (pg 136). He labels modern, civilized countries as WEIRD (an insulting acronym he made up). He also has no interest in individual rights, such as America’s Bill of Rights. Rather, he finds solace in the ignorance of impoverished villagers in northeast Brazil and primitive people of India who wipe their butts with their hands (really! see pg 122). He praises studies which show that ignorant people prefer collectivism and use their intuitions (prejudices/biases) when making moral decisions. Critical thinking? Rights? To Haidt, they’re irrelevant. He’s openly hostile to critical thinking. He disparages psychological studies of advanced (“WEIRD”) countries as “statistical outliers” (pg 112).
Essentially, his ethics can be summarized as “cultural relativism”, except that Western cultures are always wrong and those on the upper half of the bell curve (advanced, civilized societies) are WEIRD. Since humans are incapable of reason (according to Haidt), we can only navigate ethical and political decisions by intuitions. Whose intuitions should we follow, you ask? Well, that’s unclear, although he does provide some helpful graphs of the intuitions of different political views towards the end of the book. I guess whoever shouts the loudest gets to make the rules.
I don’t actually disagree with any of Haidt’s psychological studies. I just come to entirely different conclusion. When Haidt finds ignorance and prejudice, he wants to build a code of ethics out of it. Where I find ignorance and prejudice, I want to educate people and help them to understand the points of views of others. How can this come about? Well, first one must accept that there is a real, physical reality out there, and that certain actions make sense in the real world and others don’t. If you compare today’s political discussion with that of previous generations, you can see how far we’ve fallen. For example, read “The Federalist Papers” and compare that to any modern day politician’s anti-intellectualism, and you can realize how much America has lost since our founding in terms of critical thinking and honest debate.
The Enlightenment-style system of individual rights has advanced society enormously. Unfortunately, there are still pseudo-intellectuals like Haidt who want to drag us back into the stone age, or worse, towards fascism, religious fundamentalism, or communism. I find this book disturbing and could go on and on about problems I have with it, however I think I’ve said enough to get my point across.”
Brandon “I’ve read a lot of books in my life. Psychology, Poetry, Biology, Business Theory, Self-Help, Nutrition, Economics and so many other subjects are represented in my home library.
The Righteous Mind is hands-down the most important book I’ve ever consumed. Haidt’s understanding of human morality and the science of communication and decision making are weaved together into an approachable, beautiful and potentially life changing symphony.
Enough has been said about why you should read this book so I want to use the rest of this review to tell you exactly what I experienced after finishing this book and how it became “The most important thing I’ve ever read”.
I have struggled for years to communicate with some of my friends and family. So many words were wasted discussing politics, religion and conspiracy theories and all we ever accomplished was self-fulfillment. We never had resolution and we never succeeded in convincing the other side.
I’m a person who considers myself well-read and a champion for pragmatism and logic. You can probably imagine how frustrated I felt when I was consistently unable to win arguments about out-there, government’s coming for us-so buy some guns, conspiracy discussions.
Something had to give, so I went searching and ended up on this book. I read it, digested it and decided to try and apply the principles to my communications. I was determined to “align with their elephant” first so I could then shift their mindset to my point of view.
Let’s be honest: I was just trying to manipulate other people into seeing things my way.
Well, something incredible and completely unintentional happened: I realized I was wrong, a lot.
One of the foundational pieces discussed in the book is the fact that we, as humans, make decisions in the parts of our brain that aren’t subject to critical thinking. If you want to sway someones opinion, Haidt suggests, you must first appeal to their elephant (the emotional part of their brain or “why they feel the way they do”).
In the effort to start practicing this: I dedicated myself to asking “why do they believe this way?” first and only made suggestions after I felt that I could articulate what the other person was “feeling” about the subject.
A crazy thing happened: many times I would find myself changing my mind about a subject mid conversation. As it turns out, other people aren’t quite as crazy as I thought, they just have different experiences than I do.
After I spent some time training my brain, I started to conversate this way without any conscious effort. I actually seem to have re-wired my brain. The implication of this can’t be overstated.
I now see the world in completely different ways and I feel that I can actually empathize for the first time in my life.
I only wish everyone could read this book, understand their natural decision making process and be aware of what’s happening to them when they have disagreements or strong opinions on a subject.
You need to read this book. Everyone does.
To the author: Thank you, Jonathan, for giving your life to understanding us a little better and for taking the time to write it all down and pass these lessons onto the rest of us.”
Mandrake “This was a book club choice, and one of the best that we have read in recent years. I would recommend it to everyone, but particularly those with strong and confirmed moral or political convictions. It will change your views about religion and politics, and hopefully make you more tolerant of other peoples perspectives. Here are my notes:
Haidt: The Righteous Mind
This was one of our best recent book club choices. It was well written, clear and thought provoking. The main point of the book to me was to demonstrate that morality has a social purpose, as the foundation on which social capital is constructed. What matters is that people share the same moral values, not whether those values are “right or wrong”. It has changed my thinking, and I have bought copies for friends of mine to see if it can also change theirs.
Table of Contents
The book is divided into sections:
• Section 1: Intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second
The central metaphor is that the mind is like a rider on an elephant, whose job is to serve the elephant without much control of where the elephant is going. Traditionally Western philosophy separated the body and the mind, with the mind being the “ghost in the machine”, but according to Haidt the two are intimately connected. In fact morality is rooted in emotion and not in reason. We act first (the elephant moves), and justify our actions later (the rider).
• Section 2: There’s more to morality than harm and fairness
The central metaphor is like a tongue with six taste receptors. Morality has evolved to bind social groups together. Haidt identifies 6 different moral foundations, each of which has a role to play in addressing specific human behaviours:
Care/Harm: evolved for the protection and care of vulnerable offspring
Fairness/Cheating: evolved to encourage sharing and punish cheating
Loyalty/Betrayal: evolved to bind people together in social groups and to punish defectors
Authority/Subversion: evolved to bind people within a hierarchical social structure within the group
Sanctity/Degradation: evolved to protect health by avoiding unsafe foods and encouraging hygienic practises
Liberty/Oppression: evolved to balance the personal freedom and group loyalty
• Section 3: Morality binds and blinds
The central metaphor we are 90 percent bee and 10 percent chimp. We naturally tend to aggregate into large social groups bound by shared morals. In this context religion should not be seen as a parasitic meme, but as a social tool that binds people together into a cohesive and effective unit. Further, our political inclinations are a function of our individual sensitivities to each of the 6 moral foundations. Socialists are primarily driven by Care/Harm considerations for “social justice” and equality of outcomes. Conservatives are more concerned with maintaining social capital in an imperfect world where people cheat and exploit the system. Neither has a monopoly on righteousness, and each has their place in maintaining a balanced society.
I thought that this was an excellent book, grounded in science, which succeeds in its main argument that morality is an evolutionary adaptation whose purpose is to behind social groups together. I also very much enjoyed the description of how the field of moral psychology has developed over time. I have only a few points to discuss:
1. Religion as a meme
Haidt argues that the new Atheists are wrong in characterising Religion as a pernicious meme, and that instead it has a social purpose in binding people together into a cohesive whole. I think he overstates his case, and that his argument is not incompatible with that of the new atheists (Dawkins, Hitchens etc). Although the set of religions as a whole may well have a social purpose (religion has spontaneously evolved too often for it not to have some use), each individual religion can also be regarded as a meme that exploits humanity’s social needs to propagate itself. Thus when Haidt states that religions change over time to fit the needs of a changing society, the New Atheists would argue that the meme mutates and evolves with its host to ensure its continued propagation. It is merely a question of perspective.
2. Moral foundations of political views
Although, the conclusion of Haidt’s discussion of the moral foundations for Conservative and Liberal viewpoints is a refreshing call for tolerance, I thought that this was the weakest part of the book. His claim that political beliefs can be traced back to differing sensitivities to the 6 moral foundations mentioned above was justified by social surveys in which people were asked their political orientation and then asked to answer moral questionnaires. Conservatives and Liberals were then found to have different reactions to questions that targeted particular moral foundations. Correlation is not necessarily causation I thought that some of the graphs showed relatively weak relationships. In order for Haidt to be right the questions must be formulated so that the subject interprets them in the way intended, and that each question must target the intended moral foundation correctly. There is significant room for error and ambiguity there. His results seemed strong enough to draw general but not specific conclusions from.
3. I have an old friend whose politics are different from mine (he is a lifelong Socialist), so I bought him a copy of the book in the hope that it would provide some perspective and allow us to better understand each other’s viewpoints. As I handed it over he took one look and said “Not bloody Haidt, I hated that book.” We continue to avoid discussing politics. I am pessimistic that Haidt’s call for political toleration will be heeded.
I thought that this was a terrific book, and one of the best we have read in a while.”
This site complies with DMCA Digital Copyright Laws. Please bear in mind that we do not own copyrights to this book/software. We’re sharing this with our audience ONLY for educational purposes and we highly encourage our visitors to purchase the original licensed software/Books. If someone with copyrights wants us to remove this software/Book, please contact us. immediately.
You may send an email to [email protected].com for all DMCA / Removal Requests.