Merriam-Webster defines "health" as:
Support the ‘Prince’
Please disable ad blockers for our domain. Thank you!
Use the fields below to perform an advanced search of ' archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query. You can also try a Basic search
471 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
Merriam-Webster defines "health" as:
I was dismayed to read about Jon Ort’s conversation about privacy with a Princeton University librarian in his opinion column in the ‘Prince.’ I want to affirm that some, hopefully many, Princeton University librarians are keenly aware of and concerned about privacy issues, especially in an online environment. I have been a Firefox user for more than a decade, and I have exclusively used Duck Duck Go as my search engine of choice for several years. I’m concerned about tracking tactics such as browser fingerprinting, but also about wider issues such as how an erosion of privacy affects fundamental democratic freedoms of association and expression and even our capacity to sustain meaningful personal relationships. I also regularly attend talks at Princeton’s Center for Information Technology Policy, which has a robust research program on web tracking and privacy.
In a well-written response to my letter to the editor last week arguing for the live, radical space of the arts while questioning the monumental architecture of the new Lewis Center for the Arts complex, I was accused of threatening “to obscure the great good that the existence of this new center will do for the University.”
This past week, Kyle Berlin ’18 penned a letter to the editor in which he criticized the new Lewis Center for the Arts complex. From decrying the center’s allegedly garish architectural style to its supposed complicity in the Neoliberal Cooptation of the Arts, Berlin spared no aspect of the University’s newest project from criticism in his piece. As it turns out, not only are Berlin's accusations vague and unimportant, but they are wrong, threatening to obscure the great good that the existence of this new center will do for the University.
Last weekend, a mysterious procession of people weaved its way through north campus. From a distance, they emitted a collective murmur, like a moan of mourning. But if you got close enough, you could catch snippets of individual sentences. In their sudden intelligibility and idiosyncracy, the reader’s emergent voice blending with the voices of others, they sounded more like joy. A cacophony of words, embodied and reverberating and alive.
"Shall the undergraduates direct the USG Senate to establish a standing committee that works with the Interclub Council to annually collect and release demographic information, such as race, gender, and academic major, about the members of each Eating Club, and additionally, for each selective (‘bicker’) Club, its applicants (‘bickerees’)?
The Oct. 1 referendum on Catalan independence made headlines, but not because of its result. As CNN reported, “some 893 people were injured as riot police raided polling stations, dragged away voters, and fired rubber bullets during clashes.” International media published videos showing Spanish policemen beating people up, from teenagers to old ladies. Nonetheless, about 43 percent of Catalans managed to vote, and among those, 92 percent voted to secede from Spain. Three of the four main Spanish political parties, making up 70 percent of the members of Parliament in Madrid, failed to condemn police brutality. The Spanish government condoned it by calling it “proportionate.”
To the Editor,
To Christopher Eisgruber, President of Princeton University:
Another Bicker season has come and gone, leaving some students overjoyed and some crushed. For some of those students, bickering was a way to increase their social status, to be part of a club that everyone wants to get into. During the year, the thought of Bicker nags constantly in the recesses of their minds. Students actively try to hang out with members of clubs, even at the expense of their old friend groups. Every social interaction with a member of a selective club is just that much more important, more consequential. But I’m willing to wager that most students who bickered, like me, were just looking to be able to eat with their friends.
I am not in the habit of reading the editorial page of The Daily Princetonian, and moreover, I am normally inclined to forbear rather than publicly single out an undergraduate for criticism. Nevertheless, an ad hominem reference to me in the Sept. 26 edition came to my attention, and the circumstances in this case are special. In his column, Ryan Born takes umbrage at what he supposes is the vagueness of the term “free speech,” and he goes on to dismiss it as a rhetorical weapon. He then incorrectly imputes sinister motives to others in their defense of freedom of speech. The lengthy screed groans on, column after column, making a series of increasingly bizarre assertions, including the particularly egregious claim that what he calls “the arguments of hate” were “laid to rest at Dachau.” A great many good people were murdered at Dachau. Does Born approve of those murders? Does he approve of the suppression of ideas or religious beliefs held by the people who were murdered at Dachau? Is he simply making a reckless allusion to mass murder and genocide for effect? In any one of these cases, he is within his First Amendment rights to express his appalling point of view, and in each of these possible interpretations of his intent, the rest of us have a moral obligation to condemn what he has said. Shame on him!
Dear Mr. Ryan Born,
Last week, the Spanish police arrested 14 Catalan officials in Barcelona. The conflict between the Catalan and Spanish governments has escalated in recent weeks, ahead of a referendum scheduled for October 1, in which Catalans want to decide whether to remain in Spain or to become independent. Friends and colleagues have been asking, with equal bewilderment: “Why is Spain so adamant in preventing you [Catalans] from voting in the self-determination referendum? Didn’t Scotland vote on independence recently?” But also, “Why is Catalonia so stubborn about holding this referendum? There must be some alternative.”
You’re sitting in class, trying to take notes, but the only thing on your mind is the fact that your family group chat is quiet. Reports then come out with the body count, news articles pop up detailing the damage, and images of a home you once knew cover your feed.
Dear Vice President Calhoun, Dean Crittenden, and Dean Dolan,
When I walked onto the Princeton campus eight years ago, I wasn't sure what to expect. It didn’t feel right to step inside the perfect Gothic architecture in my flip flops and shorts. On my application, I promised to major in molecular biology, but after sitting behind a microscope for year years in high school, cells and molecules were the last thing on my mind. I knew I wanted to empower others in some way and decided that I could figure it out over the next four years.
I had just finished a packed summer working in the Frick Chemistry Lab at Princeton and was therefore so relieved and excited to see my parents. I had not seen them in over eight months, the longest I have ever gone without seeing them. Stepping off the plane and walking into the airport lobby, I was warmly greeted by my parents and two shots of flavored Cruzan Rum, a true reminder that I was home and a taste that I missed. We spent the next couple of weeks getting back to our old family life, living life how it was before I went to college.
The Harvard administration set off a firestorm when it rejected a formerly incarcerated woman who had already been recommended by the Department of History. Numerous media outlets have covered the case of Michelle Jones, who is now pursuing a Ph.D. in history at New York University. While incarcerated, she completed an undergraduate degree and then became a published scholar in American studies with her paper “Magdalene Laundries: The First Prisons for Women in the United States.” She also wrote a play to be performed in a theater in Indianapolis.
After Harvard University’s recent decision to rescind its fellowship offer to Chelsea Manning, following backlash from CIA Director Mike Pompeo as well as others, it has become evident that, once more, the fight for academic freedom and university autonomy is more important than ever. While Harvard’s decision demonstrates the university’s unwillingness, or perhaps inability, to grapple with difficult ideas, controversial figures, and important public debate, Princeton University should demonstrate its maturity and commitment to academic freedom by extending an invitation to Manning.