the overthrow, then the murder of gaddafi, but frankly speaking, gaddafi was a bit of a tyrant, although a popular tyrant, he had the habit of sometimes indulging in terrorism, but by that time the united states had absolutely normal relations with them, he was kind of handing over his nuclear material potential, and the west was cooperating with him, why did they decide to overthrow him and kill him, the arab spring gave...

new opportunities, it seems to me, i think that it was generally unpredictable , at least, not orchestrated from the outside, that's it how such a total, such a total explosion in the greater middle east, when these protests happened, the americans, apparently, decided to take advantage of these things, and gaddafi turned up, assad turned up, who were not satisfied with anything else, the opportunity to change power in egypt turned up, in different situations. different decisions were made, each regime had its own capabilities, but gaddafi, apparently, turned out to be such a compromise figure for a whole pool of western countries that were ready to support the next coalition that was being created, even no minimal respect for the factor of sovereignty, well yes, under the cover of the un resolution, which in fact 1973, which was in fact not about the overthrow of gaddafi and not a ground invasion of libyan territory. to destroy

libyan aviation, to destroy ammunition depots, to destroy civilian administrative infrastructure, but in fact to suppress all the possibilities of the gaddafi regime for resistance, and in fact it was a real intervention, about which, by the way, then prime minister of russia vladimir putin said that this was a new crusade in its most original form, and then, of course, in 2014, the american intervention in syria, which i am sure would have led to the overthrow of the local government if only russia had not intervened and used military force, then there was the actual coup in kiev, which was organized and financed by the united states and its allies. and finally, in

2024, from my point of view, the direct entry of the united states through the ukrainian raid on kursk and the surrounding areas, the direct entry the united states, but if you like, in an undeclared war with russia, but i would like to get your assessment of why the united states did all this, in which of these situations. were fundamental american interests involved, why? i will already forget about the law, about decency, why was there not some, well, if you like, instinct for self-preservation, that this is an adventurist position with minimal results from my point of view for the united states itself, why all this? well, if we talk about fundamental national interests of the united states, as they are understood by the establishment, president biden recently said: the other day, we are talking about world domination,

about world domination, for the sake of which the americans are ready to do everything, and if we talk about the real interests of america, then of course all these operations are unlikely to benefit the national interests of america, because of course, the shell is thinning, i think that at each stage, america's defeat in one region or another thins this idea of ​​america as a party. the leader of the democratic world, no one talks about this anymore says, it is thinning the idea of ​​america as a real hegemon, failure after failure, just remember the flight of americans from afghanistan, which was broadcast to the whole world, and this is thinning, in fact, the system of international security , which the americans, among others , spent a lot of effort to create, this is what you were talking about, the reagan era, when he was ready to take some steps for the sake of ensuring a comprehensive peace, even if only symbolically in

relations with the soviet union, this is the era, it goes into the past, and this threatens the world with unpredictable consequences, this threatens the world with truly unpredictable consequences.

no evil will befall a good man, our soul is immortal, after death there will be a reward for the good, and punishment for the evil, these words are inscribed on the scroll that the hero of our conversation today is holding in his hands on the fresco.

the fresco is in the annunciation cathedral of the kremlin, and the hero is called socrates. hello, dear friends, dean of the philosophy. igor evgenievich surikov, chief researcher institute of general history of the russian academy of sciences. dear friends, i am vladimir ligoydov, let's talk about socrates. igor evgenievich, let's start with how, actually, this fresco, you have written a lot about it, how did it appear in the annunciation cathedral? here is what i know, that in general all these sayings, it's like socrates, there are other sages there, the so-called external sages are presented, in general sayings. according to him they were painted quite arbitrarily, and the fact that in an identical, so to speak, what is called a complex of sayings of socrates, we we will find these phrases no more than any other thinker, well, especially since, as is known, socrates did not write philosophical texts, yes, they usually say, he did not write anything, not quite so, but still

some texts have been preserved, but not of a philosophical nature, well, at least this is in any case very interesting, maybe we will return to this, you know what the first question is for you personally, even if different. from purely professional studies, as far as possible, here is socrates, first of all - who is this? alexey pavlovich? a meme, actually, because there is not only socrates, the ancient greek, but there is also the moscow socrates, nikolay fyodorov, and the georgian socrates, mirab madashvili, that is, socrates was usually called a person who preferred oral culture to written culture, who remained in the culture, like...

and actually, there is a russian proverb, silence is gold, speech is silver, therefore in russian culture, in traditional, in ancient russian culture, socrates is almost a saint, justin martyr said, christians before christ, before christ, igor evgenevich, and for you here is such a personal question, well, i will start with the fact that it was pythagoras who said that silence is golden socrates was an absolutely impossible chatterbox, well , in fact, socrates. first of all, this figure, as they say now, is super -promoted, this is the most famous, certainly the most famous, the most famous of all the ancient greeks, even people who have never thought about antiquity at all , have no idea about it, all the same somehow heard something about socrates, about things they are well known, they say, any

schoolchild knows this, so reduce definitely not only any schoolchild, many preschoolers have heard and know that there was such a sage socrates, this becomes some kind of grandiose, in fact , it embodies and almost... how much historical socrates is possible, you say in your wonderful monograph that you leave this question out of brackets, since it, well, in some sense, is not solvable, if i remember correctly, and i recently leafed through william guthrie, yes, the author himself, as far as i understand, on today is the day of the complete book on ancient philosophy of a multi-volume edition, and it seemed to me that he is very optimistic, guthrie says that in general, this is how he is described, this is how he was, it's just... plato imagined him like this, yes, xenophon was different, and he, by the way , gives a very interesting quote from

schweitzer, guthrie, where schweitzer says that here is the description of christ - ours is much more reliable, since it was written by simple fishermen, the difficulty with socrates is that outstanding people wrote, but plato alone enough, that's how between these two, actually, designated positions, how resolvable is the problem of the historical socrates and how much it needs to be resolved. since the same event, the trial of socrates, was described by both plato and xenophon, in general, these descriptions are different, but this is a description of the same event, yes, we can make sure that it really happened in history, the trial, the condemnation, the execution, the death of the righteous man, in its time, when we read the opolonia of socrates... the gospel, this

precedes the death of christ, and indeed, that is, that in culture there are such system-forming, meaning-forming events, socrates, probably, is not just a person, he is such an event of culture, but still, that is how much is solvable, igorevich, and it is necessary. to try to resolve the question of the historical socrates, well, on socrates, let's say, maybe, as many people, so many views, my view on this is the view of a historian, so if we take it from the point of view of strict facts, then the life of socrates in terms of biographical outline is even very well known, his parents are known, it is known that he lived almost always in the countryside, he was such a homebody, he really didn’t like to leave, even his hometown, even the nearest suburbs he didn’t like to go out, she said that i’m there, i’m only interested in people, i’m interested in nothing else, what will she tell me...

the poor couldn’t serve in the hoplites, it’s possible that towards the end of his life he somehow became poor, i suspect that simply because he was engaged in pure philosophy, he completely neglected everyday affairs, i probably neglected the household, and to be honest, his grumpy extantipa in some way, probably and it was nagging at him, let's say, that he was, to put it mildly, a far from ideal family man, and of course the events connected with his trial, his stay in prison and execution, this is known in literally such detail, here are the teachings of socrates from the point of view of strict facts... this thing is somehow elusive, i have already said that in the eyes of many he almost embodies philosophy, in fact

his role in the development of philosophy is enormous, it is impossible to argue, even to the point that the entire history of philosophy is divided into pre-socratic and after socrates, but what exactly this role consisted of, this is a very problematic point, let's say, which would deserve a separate discussion, it is generally accepted that socrates turned the attention of ancient philosophy to man, but what can be said here? we discussed kant here not so long ago, and indeed, in a sense, kant made such a copernican revolution in philosophy, socrates also made such a revolution, that is, he turned the attention of philosophers from the natures of philosophy to man, yes, that is, if the treatise of any natural philosopher before socrates, parminid, impedocles were called periphysios about nature, yes, that... socrates began to teach about man, as, in fact,

the sophists did, protagoras, who said that man is the measure of all things that exist, that they exist, and not that do not exist, that they do not exist, but the view of partagoras and the view of the sophists, it was so relativistic, that is, as you turn it, so it will be, as we want, so it will be, socrates draws our attention to what is... something outside of us, there are certain values, there are ideas, there are virtues, that's it here of course the question of the difference between the teachings of the genuine arises. the teaching of plato, who then retells to us, as if it were the teaching of socrates, but in fact in his mature dialogues this is already the teaching of plato, that is, if for socrates ideas are ideas of virtues, first of all wisdom, courage, justice, then for plato ideas are in all things, even in dirt, even in a poker, yes,

that is, i think that this is precisely the departure from socrates that plato made, but in general. of course, this is how i understand it, that plato did not like the sophists so much, yes, that in part, our attitude towards the sophists has been around for a long time, we looked at them through the prism of plato, if we look more objectively, then we still have to recognize their merits too, yes, alexey pavlovich, of course, in essence they, gosparov said the discovery of language, they discovered language, that language is a sphere where there is much that a person establishes.

there is c major, c siptochord, c minor, you confused me even more, you perform in the genre, right, i don’t know, i’ve already forgotten, i forgot, and do you like to perform more than one or with team, this way and that, oh, what a delight,

carefully pour at an acute angle, waited for with a special dye, using this method, you can isolate a new acid, that deoxynucleic acid, the best of all, the premiere is on saturday on the first, samarkand is a city, getting into which the feeling is that you have learned to travel in time without machines. time, but you have a robe kilinki, and kilinki - who are the brides? yes, and this is the groom, and the groom is more expensive, i see, well of course, the groom earns, it is more expensive for him, here is a dried melon for you, while you eat, and i will tell you, we have here, that do not take all vitamins, that is why we have so many children in families, did you choose him or did he bring himself, mom, here you go, he

met, then came and said: "mom, look, they had only known each other for 5 days, that is, yours"? the son brought his bride home after 5 days, yes, the life of others, the premiere is on sunday on the first. alexey pavlovich kozyrev, dean of the philosophy department of moscow university, igor evgenevich surikov, chief researcher of the institute of general history of the russian academy of sciences, i am vladimir ligoido, we we continue, and if we return, well, maybe not to the teaching of socrates, to his method, yes, then, probably, we also cannot help but mention the method, which he described, recalled his mother, and the midwife, yes, well, this is, strictly speaking, maeftics, maeftics is the art of midwifery. grandmothers, that is, we need to help a person come to the truth, not even give birth to the truth, remember it, because according to socrates,

we already know everything, here is birth, we just forgot, maybe some kind of birth trauma happened to us, so in this way, talking with a person, ask him some questions that lead to the search for truth, a person can prove the pythagorean theorem himself and generally come to any.

marxist, yes, as a unity, a struggle of opposites, and dialectics as the ability to conduct a conversation, as the ability to move through

speech, to put together statements, irony is also not a mocking irony and not even a romantic irony, which carries signs of fatigue, disappointment in life, yes, collapse, all hopes, but this is positive irony, also associated with speaking. that's all the inhabitants of athens improve the young men, and i spoil them, corrupt them, and what about horses, horses, everyone improves, or one rider, yes, after all , the rider makes the horse peaceful, obedient, but if you give the horse to the pleps. people, yes, then you will not educate the horse, that is, on such parables, understandable to the average person, far from a philosopher, socrates advances his very

anti-democratic, maybe even dialectic, igorevich, here irony may not even be the exact word, yes , russian, you can’t find a normal russian equivalent here, this is the very irony, the irony of socrates is a very peculiar thing, very much at odds with what we... i know nothing, just the emergence of that very irony, by the way, socrates is often mistakenly credited with the saying: "i know that i know nothing." he didn't say it literally, let's say, but in principle, he had something close in mind, he was pierced with this irony all his life, that i am so wretched , so to speak, that's the only time he threw it away. when he was being tried, that's when he spoke truly proudly, and this, by the way, was also one of the factors that led to his to his to his condemnation, they saw for the first time another socrates, proud,

speaking with a huge.

and my divine voice forbids accepting such a service from you, i will somehow cope with the speech myself, said the speech completely, not in the spirit, as was said then, he did not strive to survive, the background directly writes, he would have been ready, he wanted to defend the truth at that moment, this also became such a well, cultural model, yes, you know, we recently discussed the genre of detective and detectives, so to speak, with colleagues, and i remembered that someone from american translators at one time drew my attention to the fact that columba, the hero of the series about columba... this is porfiry petrovich uh because of the crime of punishment, something he walks around there, so somehow he always plays the poor guy, and when my colleague, the young philosopher syundyukov, said this, he says: well , by and large, this is socrates in the limit anyway, this is the model that we see in porfiry petrovich, well, right up to these modern frivolous byzantine rhetoric and not only byzantine, if we remember how the message of the other begins

philotheus about moscow third. will be the word of socrates as a certain voice well so scary, it is just literally something divine, few people know, it is like daimonion, few people know that the greek word daimon, from which our later demon came, it was originally just one of the terms for the meaning of deity, it is almost the same as theos, let's say so, well there are some nuances, but now i will not go into them, that is, socrates said that i have a divine voice, as we say, it began with me in childhood, suddenly

i hear a certain voice, plato says it like this, which... doesn't give me direct advice on what to do, that's when he wants to turn me away from something, i want to, he turns away from xenophon, another famous student of socrates, who left a memoir about him, he has it a little differently, that he gives demoniac advice as well, that is, not only a negative role, but also plays a positive role, in some authors, it even seems like he gave socrates demoniac advice and even regarding his friends, let's say so, well, that's how i understand it, still, one of these deeper explanations of what... what we can understand by socrates' daemonium is a category that, well, at least according to one version, the greeks did not have, yes, this is what we call conscience today, yes, well , herocletus has a saying, this anthropodiamond, that is, the character of a person, his deity, and here in this case everything is clear, yes, a person has a character, has a character, in some sense this character controls us, herocletus was before socrates,

therefore, maybe socrates is here... brings some additional meaning here, yes, but it is absolutely obvious that daimon is not an oracle, it is not the delphic oracle that alexander the great visited, which should indicate, go there, do that, it is rather an inner voice, and it can be the voice of conscience, where a person knows virtue, listens to his conscience, to his inner self, am i acting according to virtue, am i corresponding to how... i believe, as i know, and for socrates, strictly speaking, to believe, to know is to act, this is essentially the same thing, yes, he does not separate, if you act badly, it means you do not know, it means you do not have knowledge, yes, this, by the way, is the most amazing thing, why, i do not know, it seems to me, it is difficult for us today to perceive, that is, he , this

is some kind of, well, protection of a person in the sense that the one who acts badly, acts in such a way, that he does not know how he should act, well, that ... this is intellectual, this is science, well, in antiquity this is connected into one, here socrates, in my opinion, still stands somewhere, well, close to where religion and philosophy were one, here philosophy has just begun to separate, and the way of life yet, and the way of life, regarding the virtues of knowledge, this is just one of the most important taists socrates is knowledge, there is much of this, that there is a person who has learned what is good and what is evil?

especially did not like the average communication, what kind of voice does he have, such a non-divine, why does he communicate with the gods alone, actually, the wording of the court was that socrates introduces new gods, for this he was judged, it was the demons you meant, in any case daemonium is a kind of internal behavior regulator, and this is really somewhere close to what later appeared later began to be called conscience for the greeks it was completely the greeks did not have such a word conscience, the greeks shame was a regulator, it is external it is an external regulator, like... others, what others will say, socrates was absolutely indifferent to what you say, what others will say about him, what in particular he showed in court, even here we saw the thought would not others condemn death, judged, but what can i say, as if here he is exactly this listened to the internal regulator,

followed its advice, but here of course the apostle paul involuntarily comes to mind, yes, who will say later that it doesn’t matter to me what you or other people think of me, how they judge me, i don’t judge myself, for the lord is my judge. yes, that’s of course, well, you can see a certain connection here, well at the same time there is a slightly protestant attitude, but in antiquity in relation to traditional greek religiosity, it’s no coincidence that there is a version, i don’t know, maybe someone will correct me my interlocutor, that such real initiators of the trial of the tale, that they ejected icons - these are just extras, but... really , the priests saw in socrates a certain threat, a danger in relation to traditional religion. today we gathered our thoughts about socrates, igor evgenievich surikov, alexey pavlovich kozarev, i am vladimir legoida,

we continue. well, the death of socrates, i even read a piece to the children, when socrates refuses to flee and communicate with friends, why socrates did not... did not take advantage of this opportunity, well, you understand, in fact, if he had used it, it would have completely distorted the image, he is before crito, this is so, if my homeland has legally condemned me to death according to the laws, i must obey the laws of my homeland, excuse me, but he has not been judged yet , this is undeserved, it turns out that we are beginning to judge the law of our homeland ourselves, socrates would say, it turns out that everyone will decide which law is certain, which is incorrect, and the same sophistic subjectivism will come out, no, as they say, obey the law in everything.

a conscious move to challenge his city, which at the same time was supposed to make people better, remember how gogl wrote in his will: no need to erect monuments to me, but let everyone become better after my death, and

it seems that aksakov said that gogol had completely gone mad, he was calling for people to become better in his name, but socrates, who did not know christ, he was a christian before christ, but ... did not know christ, and could not offer his residents anything else, how to become better in his name, and his death was in some in the sense of such a performance, which was supposed to... plato and aristotle, well, christianity had a different attitude to the experience of antiquity, and not only positively, that's what this assessment is connected with, what did it have, what ? i mean, by the way, this quote with which we began, yes, which is on the scroll,

it, despite the fact that, well, it's hardly, so to speak, a quote, yes, in some sense it reflects socratic ideas on the one hand, on the other hand, it leads to exactly this, yes, probably, well, i think, for justin the philosopher, justin martyr, the 2nd century apologist, the main thing here was that these were people who knew how to live and lived a virtuous life, it is unlikely that the idea of ​​similarity was put here.

plato about the trial of socrates and phaedo, plato's story about the death of socrates about his last day, so if you compare the apology, the story there is this is the difference, in the apology socrates says, well, execute me, after death there will be one of two things, some say that this is really a great world, and others say that this is just this cessation existence, well if the cessation of existence, then just like falling asleep and not waking up, nothing terrible, but if there is a huge world, then i will communicate there with the great negators of the past and how much pleasure i will get, that is ... then he still doubts one thing, now on the last day all doni, he firmly speaks, apparently, while he was sitting in prison for a month, he thought a lot, of course, there was nothing to do, he even began to write poetry, he probably thought a lot, including about life, about the soul, and he already firmly declares that the soul is immortal and gives a number of wonderful, by the way, the proof is not contained, the proof for the death of the soul, of course, not everyone can be advised to read this, it is difficult, here he already says , therefore i am definitely not afraid of death, because i cliton says, that's when ... how to bury you, bury me, no, he

said so, bury me if you catch me, if i do not run away from you, let's say so, that is, he is firmly convinced that he would simply pass into another existence, moreover, from a more sick person into a healthier existence, because the latter again death, what crito, to sacrifice the rooster's sklepei, and the sklepei is the god of rotation among the greeks, and it is precisely the sick person who is healed, as he should sacrifice the pedukha, that is , socrates remembers death as healing, and that is, and this is already on this, on this last day of his, on this last day of his life. phaedo becomes a metaphor for the immortality of the soul. mendelssohn then writes his phaedo, mendelssohn's ideas influence alexander nikolaevich radeschiy, on his treatise on man, his mortality and immortality. that is, we can say that here we see such a distant echo, since i wanted to talk about this echo about socrates in russian culture, but precisely starting from the phrase that if you catch on the grave. grigory savechesky wrote about the birth, yes, the world caught me, but did not catch me, because he

was called the russian socrates, this is true, he wrote in russian, he wandered through the belgorod, kursk, oryol provinces, but here is something else, at the frying pan one of his dialogues is called the israeli serpent or icon alcibiades, that is, this image that alcibiades gives at the feast, yes, socrates is selenium, he is... ugly on the outside, but on the inside he is beautiful. skovoroda cunningly applies it to the bible, that is, the bible is an alcibiades icon, you understand, here is another parallel between antiquity, between athens and jerusalem. and in general , what can we say about socrates in russian culture? well, here we must say that we, just like in european culture, had people who did not like socrates, in europe they did not like him nicha. and we have lev shestov, that is, people

who were such an existential type of thinkers, philosophers of life, they saw in socrates the temptation of intellectualism, everything, reason answers all questions, no, sometimes rebellion answers questions, sometimes prayer, sometimes anger, yes, and here it is very interesting that shostovskaya. criticism of socrates, it is somewhere very similar to what nisha wrote about socrates, unfortunately, our time has come to an end, i have one last question, he is such. advice, yes, they will watch us, dear viewers, and they will want something else to read about socrates, besides your wonderful book, igor evgenevich, what would you advise, perhaps, first of all, not to specialists, but to people who would simply be interested in learning something else about socrates, oddly enough, i

like what he wrote about socrates' head in the book by eduard davidevich fralov, a historian professor. what would you advise? well, i remember our teachers and arseny nikolaevich, who himself was in some way a socrates, wrote poetry under the pseudonym arseny prokhozhey. he has a wonderful course in the history of philosophy of the ancient world, so i entered into ancient philosophy through chanyshev, kisidius, feokhar harlampevich, he was also a greek by origin, a pontic greek, well, he wrote about socrates, well , so that we of course have russian religious

philosophers sergei nikolaevich trubetskoy, who laid the tradition of reading ancient philosophy. aesthetics in the volume called sophisa socrates plato, this is the second volume of this multi-volume work, open and read a few pages that are there socrates, amazingly bright, bright judgments there, so to speak, simply, probably no one, no one in russian said better about socrates than lich, excellent, thank you very much, dear friends, igor evgenevich.

hello, this is the badden baden podcast, and i am its host professor severinov, our guest is dmitry alekseev, a microbiologist. computer scientist and candidate of biological sciences, hello, konstantin, hello, and what is bioinformatics? i'll immediately take the bull by the horns, bioinformatics, but it sounds like about some kind of bioinformation, yes, and so it turned out, i was lucky that studying mathematics and physics, i suddenly appeared on the scientific scene when dna was deciphered and they learned to load this information into a computer, bioinformatics is about how this information in a computer before...

at the same time, when levinguk began to look through a microscope, and this word was simply used to denote all those who are visible through a microscope, but not visible to the naked eye, and according to scientific classification , this really includes all these small creatures from one cell or without a cell, bacteria and unicellular fungi, amoebas, amoeba is microbial, yes, well, we don’t we see with the naked eye, and what is the difference between them, just oh, well, for me on... viruses, bacteria and all the rest, such an evolutionary, for example, yes, that bacteria, we probably consider the biggest difference between, one of the first, appeared on the planet, changed the environment in which we are, the water, its composition, what do you mean, that they changed the environment, here the earth was

hot, then it cooled down, bacteria did that, that they created oxygen, actually, and thanks to oxygen, the opportunity arose for...

inside our cells is dna and rna, that there are information molecules, one of the latest discoveries is that these molecules or nucleotides, yes, the components of these molecules can be formed during space flights on asteroids, yes, that is, due to the effects of radiation and then it's all like components of a good borscht, right? it

's as similar as possible to a bacterium, so ancient, that is, we are related to them, yes, we are related to them, very, very distant, yeah, now what functions do they perform, well, bacteria and viruses, fungi, all this, all this the little ones that we don't see, they live are in we call it homeostasis, but it's a complex word, it's generally a balance, that is, everyone is holding each other back, life, it seems to me, is always trying to grow, everyone has the task of giving the maximum amount of space. according to their offspring, here at the crossroads of these different relatives, these different families, plants, fungi, microbes,

bacteria and so on, they either fight or agree so as to create entire ecosystems, that is, such niches, yes, for example, forest or the ocean floor or our intestines, examples of such niches, within these niches, yes, they thrive, yes, that is, they produce the maximum number of their own descendants. and where do these so-called pathogenic bacteria come from then? it is obvious that there are a lot of unpleasant things, diseases, it seems to me that from the moment such multicellular living beings appeared, yes, from the moment the first intestine, the first creature appeared, every microbe immediately understood that it is very good to live inside us, why is it very good, because it is warm there, warmer, than in the environment, it is dark, that is , sunlight does not interfere and does not... someone else is constantly killing, getting food , why kill, if it is so good, then there are different strategies of life in this environment, and

like people, microbes, there are two directions in which they can act, this is learning to be friends for survival learning to conquer, win, fight for survival, as we see, both strategies bring their results, because there are infections that... cannot be exterminated, so there are useful microbes that remain with us, well, there are tens of millions of years, who is more, but there is this idea, you know, that you need to wash your hands, there is generally to do everything so that the ideal world, in the understanding of many people, is that there are no microbes at all, yes, this is of course a mistake, it is impossible without microbes, everywhere where there is at least some source of food, yes, even inside a nuclear reactor or on a spaceship , microbes will appear everywhere, maybe we just do not clean ourselves enough, maybe we can set such a task so that there are none, we we'll clean everything very clean and from...