School #158

Analytic Philosophy

Frege, Russell, Moore, Wittgenstein, Quine

Analytic Philosophy designates the broad twentieth-century tradition that took the logical analysis of language as the primary tool of philosophical inquiry. Gottlob Frege's 'Begriffsschrift' (1879) and 'Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik' (1884) furnished the new logic that made the project possible, replacing Aristotelian syllogistic with a quantified predicate calculus capable of representing the structure of mathematical reasoning. Bertrand Russell and G. E. Moore's revolt against British Idealism around 1900 — culminating in Russell's 'On Denoting' (1905) and Moore's 'Principia Ethica' (1903) — established analysis, common sense, and respect for the natural sciences as the tradition's defining commitments. Ludwig Wittgenstein's 'Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus' (1921) and his very different 'Philosophical Investigations' (1953) framed the two great phases of the linguistic turn: ideal-language analysis and ordinary-language description. W. V. O. Quine's 'Two Dogmas of Empiricism' (1951) and Donald Davidson's 'Truth and Meaning' (1967) naturalised the project, while Saul Kripke's 'Naming and Necessity' (1980) restored substantive metaphysics within an analytic idiom. Across these mutations the tradition has prized clarity, argument by counterexample, and the conviction that confused language is the source of most philosophical perplexity.

Worldview

To live within analytic philosophy is to treat clarity as the principal intellectual virtue and to suspect that most apparent metaphysical disputes are at bottom disputes about words. The analytic philosopher inhabits a publicly shared world of objects, properties, and propositions, takes natural science as the best running account of how that world is arranged, and treats the philosopher's distinctive job as the careful regimentation of arguments, definitions, and conceptual schemes. The mood is one of cool argumentative engagement rather than prophetic vision: positions are defended, counterexamples are advanced, distinctions are drawn, and the slow accumulation of fine-grained results is preferred to grand systems built in a single night. Inside this style of thought one feels both modest and exacting, conscious that progress is measured in tightened formulations rather than in revelations. The framework classifies this as None: across its many local disagreements the analytic tradition does not posit a personal deity, a cosmic ordering principle, or an operative spirit as part of its working metaphysical furniture, and where such notions appear they are subject to the same critical scrutiny as any other. The framework reads this as Reason: from Frege's logicism through Russell's and Moore's rationalist ethics to contemporary work on practical reasoning, the analytic tradition takes argument under public norms of consistency and evidence — rather than scripture, tradition, or simple experience — as the authoritative court of appeal in normative matters.

Moral Implications

Analytic ethics has worked hard to formulate moral theories — consequentialist, deontological, contractualist, virtue-theoretic — with the same precision the tradition demands of metaphysics, testing each against carefully constructed counterexamples and intuition pumps. Moral disagreement is approached as a tractable intellectual problem: clarify the concepts, isolate the premises, examine the inferences. The tradition tends to favour universalisable, impartial principles and a strong place for individual rights, though it has also accommodated communitarian and care-based critiques on their own analytic terms. The upshot is a style of moral reasoning that prizes argumentative honesty, public justification, and a willingness to revise one's view in light of better arguments rather than appeals to authority or sentiment.

Practical Implications

Analytic methods have shaped law, public policy, bioethics, and the design of computational systems, all of which require precise definitions and explicit reasoning. Frege's and Russell's logic is the direct ancestor of computer science and formal verification, and analytic philosophy of language underlies much work in linguistics, AI, and the law of contracts and statutes. In education the tradition emphasises argument, charitable interpretation, and the disciplined identification of fallacies. In public life it underwrites evidence-based policy, cost-benefit analysis, and the demand that reasons given in justification of decisions actually withstand scrutiny.

I. Time

Time is treated as a substantival, infinite, continuous dimension of the actual world, analysable into a linearly ordered series of moments and well-modelled by the equations of mathematical physics. Direction is uni-directional in line with thermodynamic and causal asymmetries, and the default temporal metaphysic is broadly deterministic, leaving libertarian freedom to be either reduced or explained away rather than taken as basic. Analytic philosophers from Russell and Quine to David Lewis have approached time as a topic of careful logical and scientific theory rather than of inner intuition, and McTaggart's A and B series remain reference points in the literature. The texture of lived temporality is acknowledged but located in psychology rather than in the fundamental ontology of time itself.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Grain: Continuous Freedom: Deterministic Traversability: Linear Dimensionality: One Direction: Uni-directional

II. Space

Space is taken to be substantival, infinite, locally Euclidean for everyday purposes, and three-dimensional, again following the deliverances of classical and relativistic physics filtered through logical regimentation. Russell's and Quine's respect for natural science set the default: whatever our best physical theories quantify over in their spatial descriptions is what there is. Spatial properties and relations are crisply analysable, and ordinary spatial talk is understood as approximating a more exact scientific picture. Curvature is treated as flat in the standard analytic idealisation, with relativistic refinements absorbed as further detail rather than as a metaphysical upheaval.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Curvature: Flat Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

III. Matter

Matter is substantival, finite, three-dimensional, and locally distributed in space, consisting of whatever entities the best physical sciences require. Quine's criterion — to be is to be the value of a bound variable — anchors ontology in the quantifications of mature scientific theory, while Kripke's and Putnam's work on natural kinds gives material substances a robust modal profile. Matter is conserved as a matter of empirical law and analysed locally: spooky action at a distance is admitted only where physics actually demands it. The analytic philosopher defers to chemistry and physics for the inventory of stuff and confines philosophy to clarifying its conceptual structure.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

IV. Observer

The analytic observer is an embodied, rational subject situated at a determinate point in space and time and equipped with natural language, logic, and the methods of the empirical sciences. Knowledge is mediated through concepts and propositions rather than given by any intuitive seeing of essences, and what each individual retains is always partial — corrigible, defeasible, open to revision by counterexample. The observer is active in framing hypotheses, constructing arguments, and translating ordinary discourse into perspicuous logical form, but passive in the sense that the world ultimately decides what is true. Multiple observers share a common public language and a common physical world, and intersubjective agreement under critical scrutiny is the principal check on private confusion. There is no privileged inner faculty of metaphysical insight: the philosopher works with the same cognitive equipment as the scientist and the careful speaker.

Attributes
Time Instance: Single Space Instance: Single Extent of Knowledge: Mediated Retainment of Knowledge: Partial Physicality: Embodied Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: None Moral Authority: Reason Theological Method: Critical

V. Energy

Energy is a substantival, finite, conserved quantity governed by physical law — the analytic tradition takes the energy concept of mathematical physics as broadly accurate and treats philosophical talk that conflicts with conservation as confused. Its dispersibility is irreversible: the second law of thermodynamics is a fixed feature of the world the philosopher must accommodate rather than legislate against. Within this orthodoxy the analytic philosopher is interested in the conceptual analysis of 'energy' itself — its referential semantics, its modal profile, its relation to causation — but rarely in re-founding it on metaphysical grounds. Discussions of free will, mental causation, and emergence are constrained by what the energy budget will bear, which is one reason eliminative and reductive options recur.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dispersibility: Irreversible

VI. Information

Information for the analytic tradition is borne by propositions, sentences, and the discrete logical structures that Frege and Russell made explicit. It is substantival in that facts and truths are taken to be features of the world that propositions answer to, and conserved at the cosmic scale because logical and mathematical truths are necessary and the empirical record accumulates in a public, citable form. Granularity is discrete: well-formed formulae, sentences, and bits of evidence are the natural units of analysis. The framework distinguishes scales: personal-identity information is non-conserved because the analytic tradition treats persons as biological organisms whose memories and beliefs end with the body, while the body of public knowledge persists in journals, libraries, and shared practice.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Substantival Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Non-conserved Granularity: Discrete
← #157 Cosmopolitanism All Schools #159 Continental Philosophy →

Works that name Analytic Philosophy in their embodiments

Foundational texts that draw on this school, with each work's declared weight.

10%
Logical Investigations (fragments) (Mature)
Chrysippus of Soli · c. 250 BCE
8%
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (Early)
Ludwig Wittgenstein · 1918 (drafted in the trenches); 1921 (German pub.); 1922 (Ogden English ed.)
8%
Philosophical Investigations (Late)
Ludwig Wittgenstein · c. 1929–49 (drafted across two decades); 1953 (posthumous publication, ed. Anscombe & Rhees)
8%
The Problems of Philosophy (Early)
Bertrand Russell · 1912
8%
The Foundations of Arithmetic
Gottlob Frege · 1884
8%
On Certainty (Latest)
Ludwig Wittgenstein · Written 1949–51 (in Wittgenstein's final eighteen months); published posthumously 1969
8%
A History of Western Philosophy (Late)
Bertrand Russell · 1945
8%
Principia Mathematica (Early (both authors))
Alfred North Whitehead and Bertrand Russell · 1910 (vol. 1), 1912 (vol. 2), 1913 (vol. 3); 2nd edition 1925-27
8%
Why I Am Not a Christian (Mid-late)
Bertrand Russell · 1927 (lecture); 1957 (collected essays as a book)
8%
The Logical Structure of the World (Early (Carnap's breakthrough work))
Rudolf Carnap · 1928 (Carnap's habilitation; the founding text of the Vienna Circle's constructive-philosophical programme)
8%
Reason, Truth and History (Mid (the major mid-career book, the systematic statement of internal realism))
Hilary Putnam · 1981
8%
Representation and Reality (Mid)
Hilary Putnam · 1988
8%
The Conscious Mind (Early (Chalmers's breakthrough book, derived from his 1993 Indiana PhD))
David J. Chalmers · 1996
8%
On the Plurality of Worlds (Late (Lewis's mature systematic statement of the modal-realist programme))
David Lewis · 1986
8%
Reality+ (Late (Chalmers's major popular-and-technical synthesis on virtual reality and the simulation hypothesis))
David J. Chalmers · 2022
8%
The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language (Early-to-middle (Carnap's most polemical statement of the verificationist programme))
Rudolf Carnap · 1932 (Erkenntnis 2; English trans. Arthur Pap, 1959)
8%
Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language (Mature (Kripke's second major book after Naming and Necessity, 1980))
Saul Kripke · 1982 (Harvard UP; based on 1976 Wolfson College lecture, 1977 Princeton seminars)
8%
Convention: A Philosophical Study (Early (Lewis's first book, published at 28, the year he began at UCLA))
David Lewis · 1969 (Harvard UP; based on his 1967 Harvard PhD dissertation under W. V. O. Quine)
8%
Some Remarks on Logical Form (Transitional)
Ludwig Wittgenstein · 1929 (Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume 9)
8%
Words and Life (Late)
Hilary Putnam · 1994
8%
The Threefold Cord: Mind, Body, and World (Late)
Hilary Putnam · 1999
8%
Jewish Philosophy as a Guide to Life (Late)
Hilary Putnam · 2008
8%
Grundgesetze der Arithmetik (Basic Laws of Arithmetic) (Mature)
Gottlob Frege · 1893 (vol. 1), 1903 (vol. 2)
8%
Der Gedanke (The Thought) (Late)
Gottlob Frege · 1918-19
8%
Posthumous Writings (Posthumous)
Gottlob Frege · c. 1879-1925 (composed); 1969 (German collection); 1979 (English)
8%
Function and Concept (Mature)
Gottlob Frege · 1891
8%
The Mind and its Place in Nature (Mid)
C. D. Broad · 1923 (lectures), 1925 (book)
8%
Examination of McTaggart's Philosophy (Mature)
C. D. Broad · 1933 (vol. 1), 1938 (vol. 2)
8%
Five Types of Ethical Theory (Mid)
C. D. Broad · 1930
8%
Lectures on Psychical Research (Late)
C. D. Broad · 1959-60 (lectures), 1962 (book)
8%
The Principles of Mathematics (Early)
Bertrand Russell · 1903
8%
Our Knowledge of the External World (Mid)
Bertrand Russell · 1914
8%
Mysticism and Logic (Mid)
Bertrand Russell · 1918
8%
The Conquest of Happiness (Mid)
Bertrand Russell · 1930
8%
Anthropic Bias (Early)
Nick Bostrom · 2002
8%
Global Catastrophic Risks (Mid)
Nick Bostrom · 2008
8%
The Character of Consciousness (Mid)
David J. Chalmers · 2010
8%
Constructing the World (Mid)
David J. Chalmers · 2012 (2010 Locke Lectures, Oxford)
8%
Quantum theory, the Church-Turing principle and the universal quantum computer (Early)
David Deutsch · 1985
8%
The Fabric of Reality (Mid)
David Deutsch · 1997
8%
The Beginning of Infinity (Late)
David Deutsch · 2011
8%
A History of Philosophy (Career-spanning)
Frederick Copleston · 1946–1974 (9 volumes)
8%
Aquinas (Mid-career)
Frederick Copleston · 1955
8%
Contemporary Philosophy: Studies of Logical Positivism and Existentialism (Mid-career)
Frederick Copleston · 1956
8%
Religion and Philosophy (Late)
Frederick Copleston · 1974
8%
Philosophies and Cultures (Late)
Frederick Copleston · 1980
8%
A Theory of Conditionals (Early)
Robert Stalnaker · 1968
8%
Inquiry (Mid-career)
Robert Stalnaker · 1984
8%
Context and Content (Mid-to-late)
Robert Stalnaker · 1999
8%
Ways a World Might Be (Late-middle)
Robert Stalnaker · 2003
8%
Our Knowledge of the Internal World (Late)
Robert Stalnaker · 2008
8%
Context (Late)
Robert Stalnaker · 2014
8%
Atomic Theory and the Description of Nature (Mid-career)
Niels Bohr · 1934
8%
Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? (Mid-career, post-EPR)
Niels Bohr · 1935
8%
Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge (Late)
Niels Bohr · 1958
8%
Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge (Final)
Niels Bohr · 1958–1962 (collection published posthumously, 1963)
8%
The Poverty of Historicism (Mid-career)
Karl Popper · 1944-45 (Economica articles); book 1957
8%
Objective Knowledge (Late)
Karl Popper · 1972 (essays 1960-72)
8%
On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem (Early)
Alan Turing · 1936
8%
Intelligent Machinery (Mid)
Alan Turing · 1948
8%
The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis (Late)
Alan Turing · 1952
8%
Expression and Meaning (Mid-career)
John Searle · 1979
8%
Minds, Brains, and Programs (Mid-career)
John Searle · 1980
8%
Mind: A Brief Introduction (Late)
John Searle · 2004
8%
Parts of Classes (Late-middle)
David Lewis · 1991
8%
Papers in Metaphysics and Epistemology (Late)
David Lewis · 1999
8%
Papers in Philosophical Logic (Late)
David Lewis · 1998
8%
A Completeness Theorem in Modal Logic (Earliest)
Saul Kripke · 1959 (Kripke aged 18)
8%
Semantical Considerations on Modal Logic (Early)
Saul Kripke · 1963
8%
Philosophical Troubles (Late)
Saul Kripke · 2011 (essays 1962-2008)
8%
Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology (Late)
Rudolf Carnap · 1950
8%
The Philosophical Foundations of Physics (Late)
Rudolf Carnap · 1966 (lectures earlier)
8%
Deep Utopia (Late)
Nick Bostrom · 2024
5%
Paradoxes (fragments)
Zeno of Elea · c. 460 BCE

How Analytic Philosophy resolves each dilemma

56 resolved positions across 4 dimensions, including 7 distinctive where the majority of schools go the other way · 1 unaligned.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

Persistence, the future, and the direction of becoming.

Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Do you really choose?
If the brain is a physical system and physical systems are governed by laws, then every choice is also a chain of causes — which raises the question of what was really left to choose.
Choice is real within a determined order — agency and determinism aren’t opposites.
On this view, the future is determined and you are genuinely choosing. Those aren't contradictory because the determination runs through you rather than around you: your reasoning, deliberation, and assent are the way the determined outcome gets settled. Choice is what it feels like from …
Roads not taken The future is open and you are a genuine origin of it. (69%) · Choice is structural illusion — every event is fixed by the prior state. (10%) · Even if the universe is undetermined, you are not the chooser. (6%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Are addicts responsible for their addiction?
Addiction looks from one angle like the textbook case of agency failing — a person doing what they don't, in any meaningful sense, want to do. From another angle it looks like agency at work in hard conditions. Which it is depends on what agency is.
The addict is genuinely responsible within a determined order.
On this view, the addict is acting within a determined order but is genuinely acting — making decisions, endorsing or resisting urges, seeking or refusing help. Responsibility attaches not because some uncaused choice happened, but because the addict is the kind of agent through which …
Roads not taken The addict could have chosen otherwise — that's why recovery is real. (69%) · The addict's behaviour is the outcome of causes; 'responsibility' is a useful fiction, not a metaphysical fact. (10%) · Even if the universe is undetermined, the addict isn't the chooser. (6%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/202)
Should we hold AI systems responsible for what they do?
When an autonomous AI takes an action that harms someone, the question of who or what is responsible — the developer, the operator, the model itself — turns on whether the model is the kind of thing that can be a responsible agent.
The AI can be a genuine agent within determined conditions — and therefore genuinely responsible.
On this view, what makes a being responsible is not indeterminism but the kind of process the being is. An AI that deliberates, considers consequences, can be given reasons, and modifies its behaviour on reflection is doing what responsible agency is, even if its underlying …
Roads not taken An AI without a free will is not the kind of thing that can be responsible. (69%) · An AI's behaviour is fully determined by training and input; 'responsibility' applies if at all to its makers. (10%) · Neither AIs nor anyone else are the locus of free agency; the question is the wrong one. (6%)
6 mainstream positions
Matter · 7 dilemmas, all mainstream

Observer · 37 dilemmas · 4 distinctive

Mind, agency, and the knower's relation to the known.

Distinctive · only 10% of schools agree (21/202)
What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize?
Religious traditions differ not only in what they believe, but in how authority is structured — and what counts as the right kind of argument.
Historical-critical method is the authority.
Religious claims are evaluated by the same critical-historical standards as any other claim.
Roads not taken The category does not apply — the school is non-religious. (44%) · Direct experiential union is the authority. (16%) · Institutional teaching tradition is the authority. (14%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Is reality fundamentally digital?
Pancomputationalism, Planck-scale quanta, simulation theory and Kabbalistic letter-mysticism all say yes — but for very different reasons. The rest of the atlas says no.
Yes — bits, quanta, computational substrate.
On this view, the world is at bottom discrete and law-governed, with no metaphysical agency above or behind the substrate. Reality reduces to bits or their physical analogues; the continuous appearance of fields and flows is coarse-graining over discrete underlying structure.
Roads not taken No — continuous divine sustaining act, the Tao that knows no joints, the One's self-disclosure. (44%) · No — continuous fields, classical limits, analog deep structure. (37%) · Yes — but divinely-discrete: divine letters, momentary cognitions, atomistic theism. (6%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Are there indivisible units of experience?
Whiteheadian actual occasions, Buddhist moments of mind, Kabbalistic letter-cognitions, IIT phi-units — or the unbroken Jamesian stream? The atomism of experience cuts across naturalism and theism alike.
Yes — naturalist quanta of experience.
On this view, experience comes in discrete units defined by the substrate: information-theoretic phi-units, computational frames, discrete neural events. There is no further metaphysical agency that knits them; the appearance of a stream is the way many discrete events present to introspection.
Roads not taken No — continuous divine presence; consciousness is the unbroken witness. (44%) · No — continuous Jamesian stream, phenomenological lived time. (37%) · Yes, theistic atomism — actual occasions, divine letters, momentary cognitions. (6%)
Distinctive · only 13% of schools agree (27/202)
Is memory stored or reconstructed?
Engrams and traces — or continuous re-narration each time you remember? The cognitive-science debate has a theological cousin: divine memory holding each hair, or the ancestors' continuous remembering.
Stored — discrete engrams, traces, weights.
On this view, memory is the readout of discrete information stored in the substrate: engrams, synaptic weights, file-like records. Reconstruction at retrieval is real but secondary; without the stored bits there would be nothing to reconstruct from.
Roads not taken Held in continuous divine or ancestral remembering — neither stored discretely nor purely reconstructed. (44%) · Reconstructed — continuous re-narrating, no fixed engrams. (37%) · Stored — in divine memory's discrete particulars, or in karmic-record units. (6%)
32 mainstream positions
Could causation work backwards? Causation runs one way — the arrow of time is real and structural. 68% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? The asymmetry is real because time itself has a real direction. 68% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? The arrow is real and structural; the asymmetry isn't an artifact of description. 68% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Damage is real and permanent on the relevant timescales. There is no recovery; there is only limitation. 66% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilizational complexity is hard to build and easy to lose; recovery is at best partial. 66% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Entropy is what time is. The moral weight, if any, is the weight of working against the current. 66% Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed? Truth is mind-independent, universal, accessible in principle to all. 65% When does a person begin? A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. 54% What is marriage? Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. 54% Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Moral obligation tracks the relations one is in; distance does matter, structurally. 50% Can prayer for someone far away affect them? Prayer changes the pray-er, not the prayed-for. 49% Are coincidences ever more than coincidence? Coincidence is exactly what the math says it is. The pattern is in the noticer. 49% What is our place in nature? Active in a real nature — we cultivate, steward, transform. 48% Should we colonize space? Cultivating worlds beyond Earth is the next form of stewardship. 48% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? Genetic modification is cultivation by other means. 48% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? The observer is in time; foreknowledge across times raises real freedom problems. 46% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditators are bounded observers reporting unusual brain states; the 'timeless' is metaphorical. 46% Does prayer change God's mind? If there is an addressee at all, it is in time; prayer is communication, and may genuinely change what comes next. 46% Are the dead morally present to the living? Observers are bounded by their own moment, and no further agency makes the dead present. 44% Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species? The discrete person is the moral primary. 40% Does history have a direction or meaning? History is not where the deepest truth lives. 37% What makes someone the same person over time? You are your body — continuity is bodily continuity. 36% Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? Same body, same person — even when the cognitive pattern has changed. 36% If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? Different body, different person — you died in the scanner. 36% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? Animal minds are real because biology is the substrate of mind. 32% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? Brain tissue can in principle do what brains do; the question is integration. 32% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust expertise whose conclusions a competent mind can in principle reproduce. 32% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? Revelation is evaluable by reason — and not above it. 32% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? An LLM can produce correct outputs but not reason to them; useful, not knowing. 32% What happens to "you" when you die? Death is genuinely the end. 30% Could an AI have a mind that matters? No — mind is what a biological brain does, and an LLM has no brain. 30% How is knowledge of reality produced? Through a priori reasoning and conceptual demonstration. 25%
1 unaligned
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream
Jump to school (202)
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47 #48 #49 #50 #51 #52 #53 #54 #55 #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63 #64 #65 #66 #67 #68 #69 #70 #71 #72 #73 #74 #75 #76 #77 #78 #79 #80 #81 #82 #83 #84 #85 #86 #87 #88 #89 #90 #91 #92 #93 #94 #95 #96 #97 #98 #99 #100 #101 #102 #103 #104 #105 #106 #107 #108 #109 #110 #111 #112 #113 #114 #115 #116 #117 #118 #119 #120 #121 #122 #123 #124 #125 #126 #127 #128 #129 #130 #131 #132 #133 #134 #135 #136 #137 #138 #139 #140 #141 #142 #143 #144 #145 #146 #147 #148 #149 #150 #151 #152 #153 #154 #155 #156 #157 #158 #159 #160 #161 #162 #163 #164 #165 #166 #167 #168 #169 #170 #171 #172 #173 #174 #175 #176 #177 #178 #179 #180 #181 #182 #183 #184 #185 #186 #187 #188 #189 #190 #191 #192 #193 #194 #195 #196 #197 #198 #199 #200 #201 #202