School #56

Ubuntu / African Communal Ontology

Mogobe Ramose, John Mbiti, Desmond Tutu, Placide Tempels

"I am because we are" (umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu). Ubuntu holds that personhood is constituted by communal relations rather than individual substance — a person becomes a person through other persons. Mogobe Ramose's 'African Philosophy Through Ubuntu' (1999) analyzed ubuntu as a philosophical concept rooted in the Bantu languages, arguing that being (ubu-) and becoming (-ntu) are inseparable, and that reality is a continuous process of communal unfolding. John Mbiti's 'African Religions and Philosophy' (1969) articulated the foundational principle of African communalism: "I am because we are, and since we are, therefore I am" — the individual exists only within the community, and the community extends to include the ancestors (the living-dead) and the yet-to-be-born. Desmond Tutu's 'No Future Without Forgiveness' (1999) applied ubuntu as the philosophical basis of South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission, grounding restorative justice in the recognition that dehumanizing another diminishes one's own humanity. Placide Tempels's 'Bantu Philosophy' (1945), despite its colonial limitations, was among the first works to present African thought as a systematic ontology of vital forces in dynamic interaction.

Worldview

The Ubuntu adherent experiences reality as fundamentally communal — personhood is not a property one possesses in isolation but a quality that emerges through and is sustained by relationships with others. "I am because we are" is not a slogan but an ontological claim: the individual literally does not exist apart from the community that includes the living, the ancestors (the living-dead), and the yet-to-be-born. To hold this ontology is to feel one's own identity as inseparable from the web of relationships that constitute it. The world is animated by vital forces that flow through communal bonds, and the health of the individual depends on the health of these connections. The fundamental mood is one of belonging, mutual dependence, and shared responsibility for the flourishing of all. The framework reads this as Spirit-relational metaphysical agency: ancestors and other spirits are real, particular agents operative in the community's life, distinct from both a single personal high-god and from a merely impersonal ordering principle. The framework reads this as Experience-grounded moral authority: the proverb 'umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu' is verified in lived communal encounter; norms are tested against the experienced reality of being-with-others under the ancestors' gaze, not against a closed text or an abstract universal Reason.

Moral Implications

Ubuntu ethics holds that dehumanizing another person diminishes one's own humanity — a principle that Desmond Tutu applied as the philosophical foundation of restorative justice in post-apartheid South Africa. Justice is not primarily punitive but restorative: the goal is to repair broken relationships and reintegrate offenders into the community rather than to isolate and punish them. Generosity, hospitality, and solidarity are cardinal virtues because they sustain the communal web on which all personhood depends. The moral framework extends beyond the living to include obligations to ancestors (through proper ceremony and remembrance) and to future generations (through responsible stewardship). Selfishness is not merely a vice but an ontological error — a denial of the relational nature of one's own being.

Practical Implications

Ubuntu shapes governance, conflict resolution, education, and economic life around communal principles. Restorative justice models inspired by Ubuntu have been adopted internationally as alternatives to purely punitive criminal justice systems. Economic decisions are evaluated not by individual profit but by their impact on communal wellbeing and intergenerational sustainability. Education is understood as the formation of persons within community rather than the production of autonomous individuals for the labor market. Ubuntu provides a philosophical framework for critiquing the atomistic individualism of Western liberal economics and for developing alternative models of development that prioritize communal flourishing, shared resources, and the integration of indigenous knowledge systems.

I. Time

Time is relational and infinite — it is communal, flowing through the generations of the living, the dead, and the yet-to-be-born. Time is continuous, cyclical, and uni-directional within the individual lifespan but cyclic across generations as ancestors are reborn and remembered. The past is present through ancestral memory; the future is present through communal obligation.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Relational Grain: Continuous Freedom: Non-Deterministic Traversability: Cyclical Dimensionality: One Direction: Multi-directional

II. Space

Space is relational and finite — it is the communal territory in which relationships of mutual obligation and care are enacted. Space is flat, local, and three-dimensional as experienced, but its meaning is constituted by the web of social relationships that inhabit it. The village, the homestead, the gathering place have moral and spiritual significance beyond their physical dimensions.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Relational Curvature: Flat Dimensionality: Three Locality: Non-local

III. Matter

Matter is relational and finite — it is the shared material basis of communal life: land, food, shelter, tools. Matter is conserved through communal stewardship and shared use. It is local because material resources are always situated in particular places and distributed through particular relationships. "I am because we are" (Ubuntu) means that material wellbeing is always communal, never individual.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Relational Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Non-local

IV. Observer

The observer is fundamentally communal — "I am because we are" (umuntu ngumuntu ngabantu). The individual exists only through relationships with others, ancestors, and the living community. The observer extends across multiple temporal dimensions through the presence of ancestors who remain active participants in communal life, but is spatially situated within a particular community and place. Knowledge is immediate and relational — it arises through participation in communal life, not through solitary reflection — yet it accumulates across generations through oral tradition, ritual, and the living wisdom of elders. The observer is both embodied and spiritually connected to the ancestral realm. Agency is collective and active: the community, not the isolated individual, is the primary knower and actor. The observer is irreducibly plural.

Attributes
Time Instance: Multiple Space Instance: Single Extent of Knowledge: Immediate Retainment of Knowledge: Total Physicality: Both Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: Spirit-relational Moral Authority: Experience Theological Method: Mystical

V. Energy

Finite and substantival — vital force (Tempels' "force vitale") is real and fundamental; it is the animating power that flows through all beings and binds the community together. Conservation: Conserved — vital force is neither created nor destroyed but circulates among persons, ancestors, and nature; communal rituals maintain and direct its flow. Dispersibility: Reversible — when vital force is diminished through illness, social disruption, or moral failure, it can be restored through healing rituals, communal reconciliation, and renewed right relationship with ancestors.

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

VI. Information

Information is communal and relational — knowledge exists in the web of relationships ('I am because we are'). No individual possesses information in isolation. Information is relational because it is defined by communal bonds. It is conserved because communal knowledge is passed down through generations. It is continuous because the community's relational web is a living, seamless whole. The framework places this as conserved at both scales: the communal web preserves cosmic information through generations, and at the personal-identity scale the individual is conserved as an ancestor — 'I am because we are' continues across the boundary of death.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Relational Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Conserved Granularity: Continuous

Films Reading Through This School (3)

← #55 Animism / Relational-Indigenous Worldview All Schools #57 Transhumanism / Posthumanism →

Works that name Ubuntu / African Communal Ontology in their embodiments

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

35%
No Future Without Forgiveness (Late (the major reflective work after the TRC))
Desmond Tutu · 1999 (the personal-theological reflection on the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 1995-98)
25%
African Religions and Philosophy (Mid)
John S. Mbiti · 1969 (2nd edn 1990)
20%
Cultural Universals and Particulars: An African Perspective (Late)
Kwasi Wiredu · 1996
15%
The Souls of Black Folk (Mid)
W.E.B. Du Bois · 1903
15%
Long Walk to Freedom (Late)
Nelson Mandela · 1994
15%
The Autobiography of Malcolm X (Late)
Malcolm X with Alex Haley · 1965
14%
The Sacred Pipe (Late)
Heȟáka Sápa (Black Elk) · 1947-48 interviews; 1953 publication
10%
Sister Outsider (Mid (the major prose collection of Lorde's career))
Audre Lorde · 1984 (collecting essays and speeches from the 1970s and early 1980s)
10%
Death and the King's Horseman (Mid (the major play of Soyinka's career))
Wole Soyinka · 1975
10%
Beloved (Mid (the Pulitzer-winning major novel))
Toni Morrison · 1987
10%
Aké: The Years of Childhood (Mid)
Wole Soyinka · 1981
10%
Myth, Literature and the African World (Mid)
Wole Soyinka · 1976
10%
Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center (Early)
bell hooks · 1984
10%
The Odu Ifá Corpus
Anonymous / composite — the babaláwo (Ifá priest) tradition across centuries; the corpus is principally oral but partially transcribed and translated since the 19th century · Pre-literate origins (possibly Old Oyo era, c. 12th-16th century CE); ongoing oral tradition; partial transcription from the 19th century onward
10%
Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color (Mid)
Kimberlé Crenshaw · 1991 (Stanford Law Review)
10%
Toward the African Revolution (Late)
Frantz Fanon · 1952-1961 essays; 1964 (collection)
10%
Black Elk Speaks (Late)
Nicholas Black Elk (Heȟáka Sápa), recorded by John G. Neihardt · 1932
10%
Women, Race & Class (Mid)
Angela Y. Davis · 1981
10%
Black Feminist Thought (Mid)
Patricia Hill Collins · 1990 (2nd edn 2000)
5%
The Analects
Compiled by Confucius's disciples and their disciples · Compiled c. 5th–3rd century BC; core sayings reflect Confucius (551–479 BC)
5%
Mencius
Meng Ke (Mencius); compiled by his disciples · c. late 4th century BC (compiled shortly after his death c. 289 BC)
5%
Playing in the Dark (Mid-late)
Toni Morrison · 1992 (William E. Massey Lectures at Harvard, 1990)
5%
The Lion and the Jewel (Early)
Wole Soyinka · 1959
5%
The Cancer Journals (Mid)
Audre Lorde · 1980
5%
The Wretched of the Earth (Late)
Frantz Fanon · 1961 (French; English 1963)
5%
Black Skin, White Masks (Early)
Frantz Fanon · 1952 (French; English 1967)
5%
Culture and Imperialism (Late)
Edward W. Said · 1993
5%
The Idea of Latin America (Late)
Walter D. Mignolo · 2005
5%
Twenty Years at Hull-House (Late)
Jane Addams · 1910
5%
God Is Red: A Native View of Religion (Late)
Vine Deloria Jr. · 1973 (2nd edn 1992; 3rd edn 2003)
5%
The Sound and the Fury (Mid)
William Faulkner · 1929

Personas with Ubuntu / African Communal Ontology as a declared influence

35%  Desmond Tutu 25%  Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela 10%  Heȟáka Sápa (Black Elk) 10%  Vine Deloria Jr.

How Ubuntu / African Communal Ontology resolves each dilemma

57 resolved positions across 4 dimensions, including 34 distinctive where the majority of schools go the other way.

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 18% of schools agree (38/208)
How much weight do future people deserve?
If a billion people will exist in the 25th century, do their interests count for as much as the interests of a billion people alive now? The answer turns on what kind of reality the future has.
Past, present, and future are bound in cycles — duties span generations as a matter of course.
On these views, time is not a one-way arrow but a structure of return: cosmic cycles, karmic cycles, the seasons, the succession of generations. To act now is always also to act for the ancestors who shaped your inheritance and for the descendants who will …
Roads not taken Future people are as real as you are — and their interests count for as much. (47%) · Time arises from events or from a deeper substrate — the future is not yet. (31%) · The future branches — what we owe depends on which branch we create. (2%)
Distinctive · only 18% of schools agree (38/208)
Is regret rational?
If the past is fixed and unchangeable, what kind of mental act is regret? An error, a duty, a lesson, a perspective on a moment that is still in some sense present?
The past is part of a cycle one keeps returning to; regret is one of the gates of the cycle.
On cyclical views, the past is not a fixed thing behind you — it is part of the ongoing structure of return: karmic cycles, cosmic cycles, the cycle of seasons and generations. Regret, on these views, is less about an unchangeable past and more about …
Roads not taken The past is as real as the present; regret is a real attitude toward a real thing. (47%) · The past is not a thing now; regret is the present holding what is no longer. (31%) · Other branches exist; regret tracks roads not taken that are nonetheless real. (2%)
Distinctive · only 18% of schools agree (38/208)
Do we owe extinct species something we cannot give them?
A species that no longer exists cannot be helped, cannot be consulted, cannot benefit. Whether anything is owed to it anyway turns on what kind of reality past beings have.
Past beings are part of the cycle; we owe them what we owe ancestors.
On cyclical views, the relationship to past beings — ancestors, lineages, predecessors — is structurally present, because past and future are part of the same ongoing structure of return. Extinct species are not categorically different from extinct human ancestors or non-yet-born descendants: all are part …
Roads not taken Extinct species are as real as we are; they have standing. (47%) · Past species no longer exist; what we owe is to the present and the future. (31%) · Extinction is path-dependent; the species exists in branches we didn't take. (2%)
6 mainstream positions

Matter · 7 dilemmas · 5 distinctive

What stuff is — fundamental, relational, or appearance.

Distinctive · only 14% of schools agree (30/208)
What is money?
The question of what money is — a measured store of real value, an agreed-on practice, a relational ledger of debts, or just a name we apply to many different things — sits behind every argument about inflation, cryptocurrency, debt, and the state.
Money is the ledger of obligations among real people.
On relational views, money is not a substance you have; it is a record of who owes whom what. Debts and credits are real because the relations they track are real — to kin, to community, to ancestors, to land. Money is the form this …
Roads not taken Money is a real institution with intrinsic features. (55%) · Money is a social practice — its content is what we make it. (16%) · “Money” names a family of practices — the definition question is nominal. (8%)
Distinctive · only 14% of schools agree (30/208)
What is a nation?
Whether a nation is a real moral community with intrinsic character, a constructed legal-political artifact, a web of kinship and shared history, an imagined community, or a conventional partition of a deeper unity — these are real ontological positions with sharply different political downstream.
A nation is the web of kinship, ancestry, and shared land that hosts a people.
On relational views, the nation is the relational fabric — extended kinship, ancestral inheritance, shared ecology, communal practice — that hosts a people across generations. Borders matter less than belonging; lineage and land carry the weight that political structures only ratify.
Roads not taken A nation is a real moral community with intrinsic character. (55%) · A nation is a constructed polity — a project, not a discovery. (16%) · “Nation” names a family of practices imaginatively held together. (8%)
Distinctive · only 14% of schools agree (30/208)
What makes someone male or female?
Whether sex is a real biological kind, a constructed social category, a relational identity, a label applied to varied phenomena, or a conventional distinction within a deeper unity is the ontological question the contemporary dispute about gender is mostly about.
Sex and gender are constituted by relations of recognition.
On relational views, identity is not a property a person has alone; it is constituted by the web of recognition the person sits in. What makes someone a man or a woman in any thick sense is the relations of kinship, community, ritual, and recognition …
Roads not taken Sex is a real biological kind with given content. (55%) · Gender is constructed; what counts as male or female reflects practice. (16%) · “Male” and “female” are family-resemblance terms — no single essence. (8%)
Distinctive · only 14% of schools agree (30/208)
Should we edit the human germline?
Whether human nature is a given biological kind, a constructed category, a relational achievement, a family-resemblance cluster, or a conventional distinction within deeper unity is the ontological question the policy debate over heritable gene editing is mostly about.
Personhood is constituted by relations of descent and kinship; germline editing reshapes the relational fabric.
On relational views, what makes someone a person is the web of kinship, ancestry, and community they sit in — not a property the body carries alone. Heritable editing intervenes in exactly this fabric: the lineage that ancestors handed on, the descent that descendants will …
Roads not taken Human nature is a real biological kind given by reproductive biology or by creation; editing the germline transgresses what is given. (55%) · The categories we count as 'human' are emergent from practice; germline editing is a practice-revision like any other. (16%) · 'Human nature' is a cluster term without a single essence; the editing question is empirical, not metaphysical. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (33/208)
Is the world created from nothing?
Creatio ex nihilo is one of the most distinctive Western-theological claims. Whether matter was created from nothing, eternally exists, or is sustained moment-by-moment turns on what kind of thing matter is.
Matter is constituted by relations; the question of 'from what?' presupposes substance.
On this view, matter is not a stuff but a patterning — the standing relations among things, ancestors, processes, and places. The creatio-ex-nihilo question doesn't quite arise, because the ontology has no slot for a free-standing substance to be created or eternal. What persists is …
Roads not taken Yes — matter was created and is conserved as a real substance. (56%) · Matter is real but emerges from something deeper — neither bedrock nor created-from-nothing. (23%) · Matter arises and dissolves through cosmic rounds; neither created from nothing nor eternal. (4%)
2 mainstream positions

Observer · 37 dilemmas · 5 distinctive

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

Distinctive · only 7% of schools agree (14/208)
Can prayer for someone far away affect them?
If you pray for a friend in another city, can the prayer reach them? The answer turns less on whether distance can be spanned than on whether anything beyond natural causation is doing the spanning.
Prayer reaches through ancestors, kami, or the spirits active in the world.
On this view, prayer is intelligible because the world includes spirits, ancestors, and energetic presences with whom petitioners stand in real relation. The prayer addresses these — particular kami, named ancestors, the orisha — rather than (or alongside) a single transcendent God. The practice is …
Roads not taken Prayer changes the pray-er, not the prayed-for. (47%) · Prayer reaches because God or a cosmic ordering acts on the prayed-for. (38%) · There are no truly separate minds; prayer is one part of one talking to another. (8%)
Distinctive · only 7% of schools agree (14/208)
Are coincidences ever more than coincidence?
Thinking of someone and hearing from them moments later. Two friends humming the same obscure song at the same moment in different cities. Whether such patterns ever carry meaning depends on whether the world contains any ordering agency beyond chance.
Coincidence is the world speaking through spirits, ancestors, or signs.
On this view, what looks like coincidence is often the action of specific spirits or ancestors making themselves present — an omen, a sign, a felt arrival. The framework for reading such events is rich and particular: which spirit, what message, what response is fitting. …
Roads not taken Coincidence is exactly what the math says it is. The pattern is in the noticer. (47%) · What looks like coincidence is providence — there is no such thing as a real coincidence. (38%) · Coincidence is the One showing through the appearance of plurality. (8%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/208)
What makes someone the same person over time?
When dementia hollows out memory, when a coma resolves with no recall, when you imagine being uploaded — the question of whether the surviving person is still you turns on what kind of thing the 'you' was to begin with.
You span moments — identity is a pattern that need not be located at a single now.
On this view, the observer is not bound to a single present. Identity is something that exists across moments — as a pattern, an ancestral line, a trans-temporal structure. Uploading, in this picture, is not a metaphysical impossibility but an engineering question; ancestors are real …
Roads not taken You are your body — continuity is bodily continuity. (36%) · You are a soul — what persists through change is the non-bodily aspect. (30%) · There was never a fixed self to either preserve or lose. (14%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/208)
Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married?
Loss of memory, of recognition, of the cognitive patterns that made the person — does this end the person, or merely the person you knew? The answer turns on what makes someone who they are.
The person is the pattern across moments — diminished pattern, diminished person.
On this view, the person is constituted by a pattern extending across moments — memory, narrative, characteristic ways of being. As dementia erodes the pattern, the person is correspondingly diminished. What remains is real but is less than what was; the marriage to the person …
Roads not taken Same body, same person — even when the cognitive pattern has changed. (36%) · The soul persists; the cognitive change is the body's, not the person's. (30%) · There was no fixed person to lose; care is owed to whoever is here. (14%)
Distinctive · only 9% of schools agree (18/208)
If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived?
The Star Trek transporter problem: a machine scans your body atom by atom, transmits the pattern, builds an exact duplicate at the destination, and dismantles the original. Whether you arrive at the destination or die in the scanner is the question; the answer depends on what you are.
You are the pattern; the pattern survives the substrate change. You arrive.
On this view, you are the trans-temporal pattern that has shown up in this body up to now. The teleporter preserves the pattern — destroys one instance, builds another — and the pattern is what matters. You step in and you step out. The fact …
Roads not taken Different body, different person — you died in the scanner. (36%) · The soul accompanies the person; engineering can't transfer it. (30%) · There was no fixed you to either survive or fail to; the question is malformed. (14%)
32 mainstream positions
Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed? Truth is real but accessible only from within a tradition. 10% Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Distance doesn't dilute obligation; what is real is the connection, not its length. 12% Are the dead morally present to the living? Observers span moments; the dead are present in a real (not merely metaphorical) way. 12% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? An observer can occupy multiple times at once; foreknowledge is not foreordering. 12% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditation accesses a trans-temporal level the ordinary observer doesn't ordinarily reach. 12% Does prayer change God's mind? Prayer participates in a trans-temporal liturgy or communion; the question of 'changing the mind' misses the trans-temporal mode. 12% When does a person begin? Personhood is conferred by being-in-relation. 14% What is marriage? Marriage is constituted by the web of relations it creates. 14% What is our place in nature? Embedded in a web — partners with the more-than-human world. 14% Should we colonize space? Colonisation continues the work that ended the wisdom of seven-generation thinking. 14% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? Editing the genome cuts into the relational fabric; we should be very slow. 14% What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize? Direct experiential union is the authority. 16% Does history have a direction or meaning? History recurs in cosmic cycles. 17% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Loss is part of cycles; what disappears returns in another form. 18% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilization rises and falls in cycles; recovery is structural to history. 18% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Local entropy increase is part of a cycle; the moral category is participation in the cycle. 18% Could causation work backwards? Time is structured as return; 'forward' and 'backward' are local features of the cycle. 18% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? Memory and anticipation are phases of a cycle that visits both directions. 18% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? Within a cycle there is a direction; across the cycle there isn't. 18% Is reality fundamentally digital? No — continuous divine sustaining act, the Tao that knows no joints, the One's self-disclosure. 44% Are there indivisible units of experience? No — continuous divine presence; consciousness is the unbroken witness. 44% Is memory stored or reconstructed? Held in continuous divine or ancestral remembering — neither stored discretely nor purely reconstructed. 44% What happens to "you" when you die? A soul continues into another mode of being. 38% Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species? The community of persons is the moral primary. 28% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust expertise only insofar as it coheres with first-person experience. 17% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? What gets called 'revelation' is real direct experience — not a text. 17% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? An LLM has no first-person experience, so no knowing in the relevant sense. 17% Could an AI have a mind that matters? An AI’s standing is constituted by the relations it enters. 14% Is salvation, liberation, or fulfillment individual or communal? The community is saved together or not at all. 14% How is knowledge of reality produced? Through direct contemplative union with reality. 13% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? An animal's standing is constituted by its place in the relational fabric. 11% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? The organoid's standing is constituted by the relations of care around its production. 11%
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream
Jump to school (208)
#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 #203 #204 #205 #206 #207 #208