Monad

In many Gnostic systems (and heresiologies), the Supreme Being is known as the Monad, the One, The Absolute Aiōn teleos (The Perfect Æon, αἰών τέλεος), Bythos (Depth or Profundity, Βυθός), Proarchē (Before the Beginning, προαρχή), and Hē Archē (The Beginning, ἡ ἀρχή) and The ineffable parent. The One is the high source of the pleroma, the region of light. The various emanations of The One are called æons.

Within certain variations of Gnosticism, especially those inspired by Monoimus, the Monad was the highest god which created lesser gods, or elements (similar to æons). Some versions of ancient Gnosticism, especially those deriving from Valentinius, a lesser deity known as the Demiurge had a role in the creation of the material world in addition to the role of the Monad. In these forms of gnosticism, the God of the Old Testament is often considered to have been the Demiurge, not the Monad, or sometimes different passages are interpreted as referring to each.

This Monad is the spiritual source of everything which emanates the pleroma, and could be contrasted to the darkness of pure matter.
[edit] Historical background

According to Hippolytus, this view was inspired by the Pythagoreans, for whom the first thing that came into existence was referred to as the Monad, which begat the dyad, which begat the numbers, which begat the point, begetting lines, etc.[1] Pythagorean and Platonic philosophers like Plotinus and Porphyry condemned Gnosticism (see Neoplatonism and Gnosticism) for their treatment of the monad or one.

Haskell.
This obscure language represents a peculiar corner of the programming language world called functional languages. One of the peculiar things about such languages is that they don’t have variables. Although Haskell isn’t widely known among programmers, those who know of functional languages suspect that they, too, are rather slow

Monad is just one of typeclasses. And a typeclass is some abstract entity, that allows concrete types to use some functions. And the nature of these functions depends on a typeclass of a concrete type, and how these functions implemented for a concrete type depends on the embodiment of the typeclass of that type. For example, monad Maybe is a type, computations, embedded into a monad of which, return either result, embedded into one of its data constructors, or a second data constructor - Nothing. Naturally, abstract types are often implemented in terms of type-class constrained polytypes and extraction functions from/to the abstract type families of polymorphic functions to/from some concrete type. However, the definitional structure of an abstract type uses interface operators and, therefore, is not affected by changes of representation. which may be logically hidden and, sometimes, even physically unavailable.

I have learned the fundamental difference between Haskell & PHP - PHP is much easier to interlace with html, ie jumping in and out to make life easier. I am finding that perl is no where near as flexible, actually I don't think it's possible, and even if it is, it wouldn't be considered good practise.

>>4
^IWhat ^His ^Btemplating^T?