Sentences with phrase «different view of science»

Not exact matches

Different administrators have come to different conclusions about how best to apply the law in view of the science, and many of their decisions have been challenged in court, sometimes successfully, for either going too far or not faDifferent administrators have come to different conclusions about how best to apply the law in view of the science, and many of their decisions have been challenged in court, sometimes successfully, for either going too far or not fadifferent conclusions about how best to apply the law in view of the science, and many of their decisions have been challenged in court, sometimes successfully, for either going too far or not far enough.

«I am one of the only students with a science background who also has significant startup experience, so I think that brings a very different view to our case discussions when we talk about making decisions using very little data,» she said.

Our view has been that both science and religion are rooted in experience but that each is based in a different region of the perceptive process.

A view held by many contemporary metaphysicians is that the problem of induction, so much discussed by philosophers of science, arises only because of mistaken metaphysical views; in particular views (deriving from Hume) about the nature of the causal relation and / or about the internal relations among different entities.1 Contrary to this view, I will try...

In «Theology and Objectivity» Ogden holds that theological language, though different from that of science, is objectifying because it is both cognitive and subject to rational assessment and justification.114 Of course, this view assumes the possibility of metaphysics, a possibility now generally denieof science, is objectifying because it is both cognitive and subject to rational assessment and justification.114 Of course, this view assumes the possibility of metaphysics, a possibility now generally denieOf course, this view assumes the possibility of metaphysics, a possibility now generally denieof metaphysics, a possibility now generally denied.

What is under challenge is the view of some people as to what constitutes real Faith and real science - a rather different thing.

Contemporary empirical science takes a different approach and studies phenomena from the point of view of quantity, or more precisely, measure.

This influential post-modern idea of Stephen J. Gould affirms that science and religion are two different windows from which to view the world, and there should be no cross-over.

This «whole» view of human existence — I use the adjective whole to indicate an inclusive understanding of human nature — has become increasingly attractive to those working in the many different branches of science that have a bearing on human existence.

This doorway into the subject seems to me the best one for a science of religions, for it mediates between a number of different points of view.

They opened my eyes and, because of them, found an interest in brain science, mindfulness, and a very different view of success.

A detailed view of TRPM8's structure, obtained using cryo - electron microscopy, was published by a different research group online December 7 in Science.

A report in the April 1999 issue of Science said probably not, but a paper in today's issue takes a different view.

Three years ago, for example, Texas revised its science teaching standards to require that students «analyse and evaluate different views on the existence of global warming».

According to Victoria Lush, of the communications department at Novartis, the use of scientific images can «show science from a different point of view and can increase our understanding of it through the crossover of science and art.»

DEEP VIEW This Hubble Space Telescope image of nearly 10,000 galaxies of different ages, sizes and shapes is one of over 100 pictures in a new illustrated history of science.

Opposing such confidence, he sees a blindness of science to the awkward and anomalous «noise» of the moral and religious world views of cultures that are radically different from ours in the industrialised West.

Despite similar views about the overall place of science in America, the general public and scientists often see science - related issues through a different lens, according to a new pair of surveys by the Pew Research Center in collaboration with the American Association for the Advancement of Science science in America, the general public and scientists often see science - related issues through a different lens, according to a new pair of surveys by the Pew Research Center in collaboration with the American Association for the Advancement of Science science - related issues through a different lens, according to a new pair of surveys by the Pew Research Center in collaboration with the American Association for the Advancement of Science Science (AAAS).

We offer many different videoconferences that include engaging experiences such as: take your students on a virtual tour of McDonald Observatory; complete a hands - on activity; see unique science demonstrations; and get live telescopic views sent to your classroom of the Sun, Moon and Venus from telescopes equipped with special video cameras and solar filters.

View a list of our current Jobs in Science including temporary, contract and permanent vacancies across the UK to suit all levels of scientists, from non-graduates to PhDs, and different levels of experience.

While many different schools of health and performance have unique philosophies about how to reestablish harmony and ideal function in the human system, most modern practitioners of the health sciences are shifting some of their focus to ancient views — namely, that a healthy gut is the foundation of longevity and vitality.

Biologists and physicists may have different views about which science is more critical, and within each field there are controversies about the nature of science and which scientific ideas are more important.

175 years after the invention of photography, the extensive two - part exhibition presents a somewhat different history of the medium: rather than focusing on technical, sociological aspects or those related to media science and art history, it tells the story of photography from the point of view of artists.

My view is that the best way to address this is through the idea that the validation of science is technology, as they are really the same thing just put to different uses.

Watts described a friendly two - hour trading of very different views on many points of climate change science but also on at least a few areas of common ground on pollution problems and energy choices, including on the value of household photovoltaic systems, which both men have on their homes.

This is the only thing I'd like to say about religion, and I don't think it's too far off the rails: Any strategy for communicating the science to the public — let alone any strategy for promoting policy measures — needs to carefully analyze different segments of public opinion and look for ways they can be won over to your point of view, rather than needlessly alienated from it.

So, people do care when you are opposed to their point of view, it seems, so it is quite useful to show that I work with some of the top UK climate scientists (via Tyndall), that I am involve in climate policy modelling (and climate modelling via CIAS), so I don't get any patronising comments by anonymous people who claim I should be quiet because they «read the science» while I must be a PR guy if I want to engage with people with a different opinion to myself.

Trying to find out why people do take a different view on all kinds of things, including science, is a worthwhile end.

And in what ways do you think that is meaningful in terms of evaluating the science, reconciling different views to develop policy, etc..?

* On climate science, our members and supporters cover a broad range of different views, from the IPCC position through agnosticism to outright scepticism.

A great irony is that the Scientizers have different political views but share the expectation that science is the appropriate battleground for this debate, and have together thus far successfully kept the focus of attention on the climate science rather than policy and politics.

The politics of implementation of mitigation is a very different matter but in my view the science comes first.

On the selection of convening lead authors... the IPCC can select a leading expert or two as convening lead authors — the potential problem is that these individuals will (even if subconsciously) frame the chapter based on their view of the world... this can make it seem rather difficult for those supporting other views (and I do not only mean only those holding contrarian views — there can be different schools of thought on the science, on uncertainties, etc.) to feel they are getting a fair shake... (p. 306)

Instead of the alleged «settled science», we found evidence for many different views on man - made global warming theories.

I can tell you that Osborn Jones and Briffa of the UEA (authors of the latest effusion in Science) owe their research funding to the UK gov, would it flow so well if they took a different view?

As someone who isn't bright or knowledgeable enough to understand the science, I'd say that any conclusions made on analysis of long - term climate trends that looks dramatically different based on the inclusion or exclusion of only 10 years of data should be viewed as «information» — useful but certainly not dispositive..

Any scientist with opinions different from theirs has clearly taken the blue pill and fallen under the spell of the The Machine, which they view as the enemy of true science.

Some 3 - 4 years ago I started looking at the CET in more detail, ever since Tony and I have exchanged privately views and opinions, not to mention occasional Tony's kind and helpful advise, despite researching in the two totally different areas of the climate science.

Those scientists are distinguishable by their view on the science as being different than, arguably, the views held by most climate scientists (Tol is a bit trickier as perhaps the prevalence of opinion among economists is a bit less obvious).

This way people with very different understandings of science and policy problems and with very different world views would have time to work together to fashion real progress on interdisciplinary, policy - oriented questions from governments.

The fact may be that individuals can be skeptical and hold different or similar political views in relation to the mainstream of climate science (environmentalism) and it's adherents has nothing to do with the overarching institutional structure and political persuasion of environmentalism as a social movement.

No, what I'm doing is drawing attention to an important and uncomfortable reality: that scientists from the academies of science of two major global economies (China and Russia — between them responsible for 34 % of global CO2 emissions, more than the US and EU combined (24 %)-RRB--- have a wholly different view of mankind's responsibility for recent atmospheric temperature increases from what seems to be the view of most relevantly qualified Western scientists.

Of course, we have a different view with a focus on skills - based education for data science (see zipfianacademy.com), but are always excited to see Berkeley's program getting this kind of attentioOf course, we have a different view with a focus on skills - based education for data science (see zipfianacademy.com), but are always excited to see Berkeley's program getting this kind of attentioof attention.