Sentences with phrase «human thought processes»

Human thought processes are not instantaneous, but require cognitive effort which takes some amount of time.

After introducing the concept of «machine learning,» Surden notes that although artificial intelligence is still unable to stand in for complex human thought processes we can still get «intelligent results without intelligence.»

Through the Pantone Color Institute, Pantone continues to study how color influences human thought processes, emotions and physical reactions, furthering its commitment to providing professionals with a greater understanding of color and to help them utilize color more effectively.

Combining several new techniques, Jonathan R. Polimeni, Ph.D., senior author of the study, and his colleagues at Harvard's Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, applied fast fMRI in an effort to track neuronal networks that control human thought processes, and found that they could now measure rapidly oscillating brain activity.

The Bible has its origin in God, and that God used normal human thought processes to communicate His message.

2Frege (not to mention Herder, Humboldt and Lotze) remained critical towards psychologistic and atomistic theories of knowledge by resisting trends that reduced essential theoretical foundations of logic to actual human thought processes.

Cognitive psychologists coined the term in 1960 as they tried to explain the fundamental structure of the human thought process.

Anyone can post news to affect the stock market and computers don't have the human thought process.

What failing in the human thought process enables people to ignore factual information that doesn't suit their philosophy?

Not exact matches

«I think it's real tough for anybody to go out and start a business in a world he knows nothing about,» says Tom Golisano, the founder and CEO of Paychex Inc., an $ 870 - million payroll - processing and human - resource - services company based in Rochester, N.Y. «My advice to Mike would be to find a job in a dynamic industry and then to be constantly on the lookout for opportunities within that industry.

@fred, According to Gallup, around 15 % think «Humans evolved, but God had no part in the process».

Science has it 100 % right on this fact, the human brain is what enables us to process any conscious thought.

Or can process thought find some way to defend itself against the charge that it has retained human factors that are not essential to experience as such?

Process thought does not make a distinction between suffering endemic to the entire human race and suffering which is meted out by one ethnic group to another.

According to Ellis, the well - being and growth of persons are determined by how they use four essential and interdependent human processes — perceiving, feeling, acting, and thinking.

If so, take a look at our entire human history for countless examples of physical processes causing things that we used to think were magic.

Part One, here called «Human Experience and Process Thought,» was given on the Alexander Brown Foundation as a series of lectures at Randolph - Macon College, Ashland, Virginia, U.S.A. in 1976; the material in Part Two, here called «God in Process: Christian Faith and Process Thought,» was a series of lectures given at St. Augustine's College, Canterbury, England in 1966.

First, its premisses concerning society and modern man are pseudoscientific: for example, the affirmation that man has become adult, that he no longer needs a Father, that the Father - God was invented when the human race was in its infancy, etc.; the affirmation that man has become rational and thinks scientifically, and that therefore he must get rid of the religious and mythological notions that were appropriate when his thought processes were primitive; the affirmation that the modern world has been secularized, laicized, and can no longer countenance religious people, but if they still want to preach the kerygma they must do it in laicized terms; the affirmation that the Bible is of value only as a cultural document, not as the channel of Revelation, etc. (I say «affirmation» because these are indeed simply affirmations, unrelated either to fact or to any scientific knowledge about modern man or present - day society.)

But leaving aside all thought of systematization, is it not true that every day a multitude of human souls are created in the course of an embryogenic process in which scientific observation will never be able to detect any break however small in the chain of biological phenomena?

First, since process thought concerns itself with the totality of human experience, it must necessarily take very seriously the fact of the religious vision and the claim of countless millions of people of every race and nation and age to have enjoyed some kind of contact with a reality greater than humankind or nature, through which refreshment and companionship have been given.

What ultimately turned the tide in a direction which could accommodate theological thinking to the evolutionary view was a resurgence of personal idealism which purported to see the entire process of evolution, animal as well as human, in the context of a cosmic drama presupposing a Creator God.

As the remainder awake the human race will feel more and more changes in their thought process.

In process thought, anything actual at all is an instance of creativity, from the tiniest energy event to the most complex creatures we are aware of, human beings.

Did he mean to suggest that persons are responsible for bringing as much of the rest of nature as possible into conformity with this standard or was he thinking of a natural process apart from human effort?

Any one, therefore, holding a religious rather than a materialistic philosophy, will think of the process of Biblical development as dual — seen from one side, a human achievement; seen from the other, a divine self - revelation.

Human beings are governed by the physiological and neurological limitations that govern our perceptions and our thinking processes.

Lucretius thought that the soul nestled in the human breast; Descartes located it in the pineal gland; and process theologian John Cobb, following Alfred North Whitehead, hopes to find mind wandering as a thread through the «interstices of the brain,» But if we are truly dealing with metaphysics, then the mind and the soul, like the risen Christ, will not be anywhere, but holistically related to the body.

Whitehead certainly contributed to Wieman's willingness during this period to think of this Something as a cosmic, rather than exclusively human, process.

Human feelings, sensory perceptions, thinking process, etc. are all highly limited in range and flawed within its range.

Needless to say, the mainstream of process thought has insisted instead that it is the «block universe» of classical theology which is irreconcilable with human freedom.

This is a naturally occurring thought process in human beings, or it wouldn't have been a world wide occurrence throughout all of known history, pre-recorded and post.

Philosophy is great when dealing with abstract, human concepts (beacuse it's process is based around the human as the standard) but without some way to test philosophical treaties, you are just doing thought experiments which may or may not have any bearing on events in the «real» world.

Granted — thinking, inquiry, assertion, and the like are all intellectual processes carried on by humans which, as such, must inevitably have an historical setting by way of place and time, of culture and era.

That process of criticism and reconstruction will examine the related ways we think about human beings, our world and God.

The primary answer is that modernist thinking assumes the validity of Darwinian evolution, which explains the origin of humans and other living systems by an entirely mechanistic process that excludes in principle any role for a Creator.

Recent papers on process thought and feminism have used the term «androgynous to depict the range of maleness / femaleness expressed in both humans and God.1 In a similar sense, «gynandrous» has been proposed.2 To be sure, the aim is to capture, by means of an appropriate term, the rich texture of human differences, that one is neither strictly «female» or «male» but a creative combination of the qualities historically assigned to both.

In short, process thought contends that God does not rule over creatures in tyrannical fashion but rather presents possibilities to humans for actualizing the divine will.

Without the process of biological evolution, which produced the human brain, there would be no sanctified souls; and similarly, without the evolution of collective thought, through which alone the plenitude of human consciousness can be attained on earth, how can there be a consummated Christ?

No, I think he is actually arguing that the Holy Spirit is just an articulation of some organic process within the human brain.

In process thought the human body is spatially extended; but it is not composed of Cartesian / Newtonian matter.

By contrast, the perfection of the androgynous God of process thought consists in an ideal balance of these contrasting traits, not in the total exclusion of the traits this culture traditionally views as feminine, thus luring both human males and females to strive to create themselves in the divine image.

To return to the topic of the spaciness of mind, I suggest that process thought must either give an account of the magnitude, locus, and external detectability of the stream of human consciousness, revert to Cartesianism, or cease believing in consciousness altogether.

(3) Nevertheless, it may seem that in process thought there are other types of extended but externally undetectable entities; and this may save the day for the spacy but imperceptible occasions of human consciousness.

The stream of human conscious experience and creative activity (the human mind or soul) has one vitally important property in process thought that it does not have in Cartesian metaphysics: it is spatially (as well as temporally) extended.

Henceforth the emphasis in Buber's thought is not, as heretofore, on the process of realization but on the meeting of God and man and the theophany that illuminates human life and history as the result of that meeting.

Because of this divergent process of actualization — the material past is dead, the mental past is alive — a distinction must be made between cosmology or pseudo-history and history proper (i.e., the study of human thought).

The two processes are inevitably linked in their structure, the second requiring the first as the matter upon which it descends in order to super-animate mt.. This view entirely respects the progressive effective concentration of human thought in an increasingly acute consciousness of its unitary destiny.

Recent papers on process thought and feminism have used the term «androgynous to depict the range of maleness / femaleness expressed in both humans and God.1 In a similar sense, «gynandrous» has been proposed.2 To be sure, the aim is to capture, by means of an appropriate term, the rich texture of human differences, that one is...

If like me you think you have made a conscious human being, what was the «mind - stuff» organized around the physico - chemical matter, and how did the natural processes perform this mysterious work?

Process thought emphasizes that human experiences participate in the formation of other human experiences.