Sentences with phrase «argue from fact»

Why the abortion issue won't go away: One side (pro-choice) argues from fact, reason, and an understanding of the natural world; and the other (pro-life) argues from ignorance and blind belief in a fairy tale.

Neither of you is arguing from fact but are instead accepting theory as truth.

Not exact matches

That's difficult to say, but no one can argue the fact that American multinationals are benefiting from a weaker dollar, which makes their exports more competitive globally.

In fact, some people would argue that the uber successful ventures come from people outside the industry willing to challenge the conventional wisdom.

The debate over the age of consent for access to digital services distracts from the fact that we all need a balanced education on technology, argues John Kennedy.

So aside from the fact that the gold sector has started a new cycle, the fundamental scarce nature of gold and the fact that it will become more difficult to access a steady supply in coming years, argues a compelling case for gold exposure now.

Both you and Beth are arguing that my faith is invalid solely on the fact that it differs from yours.

In fact you could argue from history that the more persecuted Christianity is in a culture the stronger it has grown.

To that assessment this essay will contribute modestly by arguing (1) that an account of experience must be compatible with the fact that there is no one thing which is what experience is or is the essence of experience, (2) that no philosophically adequate account of what experience is can be established merely by appeal to direct, personal, intuitive experience of one's own experience, (3) that generalization from features found in human experience is not sufficient to justify the claim that temporality is essential to experience, but (4) that dialectical argument rather than intuition or generalization is necessary to support the claim that experience is essentially temporal.

Most recently, Nancy Verrier in The Primal Wound and Ronald J. Nydam in Adoptees Come of Age have argued that an adopted child never fully recovers from the fact that he or she was relinquished by birth parent (s).

In fact, I would argue that church - as - performance is just one more thing driving us away from the church, and evangelicalism in particular.

In contrast to the message that the newspaper draws from the figures, it has been argued in some quarters that in fact more people attend church than did twenty years ago, but that they attend less regularly.

But I still think all this back - and - forth does is use dozens of debatable facts to cloud the main issue: Both Tony and Julie need help, and all the arguing does is give them a distraction from addressing their own responsibilities in the mess they have created together.

You leap from the fact that we «are arguing that human beings sit in judgement of the scripture and God» so that «God can not sit in judgement of us.

Go read some books from prominent scientists who lean towards creationism, refute the facts they present, make whatever «excuses» you want, then come back here and argue with me.

I shall argue that Whitehead did in fact badly misinterpret Aristotle's concept of substance, as Eslick claimed, and I shall suggest that, far from amounting to an inconsequential error in historical exegesis, this misconception was a strong influence in turning Whitehead's metaphysics in the direction of an epochal theory of becoming.

Much of the defense of Rushdie comes from writers who have argued that it is only religious naïveté that prevents Muslims from being able to distinguish between fact and fantasy.

u can argue seperation of church and state as much as u want, but u cant disprove the fact that american society did nt start its decline until they removed god from the schools.

Repeatedly he argued that the introduction of women priests, the new prayer book and other changes in the Episcopal Church had taken it out of the mainstream of Episcopalianism; that in fact the schismatic group, by separating itself from all that «error,» is the faithful remnant.

In fact, many Jews (and philosophers such as William James) would argue that action actually PRECEDES sincerity — that faith comes from, and because of, participation in religious ritual, not the other way around.

His fear of the dangers associated with the federal «dole,» argued editorials, ignored the fact that poverty emerged more from the defects of the system than from the «personal shortcomings of the sufferers» (February 11, 1931).

In fact, it can be argued (and I will, in what follows below) that the present divergences in social thought throughout contemporary evangelicalism stem largely from this source from differing theological traditions that provide conflicting models for social ethics today.

Calvin would go a step further and argue that some are in fact predestined to damnation from the beginning, which became the position of the Jansenists.

This does not mean that one can or should argue from a speculative doctrine as to how God was present in Jesus to the fact of his authority for us.

Christians arguing stories from their bible vs. scientific facts is like arguing about Santa's sleigh flying... sure it says it flies in the stories but the facts are that there is no Santa (sorry kids), there is no magic sleigh, and there are no magical reindeer to guide his sleigh tonight.

He argues that the credibility of traditional Christianity is based not on the fact that the divine text is preserved from human mediations but from the contrary fact.

The very fact that, in 2012, a presidential candidate from one party can create instant headlines by arguing against a speech made by a presidential candidate of the other party, more than 50 years ago, should be enough to convince any fair - minded American that we still have much work to do as we try to reason with each other about these questions.

D. E. Nineham points out that «most commentators accept at any rate the basic facts of the story, arguing that Christians would have been unlikely to invent a tradition in which Jesus receives hurried burial from a pious Jew, and his own followers have no part in the proceedings ’15 and then goes on to add that «scholarly opinion has perhaps been a little inclined to overlook the possible influence of the Old Testament on the story».16

Christian philosophers argue that the best explanation for these facts is that Jesus rose from the dead — unless of course your mind is closed to the idea of the miraculous.

The fact that Jesus never denounced OT violence or implied that it was not commanded by his Father means the best we can do is argue from silence and inference.

to J.W. and fred — i think its rather silly to argue anything as fact if its cleary thought based (i.e. lacking proof / evidence) when asked about the where did we come from or how the universe (whatever) i always answer with i don't know, but then i pose an idea — i state openly thats its only an idea... if any one of you religions folks would simple agree to the FACT that what you BELIEVE is real is REALLY only an idea until proven (much like evolution) then i would find much more pleasing conversations beyond the realm of atheists... but alas, i am still waiting — i found some but most are imovible in there beliefs that god is real, provable, and most fact if its cleary thought based (i.e. lacking proof / evidence) when asked about the where did we come from or how the universe (whatever) i always answer with i don't know, but then i pose an idea — i state openly thats its only an idea... if any one of you religions folks would simple agree to the FACT that what you BELIEVE is real is REALLY only an idea until proven (much like evolution) then i would find much more pleasing conversations beyond the realm of atheists... but alas, i am still waiting — i found some but most are imovible in there beliefs that god is real, provable, and most FACT that what you BELIEVE is real is REALLY only an idea until proven (much like evolution) then i would find much more pleasing conversations beyond the realm of atheists... but alas, i am still waiting — i found some but most are imovible in there beliefs that god is real, provable, and most def.

Neuhaus argues that such poor drafting resulted from the bishops being in a media — inspired panic, he ignores the fact that the very definition he quotes refers to Canon 1395 — 2, which itself, like canon law generally, employs this kind of very vague language.

We were not arguing that an orderly world such as ours could not have possessed beings and / or substances with properties different from those the beings and substances in our world do in fact possess.

Shane, I love the fact that you are trying to argue the ignorance and shortsightedness of the people who do not agree with your views, but how is anyone supposed to take you seriously when you are obviously far from educated.

Accordingly, Sawicki argues, «It would be a misconception to regard the gospel words as referring, after the fact, to some event separate and self - contained that happened independently of those words and that subsists apart from them somewhere in the human past.,,, [14] And «those who want to see the Lord must devote themselves to liturgy and the poor (better yet, the liturgy with the poor) as well as to printed texts.»

And because the underlying commitment is philosophical, the flimsiest facts are counted as evidence - as when the president of the National Academy of Sciences recently published an article arguing that evolution is confirmed by differences in the size of finch beaks, as though the sprawling evolutionary drama from biochemicals to the human brain could rest on instances of trivial, limited variation.

Equally, however, one may argue from the same facts of poverty and deprivation to the conclusion that these are people whom Great Britain is failing and they are choosing to try to improve their lot by seeking governance closer to home.

Under duress of this theodicy, loyal Jews argued back from good fortune to good morals and from ill fortune to evil morals, and thereby found themselves at last in a position where theological theory and the facts of experience were in headlong collision.

The fact that science flourished at all in this period is puzzling, for sociologists from Weber to the present have generally argued that decentralized political conditions are most conducive to intellectual innovation, and yet the seventeenth century was the great age of absolutism.

But in fact, I would argue the opposite — this «belief in the supernatural» is actually a distraction from a religious life, and makes one prone to many errors, theologically - speaking.

It could, in fact, be argued that one of the most significant paradigm shifts of the past several centuries has been the move from a religious metaphysic to a political metaphysic and the messianic state it fosters.

Father Murray provided that «something more» by arguing that those altar - throne alliances which seemed to be the tradition were in fact a departure from the tradition.

In spite of the fact that the cosmos is truly our home (as we argued on scientific, biblical, and environmental grounds in the preceding chapter) our species nevertheless began (during the axial age) to feel gradually somewhat exiled from subhuman patterns of natural existence.

Of course, it might be argued that in enjoying or discussing a magic act, for example, we are implicitly acknowledging the conceivability of a rabbit arising from absolute nonbeing even while not believing that such a transition has in fact taken place.

A second problem with Hasker's argument is that, although he claims that he is arguing that God should allow gratuitous evils, he is in fact arguing that even the gratuitous evils are not really gratuitous, because they contribute to «God's intention to make us responsible moral individuals,» which from his perspective is a more important consideration than the relative balance of enjoyment and suffering in the world.

Aside from the fact that, as I have just argued, Hauerwas is decidedly not interested in separation for separation's sake, this charge leaves me puzzling about just what «essentialism» could mean for Muray.

In fact it could be argued that the greatest progress has come as a result of freedom from religion.

In fact, Robert Kingdon argues that Geneva's resourcefulness in finding effective ways to cope with the tide of refugees and students from other countries, providing housing and practical programs of economic and social integration of the newcomers, was essential to the success of the international program of Calvinism.

Even the fact that the baptism or crucifixion are historical events is not to be derived with any certainty from the gospel narratives; it has to be argued on other grounds.

The Faith vision argues that the Incarnation of the second person of the Blessed Trinity, far from being primarily a response to human sin, is in fact from the very beginning the meaning and purpose of the Universe.