Sentences with phrase «argues against my book»

In «Romance of the Vanished Past» [Skeptic], Michael Shermer argues against my book Magicians of the Gods, which describes the possibility of a forgotten episode of civilization in prehistory.

Not exact matches

The decision has the effect of the removing the fiduciary rule from the books, say attorneys who argued against the DOL rule.

I am not sure how serious Gerecht is about that, since he apparently directly argued against the concept in his 2011 book.

Both are weighty issues that deal explicitly with «high cosmic justice,» so if he argues that a government overreaches its authority to execute justice by attempting to «balance the books of the universe» in repaying blood with blood, then does that mean there can never be any just criteria for one nation to retaliate against another after an unprovoked attack» an attack that in essence would repay blood with blood?

Maudoodi entered the lists against the Muslim wing of the Indian National Congress by writing a book on Muslims and the Present Political Struggle, in which he argued so forcefully against the stand taken by the Muslim Congress that the Muslim Leaguers hoped he would come over to support the Pakistan movement.

Are we not arguing that there is a correlation between happiness and obedience to God (or faith), between unhappiness and revolt against God, according to the ancient theory debated in the Book of Job?

As late as the 16th century Martin Luther the «father of the Protestant Reformation» was still arguing for the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation to be dropped from the New Testament altogether because he perceived them to go against some of the doctrines he was promoting.

Read those books and your thoughts are likely to be more clear and your words more coherent, no matter if you argue for or against the existence of God.

In her book Pivot of Civilization (1922), Sanger addresses «the cruelty of charity,» arguing against the «sinisterly fertile soil» that perpetuates «defectives, delinquents and dependents.»

Timothy Smith's book Revivalism and Social Reform in MidNineteenth Century America, for example, argues persuasively that nineteenth - century evangelicals with their quest for moral perfection were at the forefront of the social battle, fighting against poverty, slum housing, racial intolerance, and inhuman working conditions.68 Smith's book has often been used by evangelicals to support their claim that they have been socially active.

In this book I argue against the use of visionary thinking in the church and how it destroys authentic community.

The book was so well argued that it is still widely credited, even by non-believers, for successfully rebutting this particular charge against God's existence.

Defending Balthasar against Scanlon, he cited the passages from the Pope's Crossing the Threshold of Hope mentioned above and referred also to his own book, Death on a Friday Afternoon, in which he had argued from several New Testament texts that although we can not be certain, we may indeed hope and pray for the salvation of all.

While the book gives an interesting summary of various authors who have argued that it was the Protestant Reformation that gave rise to atheism, the author fails to note any connection between the rejection (traceable from nominalism) of reason's capacity to know reality, the Protestant Reformation's appeal to faith against reason, intellectual scepticism and current postmodernism.

(Job 15:4 as translated by John Edgar McFadyen: The Problem of Pain; A study in the Book of Job, p. 100) Thus in the dramatic presentation of the Book of Job the orthodox formula was argued and reiterated against an innocent sufferer.

People taking the Bible (or any other religious book) seriously arguing against each other is always funny.

If I were choosing recent books in this area which most deserve to be read outside the country, I would start with Oliver O'Donovan's political theology in The Desire of the Nations; John Milbank's critique of the social sciences in Theology and Social Theory; Timothy Gorringe's provocative political reading of Karl Barth in Karl Barth: Against Hegemony; Peter Sedgwick's The Market Economy and Christian Ethics; Michael Banner's Christian Ethics and Contemporary Moral Problems; Duncan Forrester's Christian Justice and Public Policy; and Timothy Jenkins's Religion in Everyday Life: An Ethnographic Approach, which argues with a dense interweaving of theory and empirical study for a social anthropological approach to English religion which has learned much from theology.

Those inclined to argue that Jesus now would advise us precisely the opposite of what he did in the New Testament — this on the basis that, regarding both tax demands and military activity, our U.S. Caesar is so much worse than his Roman one was — these people should be warned against reading Martin Hengel's little book Victory Over Violence.

Richard Rubenstein, the rabbi who wrote the book After Auschwitz, has argued that after the horrors perpetrated against the European Jews under Hitler it is no longer possible to believe in the Judeo - Christian God, for to believe in God is to believe that Auschwitz too has meaning.

But in the book I do argue against the intense national focus on standardized tests, which measure a fairly narrow range of cognitive skills and turn out to be not very effective predictors of the educational goals that I think we should care about, especially college - graduation rates.

Pease Gadoua is a therapist and the founder of the Changing Marriage Institute; in 2014, she and Vicki Larson published a book titled «The New I Do,» in which they argue against the one - size - fits - all marriage.

Author and Yale law professor Amy Chua, known as the «Tiger Mom» for her intense parenting style, book and controversial prescriptions for American motherhood, warned Wednesday against reducing rigor and discipline in our education system and argued that advancing our meritocracy was the key to continued American competitiveness.

The wikipedia page (linked to above) for the book has a slew of papers that argue for and against his conclusions.

What is new in this book, however, is that I argue against the idea that the Communists won because they had a secret recipe for governance, and that their competition, the Guomindang or the collaborationist Wang Jingwei government were failures.

Ravitch has a piece in The New York Review of Books this month arguing against this kind of reliance on teacher evaluations.

Senator Barbara Boxer (D — CA), the top Democrat on the Senate environment panel, had argued especially forcefully against language in the Senate bill that would have kept existing state chemical regulations on the books, but reduced the states» ability to issue new regulations in the future.

But my purpose in this chapter of the book is not to argue for or against veganism, vegetarianism or some variation of a plant - based diet, since that can of worms could easily fill an entire book.

He wasn't having it, using every idea in the book to argue against it because he's heard so many people repeat it.

Here, in one eloquently worded, organized and argued paper was the same basic argument that Dr. Lee, Dr. Zava and myself made our 2002 book, What Your Doctor May Not Tell You about Breast Cancer about why progesterone is protective against breast cancer and progestins cause it.

Going Against the Grain: How Reducing and Avoiding Grains Can Revitalize Your Health by Melissa Diane Smith deals with a much broader range of health problems associated with grains and one Amazon reviewer argues is better than the Mercola book.

Books like Hear Our Cry: Boys in Crisis and The War Against Boys, sounding uncannily like the girl - empowerment treatises of a decade ago, argue that coed schools actually discourage boys from self - confidence and success, and that problems such as attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) are often the result of a classroom that refuses to let boys be boys.

Why is it so difficult to identify a book that embodies the incentive - based reforms of the decade and relatively easy to list books that argue against them?

The most common type of education reform book from the period argued against the dominant strategies.

I'd argue against enrolling a cookbook in the KU lending program since most of us want to hang on to our cookbooks, but yes, they're a good example of the type of books you don't read from cover to cover.

This roughly means that the great DRM - debate isn't even a top three issue for most publishers, while opponents of digital rights» management, who argue against the artificial incompatibility of an ebook across multiple devices, have shown that DRM - free books are no more likely to be pirated than those that have impose constraints on them.

Carufel has actually had a bee in his bonnet about the state of online book reviews since before his latest essay (which argued against Stephen King's own Kindle offering, «Guns,» an essay urging gun control reform).

And that's great, and I'll say again that I wasn't arguing against it, just arguing against self - publishing without knowing what you're getting in for — and without using Guy's book as your bible.

I don't think Jonathan Galassi is arguing against digital books or even against digital publishing.

Many — including Ruth Curry and Emily Gould of Emily Books, here on paidContent — are arguing that publishers» best tool against Amazon is to drop DRM on their titles.

The opposers of FBP agreements argue that this is only a weapon in publishers» hand to artificially keep book prices high and is against the buyers» needs.

The stake's on Donegal's books at 23.8 M, and last valued by the court at 26.2 M — considering more recent deals, I'd hope / expect Donegal can successfully argue for a significantly higher valuation multiple, but obviously that will also depend on the evolution of MMM's EBITDA... They should also argue against what seemed like debatable adjustments to MMM's EV previously.

This book was written by an expert whose dogs located many a fugitive from the law over the years, so he has a record of success that would be hard to argue against.

The Weekend's Best Comment & Reviews In the Sunday Times, Waldemar Januszczak slams the Whitechapel Gallery's «Electronic Superhighway» show while John Carey praises Tiffany Jenkins's «timely» book arguing the case against restitution for Western museums.

In the fourth century, St John Chrysostom, the Archbishop of Constantinople and his close circle of clergymen, argued against including the book in the New Testament, expressing concerns over the possible dangers of misinterpretation.

G&T managed to get their work out there; publishing it in Nature or Science would not have changed the fact that they're arguments just don't hold any water (they didn't do any new science, they just took what was already known, and then tried to use that to argue against what is already known — a search for logical inconsistency, which might have been worthwhile if they'd known what they were doing and if they'd gone after contrarian «theory»)-- unless it were edited, removing all the errors and non-sequitors, after which it would be no different than a physics book such as the kind a climate scientist would use...

With regards to Steyn's countersuit, if he makes a lot of money off this book, that would rather argue against large damages from his countersuit.

Against the establishment wisdom, Minqi Li argues in this provocative and startling book that far from strengthening capitalism, China's full integration into the world capitalist system will, in fact and in the not too distant future, bring about its demise.

They're not against eating meat, but the authors of the new book Cowed argue there are sound reasons for eating less beef.

There's a fair share of this latter phenomenon on the anti-ABS side as well, people arguing against it so convinced of their position that one wonders whether they are motivated their own pocket - book and lawyers» current «monopoly» of ownership.

Promoting his new book, «Liberty's Refuge: The Forgotten Freedom of Assembly» with a panel hosted Tuesday by the American Enterprise Institute and the Federalist Society, John Inazu argued that groups should employ the assembly clause to defend against discrimination charges first and foremost because «unlike association, [assembly] actually shows up in the text of the Constitution.»