Sentences with phrase «argument is presented first»

Jennifer Ferrara's argument is presented first.

Not exact matches

It presented two findings: First, the German public didn't like the reforms passed by Merkel's government in its first year; second, when the public was presented with arguments and data justifying the reforms, it liked them even First, the German public didn't like the reforms passed by Merkel's government in its first year; second, when the public was presented with arguments and data justifying the reforms, it liked them even first year; second, when the public was presented with arguments and data justifying the reforms, it liked them even less.

I accept the results of this argument and grant that eternal objects are present in the first phase of concrescence as realized determinant [s]» (PR 239 / 366) of the actual entities that are being prehended by the new actual entity.

In the article, we first present a set of illustrative graphs about the factors that this article's argument is about: the existence of regional variation in support for redistribution among the rich and among the poor, the regional patters of inequality and fear of crime, etc..

It was the first time he has been physically present at the proceedings since opening arguments last week.

The first half of the book is a rehashing of arguments against «corporate reform» that were mostly presented in her previous book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System.

There are compelling and data based reasons to question the first two arguments — and the third presents an obvious problem that even many choice advocates do not support — but there should be no doubt that deeply held and sincere beliefs animate many school choice advocates.

It is usually a single sentence somewhere in your first paragraph that presents your argument to the reader.

My first reaction was to think that you would be more effective if you simply presented clearly data and arguments that prove that the Robinson et al. arguments are riddled with important errors and based on bias rather than scientific arguement, without blatantly ridiculing of the people who wrote the article.

Maybe there is a valid reason for you to advocate because of your concern about a lack of balance, but: (1), I question the criteria you are using to measure that imbalance, and (2) as you become an advocate, you drift away from the science, and you drift away from the first order priority of presenting as much information as is reasonable, objectively, before laying out the argument for your conclusions.

Just to be clear, the idea here is that we all aim to present reasoned arguments and dispassionate data, or others have to do something first, before this starts?

Carvin did forcefully make some First Amendment arguments, but, in doing so, too often failed to observe that various opinions were not only permitted, but reasonable... Because Steyn and National Review have parted ways, Carvin and National Review seem to have been unaware of the long backstory and more or less presented the dispute (from National Review's perspective) as little more than a purely academic controversy over the validity of tree rings as a temperature proxy, leaving the judges completely mystified on why Mann, as opposed to any one of hundreds of scientists, was at issue.

Environmentalists and members of First Nations and Metis communities who are challenging government and industry to adequately safeguard the air, water, and boreal forest eco-systems of the Athabasca oil sands region present a very strong moral argument, which I support.

Eric was condescending at first, then lapsed into pique once it was clear that he was technically outgunned (fighting to the bitter end not to acknowledge the results presented in the paper) and finally shut down comments at RealClimate when it was clear he was on the losing end of the technical argument.

Imagine such professors being first - chair counsel in a complex civil or criminal litigation who must interview potential witnesses, take depositions and engage in electronic discovery, file and respond to summary judgment motions, conduct voir dire, present the testimony of an expert witness, cross-examine (and impeach) hostile witnesses, and make closing arguments to a jury.

Thus, if an appellate court is presented with an issue that was raised for the first time on appeal, the party making the argument should be prepared to explain why the argument was not presented below.

Two arguments are presented to distinguish the Investment Court System in CETA from the ISDS in Achmea: First, CETA contains a new modernized form of ISDS possibility, an Investment Court System, which meets higher rule of law standards, in particular by improving the internal coherence of investment law and the independence of arbitrators, as well as by reducing the private autonomy bias in the system.

First of all, without it being necessary to rule on a potential analogy between the tendering procedure relevant to the present case and the principles that are applicable in public procurement... it should be noted that the applicant's argument concerning that potential analogy is based on the fact that, at the end of the tendering procedure, no bid or no appropriate bid had been submitted.

Managing Associate Mirela Metea, experienced litigator with extended proven competences in Banking & Finance, Corporate / M & A and Commercial areas of practice, awarded the first prize to a talented student, taking into consideration arguments presented, logical thinking as well as a coherent and persuasive presentation.

Justice Khullar notes (at para 48) that the Tenancy Dispute Officer did not have the benefit of the legal argument and case law that was presented to her, but instead interpreted the legislation «from first principles».

Following the above arguments, the first objective of the present study was to conceptualize the construct of changes in close relationships, and further, to develop a comprehensive measurement to assess the beliefs about the changes in intimate relationships.

The first mistake arguing couples often make is getting sucked into the content of an argument rather than simply staying centered and present with their own experiences and feelings about how the interaction is playing out.