Sentences with phrase «argument writing re»

Not exact matches

It's a little harder to deal with the haters who attack whenever you write something positive, or even whenever you write anything at all about Apple, because their arguments aren't entirely incorrect or unsympathetic.

I wrote my thesis on the philosophy of history with the central argument that Industrial Civilization would collapse and either be replaced by a new emergent socio - economic revolution an order of magnitude higher than industrialization and agriculture combined, or we would go back to the stone age or extinct.

There's no guarantee, of course, but, in a May 7 report, he wrote, «we see a good chance that these new form factors will help short - circuit the bear argument that «the PC is dead.

It's a fairly arcane argument over whether Google's design of Android to be compatible with apps written in the Java programming language (now owned by Oracle) was «fair use» or not.

The report, from 2012, did not claim that those people voted illegally in an election, as it was written as an argument for modernizing the US voting system.

In his letter, Dimon defended Mexico as well as NAFTA and even refuted some of the President's arguments regarding illegal immigration into the U.S. «Mexico is a long - standing peaceful neighbor, and it is wholly in our country's interest that Mexico be a prosperous nation,» Dimon wrote, noting that J.P. Morgan has business in Mexico worth $ 400 million in sales.

«The argument is the types of things we're doing now with information technology just don't show up in GDP because a lot of what we do on the Internet is free,» or very nearly so, says Philip Cross, a former chief of economic analysis at Statistics Canada who wrote a paper on the slow - growth economy for the Fraser Institute think tank last year.

Basically, when writing essays, or my master's thesis, I had to construct an argument that could withstand someone telling me I was full of crap.

Vik writes: The ongoing argument about this being the new internet to the grandest pyramid scheme is perplexing and similar to the current debate between Elon vs. Zuck on AI.

«If you're trying to win over someone whose natural allegiance are not with you, getting into an argument is a sure way to fail,» they write.

The court of appeals heard oral arguments last month and is expected to issue a written decision sometime this fall.

And amid a decline in VC funding and valuation write - downs of some of Silicon Valley's darlings (including Snapchat), we may already be in a contraction, the argument goes.

The judge in the case rejected Rothschild's argument that denied that the purpose of the trip, or Lord Mandelson's presence, were «purely recreational», The Telegraph writes:

[109][110][111] Corzine later wrote that only after the proposal was released did he discover «the harsh reality: the public intensely disliked the idea» and that, in retrospect, he «should have pressed harder to identify the most salient arguments against the plan and developed a strategy to get in front of and respond to those challenges.»

«To place defendants» argument in a real world context,» she wrote, «they assert that for the payment of approximately $ 100 a year to the Copyright Office (the payment for a Section 111 compulsory license) and without compliance with the strictures of the Communications Act or plaintiffs» consent, that they are entitled to use and profit from the plaintiffs» copyrighted works.»

One argument in favor of call writing is it helps smooth returns, especially in choppy or falling markets.

As the American Conservative's Matt Purple wrote, «Conservatives objected that leveraging kids in policy arguments was a lousy tactic — until they found a kid of their own: Kyle Kashuv, just as bright and eloquent as his peers and a stout defender of the Second Amendment.»

Levi writes that as a justification for enhancing domestic and North American oil production, «the underlying argument is weak.

This summer, with all the good letters already taken, the former labor secretary Robert Reich wrote on his blog that the recovery might actually be shaped like an X (the imagery is elusive, but Reich's argument was that there can be no recovery until we find an entirely new model of economic growth).

«To succeed in the Gig Economy, we need to create a financially flexible life of lower fixed costs, higher savings, and much less debt,» Diane Mulcahy, a senior analyst at the Kauffman Foundation and a lecturer at Babson College, writes in her book «The Gig Economy,» which is part economic argument and part how - to guide.

«I believe it is a matter of fundamental fairness that the American people be allowed to see both sides of the argument and make their own judgment,» Schumer wrote in a letter to the president released on Sunday.

Francis Fuller wrote: «Follow this argument to its ultimate conclusion and the end result is an independent Quebec.»

Byfield's blog post made a powerful argument for why Bill 24 is necessary to protect LGBTQ students, wrote Postmedia columnist Graham Thomson.

You might want to re-read what Ted M. initially posted, and then your responses... to me at least... what you wrote was not an isomorphic argument that in any way refuted Ted's, and i think - Ace made reference to that as well as - Ted.

What Hitchens wrote about the evils of religion was not so much a scholarly argument, but more a wave of righteous indignation that levelled everything in its path.

And pretentious and frankly childish comments such as the one so ineloquently written by Brad really are counter to your argument, however futile it ultimately is.

Accordingly, as J. Bottum puts it («Christians and Postmoderns,» FT, February 1994), «postmodernity is still in the line of modernity, as rebellion against rebellion is still rebellion, as an attack on the constraints of grammar must still be written in grammatical sentences, as a skeptical argument against the structures of rationality must still be put rationally.»

Like I wrote yesterday, even the most impressive and seemingly perfect arguments for or against God are limited.

As James O'Donnell has written, «Memory has the power to supplant «reality,» or at least what mortals know of reality: indeed, the whole argument of this half of Book X is that it is through memory that, after the fall, we encounter a more authentic reality.»

I think its an interesting argument, and may have some merit, and I was looking at your writing to see what your response to her point was.

They are discrediting bible through their wit, intellectual, articulate, scientific and logical but sly arguments to convince every people here on earth that it's a 2000 year old hoax and everything written in it which includes the prophecies in Revelations and the book of Apocalypses that had prophecized their comming.

They are discrediting bible through their wit, intellectual, articulate, scientific and logical arguments to convince every people here on earth that it's a 2000 year old hoax and everything written in it which includes the prophecies in Revelations and the book of Apocalypses that had prophecized their comming.

At one Evangelicals and Catholics Together meeting, writes Tom, the Catholic co-chairman of ECT, which Chuck helped found twenty years ago, some of the Catholic members questioned the value of natural law arguments «on the philosophical ground that no reason exists that is not already deeply saturated with prior pre-understandings and commitments.»

Jennifer Wright Knust's book is research and argument thin, akin to what an embittered co-ed would have written as a senior thesis to graduate from her religious studies department.

She uses as bases of her arguments the philosophies of «early Christians,» which I feel bears no weight as they were not the prophets who understood and wrote the holy scripture.

This is a weak argument, but interestingly, since I wrote the article, is seems that nearly every book I read has ideas which parallel the content of my research.

«It is a spurious argument to say that the protests weaken and embarrass this nation abroad and comfort its enemies,» wrote the editors.

We can not do Prager's argument justice here, but readers who are weary of the propaganda of gay promotion and gay bashing alike might write for this issue of Ultimate Issues.

The present essay is written in two tracks: the central argument, which appears as the text, and the Scholarly discussion, especially as regards issues pertinent to the Annecy meeting, which appears as the endnotes.

I also want to add, that I only wrote twice... my husband used my laptop to make his argument about the Irvings... those are not my words.

Thankfully, Noll's writing is lively and engaging, so wading through these arguments proves a sobering but easy task.

The «at first breath» argument is offered most comprehensively in To Gaurus: On How Embryos are Ensouled, a text believed to have been written by Porphyry, a third - century student of the «founder» of Neoplatonism, Plotinus.

Werner Jaeger, who has written the classic history of the idea of paideia, [2] pointed out in a later book on Early Christianity and Greek Paideia that Clement not only uses literary forms and types of argument calculated to sway people formed by paideia but, beyond that, he explicitly praises paideia in such a way as to make it clear that his entire epistle is to be taken «as an act of Christian education.»

«Lewis wrote in a time when, among the educated British public if not among their professional philosophers, there was considerably more agreement than there is now about what constitutes a valid and rational argument for a given case.»

As I wrote a theological argument for gay marriage https://lotharlorraine.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/on-the-sinfulness-of-homsexuality-von-der-sundigkeit-der-homosexualitat-deutschunten/ I received some comments which... well weren't really driven by love.

3) you said: «You're expecting someone to find a prophecy fulfillment met and all you can say is that whoever wrote the Gospels...» again, you aren't hearing the primary argument.

When I wrote Blessed Rage for Order, I did state that even if the arguments for the public character of fundamental theology in that book were sound, those arguments could not determine the distinctive form of publicness proper to systematic theology or that proper to practical theology.

But the argument that Professor Smolin attributes to Arkes is nowhere in the book; and what Arkes does argue for never appears in Prof. Smolin's review — in fact, Smolin writes as if he is oblivious to it.

«One thing only do I know for certain,» he wrote in Civilization and Its Discontents, «and that is that man's judgments of value follow directly his wishes for happiness — that, accordingly, they are an attempt to support his illusions with argument.»

It should be noted that the book was essentially written before September 11, and some last minute stitchings about what the war on terrorism might mean for the world and American culture do not sit well with the burden of his argument.