Sentences with phrase «arguments point by»

A Psychology paper must be well organized to lay out the arguments point by point.

Over the years, Derr has demonstrated an almost heroic patience in attending to the literature of radical environmentalism, and responding to arguments point by point.

Thehe lawyers defending the state, Marius Emberland and Adele Matheson Mestad, countered each argument point by point during Tuesday's proceedings.

Not exact matches

As much as it's significant to speak for yourself and stand by your point, it's also necessary to avoid pointless arguments at work.

So your argument is that because interest rates have been kept artificially low (effectively ripping everyone off with a manipulated money supply that's becoming more worthless by the day) that paying 6 % for a mortgage (which at one point was low) is getting ripped off?

Whether the $ 175 price increase on a car is «no big deal» may vary by your income and perspective, but many pundits are pointing out the argument falls a little flat coming from this Republican administration.

The one major point in favor of your argument that you didn't highlight is that most people using a Roth IRA assume that they'll make more money in the future than they do today, thus realizing a lower tax rate by paying taxes now than they would have in the future (even assuming tax rates stay constant).

In the last two years as the bull argument has been pummeled into reality by the surge in debt, the persistent failure of consumption growth to close the gap with GDP growth, and the sharp slowdown in overall growth, the mood abroad has turned increasingly bearish, to the point that many people are speaking about a China collapse and the horrible implications this will have for the rest of the world.

The first argument against refinancing goes that it doesn't make sense to refinance unless you're lowering your mortgage rate by one percentage point or more.

The government counters this argument by pointing out that businesses with an annual income of $ 150,000 CAD would be impacted the most.

At least you effectively invalidate your own argument early on by pointing out that it's based entirely on anecdote, and clearly anecdote informed through bias.

You raise a very good point that escapes most theists and that is while they argue against atheists for not believing in their god, they forget that most of those arguments could be applied to them by somebody of another religion.

Nor am I offended by the intellectually dishonest way in which you completely ignore my comments pointing out the fallacy of using such arguments.

This book has been my companion for eight years of Advent now, for some reason I find more solace in poetry during times of longing than in any well - delivered sermon or point - by - point systematic theology argument.

Reese pointed out a flaw in the bishops» argument that employers who feel their conscience was violated by providing contraception coverage should be exempted from the law.

Third, he / she posts this repeatedly, committing the fallacy of argumentum ad nauseam (i.e. argument to the point of disgust / by repitition).

II) to recognize the degree of validity inherent in the arguments which brought the original quest to an end by pointing to its impossibility and illegitimacy.

My point being that taking a member of the set of all things Jesus never explicitly taught on and positing, if only by implication, that his silence is an endorsement of that thing is not a valid foundation for making a sound argument.

As I believe was pointed out to you, this quote is in response to a teleological argument which is simply not supported by what we see in nature.

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.»

However, the proper starting point as established by the original argument from the contingent to the necessary is not «necessary being» as such, but a being whose existence is necessary.

[Noll also points to arguments put forth by some abolitionists that said that while the Bible never condemns slavery per se, it does condemn the kind of slavery practiced in the American South.

My point was that you were making logical fallacy by attacking your opponent instead of attacking their argument, which is called an Ad Hominem fallacy.

However, if you are happy to live and let live and primarily respond here to people who attack disbelief, or to point out the weakness of an argument made by a religionist, you are not necessarily an anti-theist.

Craig attempts to purge the paradox by pointing out that the kalam argument contends only «that an infinite number of events can not elapse, not that an infinite time can not elapse» (K 172).

He's developing an argument about the significance of the doctrine of the resurrection by discussing the logical consequence of denying it (verses 12 - 19), going on a very typical Pauline digression almost as if he's overcome by joy at the positive truth and has to triumphantly proclaim it (verses 20 - 28) then finally returning to drive home the practical point again (verses 29 - 35).

That's a great debate to have, and I personally believe that if you lay out Christian theology point by point and let each side objectively prove their «truth», the atheist ends up with the larger stack of chips, but that's not germane to the argument.

The stronger legal argument is to point out that they are being subsidized by the government using these special tax breaks.

And now suppose the best the atheologian can do by way of an antitheistic argument from evil is to point out that theists do not have an explanation for evil: then theism has nothing to fear from him.

On the basis of an argument that partially parallels my own up to this point, Boers concludes that in this passage «acts that are as such non-Christian, even though performed by Christians — they were not done in the name of Christ — are used to interpret the meaning of the confession of Christ» (6:72).

The role of the ontological argument in Hartshorne's philosophical theology should not be exaggerated by pointing to this argument as evidence of the anti-empirical character of Hartshorne's position, as a whole.

F. F. Bruce says that, «The date of his [Felix's] recall and replacement by Porcius Festus is disputed, but a change in the provincial coinage of Judaea attested for Nero's fifth year points to A.D. 59» [2] Conybeare and Howson lay out an extended argument for the replacement taking place in A.D. 60.

You have given one interpretation of moral relativism by one author; since relatavism inherently varies between view points, that isn't a conclusive argument.

By your argument, if there was 1 religious person that was skeptical and all others not, my point would still be invalid, talk about bs.

Patterson's failure on this point is particularly disappointing since he is in a position to offer a rich moral argument that ventures into territory that remains unexplored by both the moralistic stance of the right and the language of victimization on the left.

You are filling in any unanswered questions by science, at this point... using the «God of the Gaps» argument.

Even if the philosophical argument does not entirely persuade, we should not therefore conclude that there is no point to Taylor's insistence that we can be selves only by understanding ourselves in relation to some defining community.

Therefore, in light of this and Gunter's arguments, I see no irreconcilable, or even significant difference between Whitehead and Bergson on the point raised by Northrop regarding spatialization and distortion.

Capital punishment's lack of demonstrated superiority as a deterrent (the evidence for its effectiveness being at best mixed), the capacity of society to protect itself equally well by permanently imprisoning those who are currently being executed (which is possible at limited marginal cost, especially when one takes into account the cost of the extended trial procedures and interminable appeals and reviews which usually accompany capital punishment)-- all these points are important, but their utility is chiefly as rebuttal arguments in response to the empirically weak but emotionally strong claims made on behalf of capital punishment.

Instead of big arguments and point - by - point apologetics, instead of reacting to slights, imagined or legitimate, political or religious or relational, I long to get on with my Father's business, to live into freedom in my real walking - around life, and I pray there's an invitation in there somewhere.

However, although in the analysis of predicate denial («Socrates is not ill» equals «Socrates is well») that which it denies (illness) is replaced by something else (health), Reese's argument can be refuted by pointing out that in «Socrates does not exist» Socrates» physical existence is not replaced by something else.

This same work of Cicero's is cited by Augustine in book two of the City of God for its definition of a commonwealth, and again at a key point in the argument in book nineteen.

Although I agree with the basic premise of this argument, I would be remiss if I did not point out that the inroads science has made into those realms previously occupied by religion is far greater than just storm prediction.

To generalize this point, we should say that a properly constituted interreligious polemic should deploy as methods of argument and proof only tools that are recognized as authoritative and demonstrative by both sides.

This feeling was shared by many who pointed out flaws in Dawkins» arguments or, at the very least, questioned the certainty the scientist holds that all religion is a load of rubbish.

See, Johnny, that's exactly my point; I present people like you with well - developed arguments and, when you have run out logical avenues by which to respond, you turn immediately to the mantras of your faith — «jesus rose from the dead».

Instead of big arguments and point - by - point apologetics, instead of reacting to slights, imagined or legitimate, political or religious or relational, I long to get on with my Father's business.

The Qur» an opposed such superficial reasoning by pointing out the argument from nature, how the earth is at one time dead and dry and then living and fertile.

I'm going to rumble your entire argument by pointing out that Joseph isn't Jesus's biological dad.

Jeremy i am surprised you never countered my argument Up till now the above view has been my understanding however things change when the holy spirit speaks.He amazes me because its always new never old and it reveals why we often misunderstand scripture in the case of the woman caught in adultery.We see how she was condemned to die and by the grace of God Jesus came to her rescue that seems familar to all of us then when they were alone he said to her Go and sin no more.This is the point we misunderstand prior to there meeting it was all about her death when she encountered Jesus something incredible happened he turned a death situation into life situation so from our background as sinners we still in our thinking and understanding dwell in the darkness our minds are closed to the truth.In effect what Jesus was saying to her and us is chose life and do nt look back that is what he meant and that is the walk we need to live for him.That to me was a revelation it was always there but hidden.Does it change that we need discipline in the church that we need rules and guidelines for our actions no we still need those things.But does it change how we view non believers and even ourselves definitely its not about sin but its all about choosing life and living.He also revealed some other interesting things on salvation so i might mention those on the once saved always saved discussion.Jeremy just want to say i really appreciate your website because i have not really discussed issues like this and it really is making me press in to the Lord for answers to some of those really difficult questions.regards brentnz