Sentences with phrase «as human approach»

But world changed a lot due to modernization of technology as well as human approach, as a product of which demanding proficient have started hunt for adore companion on web.

Not exact matches

These infringements don't go over well, as humans are biologically programmed to feel threatened when approached too closely.

We're humans, we need a personal approach that is fully cognizant of what happens outside of work (also known as — the important stuff like the birth of a child or buying a new car).

Then they tested their «impulsive approach tendencies» toward men (that is, their latent attraction to them) in a task that involved tapping keyboard keys rapidly, to move an on - screen manikin - a basic drawing of a human figure - as quickly as possible in a specified direction.

This is not to dismiss or marginalize the importance of civil and political rights such as freedom of expression and religion, but rather to adopt an integrated approach recognizing that all internationally recognized human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated.

Tim Cook, Apple's chief executive, has emerged as a prominent critic of Facebook's approach to making money from user data, calling user privacy a «human right.»

This movement called for a more user - centered approach, or also commonly referred to as human - centered, to designing products, software, digital interactions, and design concepts.

Buyer persona development, as a disciplined human - centered approach, will continue to play an integral role in how companies can humanize their brand and content.

It certainly may try, and even if it hits on the truth of the matter, since the human is a Mystery unto Itself (and set within the context of Ultimate Mystery), are we not left with a great many perspectives on the matter, which might indicate that a more tentative approach may be the best way to go regarding the question of the OP, so as to make room for those who are just as caught up in the Mystery as we ourselves are?

One need merely approach it with an open mind to see that its authors were no mere robots, but human beings endowed with their own particular insights, virtues, customs, faith, and — as with all people — their own misconceptions and misunderstandings.

This means not only that we are approaching the texts as fully human productions — I point out that statements of divine inspiration are statements concerning ultimate origin and authority, not method of composition - but even more that we take seriously that aspect of literature of most interest to cultural anthropologists: how it gives symbolic expression to human experience.

I am concerned here to plead that such people should examine the religious approach de novo, and be prepared to give such a widespread human phenomenon as religion their serious attention.

If someone were to approach you today and propose the concept of religion as it has existed throughout human history, you'd laugh at them for having such a silly idea.

We think of nature as inert stuff without any life of its own; we approach it merely as a tool to achieve human ends.

A central idea in Burke's approach to rhetoric is the principle of identification, which may be understood as the attempt to overcome human division through the establishment of some common ground.

The images that usually form our approach to preaching as communication blind us to the many permutations that the study of human communication has recently taken.

On page 15 of «The Interpreters Bible», Dr. Herbert F. Farmer, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge University wrote about the indispensability of the texts, their importance and how the «truth» of them should be approached, after an exposition of the traditional conservative Christian view of person - hood, sin and the salvific actions of Jesus (aka Yeshua ben Josef), known as «the Christ» in human history.

As C. S. Lewis pointed out in his reflections on the Hegelian versus the Christian approach to history, history does have an ultimate telos, but that is known to God alone and therefore any human attempt to explain it fully is doomed to failure.

But she approached her boss as a human being to talk it over anyway, and he approached her as a tool, useful until it's not.

The next thing to say is that, as the believer, theologian, and preacher that I am, I read Scripture in the way followed before me by Chrysostom (regularly), Augustine (fitfully), and all Western professional exegetes since Colet, Luther, and Calvin that is, I approach the books as human documents produced by people of like passions with myself.

We must adopt the critical approach and seek reality, here as well, by asking ourselves what human relation to real events this could have been which led gradually, along many by - paths and by way of many metamorphoses, from mouth to ear, from one memory to another, and from dream to dream, until it grew into the written account we have read.

A realistic appraisal of human nature leads to a view of democracy as a dyke against the flood of self - interest, as a means of approaching basic justice in relationships between people who are by nature inclined toward injustice because they look first to their own advantage.

This subject can be reflected in terms of the overall approach of the Church to human and social life, and in relation to the specific phenomenon as it has developed during the 1990s, after the fall of the soviet Empire.

We may dismiss these young people as «idealistic», even when at the same time they are criticized for being too «realistic» in (say) their approach to human relations, especially in sexual matters.

It is a claim that God's grace is mediated through the material: in the incarnation, God became human flesh and dwelt among us; in the Passion, it was Christ's body that was crucified; in the Eucharist, Christ is truly present in the elements of bread and wine; as we partake of these elements, approaching the altar with our bodies, eating and drinking, we become the very body of Christ; and in the eschaton, it is this very materiality of creation that God will transform and glorify.

But «a moral discussion is inconclusive and even trivial, if it leaves out the question of its application,» as Gregory Vlastos has said.13 In order to be as specific as possible about this approach to Christian social philosophy I shall outline in arbitrary fashion five general principles which I suggest can be supported by the evidence of human experience as being necessary guides to the conditions under which the Good Society can grow.

This optimistic approach to man's virtue and the problem of evil expresses itself philosophically as the idea of progress in history.17 The empirical method of modern culture has been successful in understanding nature; but, when applied to an understanding of human nature, it was blind to some obvious facts about human nature that simpler cultures apprehended by the wisdom of common sense.

In proportion as God is exalted in transcendent holiness and power, he is removed from human approach.

«This approach undermines organ donation as a genuine gift and goes against the consensus that human beings have autonomy over their own bodies.»

The exceptional powers of sympathetic imagination and of literary expression possessed by this evangelist make his work the most effective of all as a human and, so to speak, secular approach to the «Jesus of History,» but it does not lie on the main classical line of development from the apostolic Preaching.

THE THEOLOGY WHICH CAN BEST SERVE THE CHURCH IN ITS MINISTRY TO THE SOCIETY OF THE FUTURE WILL TAKE THE FORM OF CHRISTIAN BIOPOLITICS — A UTOPIAN APPROACH TO THE ORGANIZATION OF THE QUEST FOR A DESIRABLE FUTURE, WHICH TAKES AS ITS CENTRAL THEME THE FULFILLMENT OF LIFE WITHIN THE TOTALITY OF THE NATURAL, SOCIAL, AND TECHNOLOGICAL SETTINGS OF HUMAN EXISTENCE.

They might practice viewing everyone concerned as human beings who are made in God's image, and are therefore to be treated with respect, courtesy, and an approach that's neither too familiar nor too distant.»

Except human nature tends to favor Rands approach as a default.

The living community which has once made a corporate response to the divine revelation does so with an ideology of its own, and it approaches each new revelatory event with an ideology which is as human in its origin and nature as any body of human thought can be.

Unlike Monod's view, this approach treats humans as necessary, but reduces them to computerized entities, thus diminishing the richness and value of human life.

Or, to put it another way, is not mythology an essential element in human thought, and is it not therefore just as valid an approach to reality as, e.g. that of natural science?

Perhaps aspects of them, such as their ethical implications, may be compared, but as total approaches to mystery, to human existence, and to the world, it makes little sense to say that one is clearly better than another.

In the meantime, the presence of the spirit of Christ and the «Christian phylum» (Teilhard) in this history make history, as such, always influenced by the partial realization of atonement, and the vision of fully realized divine - human unanimity which history approaches as a limit.

The collective right to peace demands such a basic approach — in fact and law — that we can no longer afford to regard it merely as a sentimental concept or to confine it to an intellectual category of human rights.

His approach takes seriously the «human dimension» of Scripture and sees it not as an unhappy condescension but as a mark of God's love and of how far He will stoop to commune with His people.

The fourth category of systemic approaches includes all those which aim at making larger, non-face-to-face systems such as governments, institutions, and economic and legal systems more responsive to the real needs of people and therefore more supportive of human development.

Thus, as I see it, the options which remain are in fact two: either an existentialist approach or a «process thought» approach, since the «secular» theology in itself does nothing more than deny a particular kind of metaphysic and leaves us open to the possibility of interpreting the secular world, and everything else in human experience, in some appropriate manner.

Once again we find in cosmological approaches such as Whitehead's and Berry's an acknowledgment of the pervasive creativity of nature, whereas existentialist and psychologically based theologies tend to confine creativity to humans (and God) alone.13

This fifth approach is implied in the earlier suggestion that the scientist responds as a free person to a total situation which includes God, human needs, and technical data.

But, unlike the first approach, which viewed all religions through the window of the Jewish - Christian tradition, Wach insisted that Judaism and Christianity alike must be seen as parts of the «whole» religious experience of the human race.

With the approach of Updike's 50th birthday, and with the publication of this his 25th book, it is time to offer an assessment of his work as a whole: to trace his natively Lutheran vision of life as cast by God into an indissoluble ambiguity, to examine his treatment of death and sex as the two phenomena wherein the human contradiction is most sharply focused, to set this new novel in relation to the earlier «Rabbit» books, and to determine what is religiously troubling and compelling about Updike's art.

As we approach the democratic age, Tocqueville says, human experience will bifurcate: On the one hand, man will become more and more isolated; on the other hand, he will look to the one visible power that remains» the state» for his security and sustenance.

It animated the vibrant pontificate of Pope St. John Paul II, from his anticommunist writings on human freedom in its relationship to truth, to assertions of universal human dignity in the face of the culture of death, as well as in his approaches to ecumenism and interreligious dialogue.

Such an approach does not ignore the human context, but sees it through the Spirit as the object of a retrospective glance.

Instead of thinking of the environmental impact of humans as a long list of components, we get a much better picture from a synoptic approach.