Sentences with phrase «best of human action»

Just as conversation draws out the best of human ideas, trust and respect draw out the best of human action.

Not exact matches

Economists tell us that quitting is actually often the smart move and that while humans have a natural tendency to avoid losing sunk costs (otherwise known «throwing good money after bad»), cutting your losses is frequently the better course of action.

If you want to learn how to read the «graphic representation» of human psychology on the charts as mentioned by Al Weiss in his quote above, as well as more about the principles discussed today, checkout my price action trading course and traders community.

In his examination of personal acts, Wojtyla seeks to describe the complex of elements issuing forth in human actions, and also to ask the further question about the good towards which such actions must tend.

The essence of all religions is to be good and do good but sometimes people get carried away by human frailty that results in undesirable actions.

The author, professor of systematic theology at St. John's Seminary in Brighton, Massachusetts, does a splendid job of introducing the series, addressing such topics as natural law, principles of human action, the determination of the moral good, and the connection between virtues, gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the Beatitudes.

everything is made up of atoms (don't believe me do some research) its the different variables of heat and light and things like that that cause different reactions to make different things and these things when they interact can create something completely different and you and slowly the process of mitosis or miosis starts to work and form stuff hell i learnt that in high school and it was a catholic one at that a millions of years ago i bet the universe was completely different and had things in it that our minds cant even imagine that have since changed over time from action and reaction to what we have today and in another million years who knows with all the different gases we pump into the air and the weather getting more intense on both ends of the scale life as we know it will be different the human race will have to evolve to survive and will probibly form into a slightly different species hell maybe well evolve into 2 different species like in the movie time machine

The Quranic texts do not give in detail the code of laws regulating dealings — human actions — but they give the general principles which guide people to perfection, to a life of harmony — to an inner harmony between man's appetites and his spiritual desires, to harmony between man and the natural world, and to a harmony between individuals as well as a harmony with the society in which men live.

It is at best a prolegomenon which seeks to suggest an element in the ministry of Jesus that gives it a constitutive as distinct from an exemplary character, that makes it the supreme action of all history (action that is fully and entirely human, yet unique), action which crowns a ministry in which the ambiguities of human life are progressively articulated, being action in which their burden is endured à l'outrance.

This is in fact a resurgence in other terms and with other objectives in view — of the error always committed by Christians who intervene in the sphere of human actions to justify them and to testify that in the end man has good reason for doing what he does.

In the strange and bewildering complex of human willing and action, God moves through lure and attraction to bring the greatest good out of the confusion of human events.

If you hold that no human death came before sinfulness, then it depends on what you call human (there is a gradation of forms leading up to the modern human skeleton in the fossil record, as well as the overwhelming genetic evidence that we arose through an evolutionary process) and what you consider sin (i.e. when did we become accountable to God for our actions?).

Well, not as we might want or expect, but the almost unbelievable set of circumstances and human actions all point to a director behind the scenes.

The failures and vast human costs of modern «salvation myths» are now well known, as is the capacity of democratic capitalism to raise up the poor, protect human rights, and allow for unprecedented freedom of thought and action.

Rorty feels that philosophy should not be thought of as a foundation for education or politics; on the contrary, he insists that grounding social and political action on philosophical theories of human nature has done more harm than good.

A priori (by «dichotomic» analysis of the various outlets theoretically offered to our freedom of action) as well as a posteriori (by classification of the various human attitudes in fact observable around us), three alternatives, together forming a logically connected sequence, seem to express and exhaust all the possibilities open to our assessment and choice as we contemplate the future of Mankind: a) pessimism or optimism; b) the optimism of withdrawal or the optimism of evolution; c) evolution in terms of the many or of the unit.

I'm not saying those Christians are intentionally not good, but it's a known trait of humans (ask any insurance company) that they are less careful when they are protected against negative consequences of their actions.

What matters here is that the total witness found in the Gospels, as well as in the epistles of Paul, John, and others, is to an activity of God in human existence and through a human activity, through which «newness of life» has been known; God has been seen as sheer Love - in - action, and human existence has been given meaning and value as a potential agency for divine Love in the world and in human affairs.

They did not change human actions or attitudes in any problem of collective behavior by a hair's breadth, though they may well have helped to preserve private amenities and to assuage individual frustrations.

By extension every good deed, every struggle for justice and deliverance from oppression, every effort to care for and show concern about those who are in need, will be not merely a reflection of the divine mercy and righteousness but also an instrument for the bringing about of just such shalom or «abundance of life» for God's human children, So one might go on, almost without ceasing, to show that response in faith to the action of God in this vivid moment has its implications and applications for the whole range of human life and experience.

But Jesus is divine as well as human — he through whom the universe was created and is sustained determines the hour of action solely on his own authority.

Both of these approaches negate our responsibility for our own actions and ignore the reality of human will and our ability to do good or evil.

Out of the quest of social groups for an understanding of the connection between specific beliefs and actions, and the reactions of the universe, as well as the meaning of human salvation, religion grows and develops.

And if the spiritual folk eventually choose «a commitment to the Enlightenment ideal of human - based knowledge, reason and action,» even better.

Exalting human rights as the epitome of social responsibility short - circuits collective judgment and stymies action for the sake of the common good.

Hence, they deal with the difference a better understanding of the kingdom might make in strengthening hope and courage, overcoming divisive forms of polarization in the churches, and redirecting action toward greater human good.

The acceptance of the importance of political action and the recognition of the essential equality of all human beings can be understood best against the background of such Christian influences.

God does not erase the distinction between good and evil in history because of the moral ambiguity of all human actions.

Likewise, it is one thing to affirm that the sole standards of moral conduct are those implicit in human action itself, and quite another thing to deny with the humanist that our actions realize any will to good beyond the merely human and either require or admit of a transcendent justification.

It is the best human antidote to the irreversibility of action.

It may seem that to emphasize the pervasive operation of the Holy Spirit, as well as to stress the Spirit's focal action in the life of Jesus and its consequences, will in the end reduce men and women to mere automatons used by God with no respect for their freedom, their dignity, and their own responsible decisions, without any personal or social human contribution to the process.

The supreme importance of Christ is best seen when he is viewed as the living creative center of the supremely important event of human history, and also that the «nature» of Christ is most truly known under that same category: God's action is the divine nature of Christ.

People do wrong things regardless of faith... it mostly because greediness, power and so on... very few among the mankind fear Lord The Almighty which includes Muslims as well... and which is why today we see these actions are being done by human in everywhere... as a matter of fact its been there since the beginning of mankind... now we have been blessed with media and anything happens, next minute we can see it and sometimes we see what the media wants us to see...

What we are trying to say is that his supreme importance is best seen when he is viewed as the living creative center of the supremely important event of human history, and also that the «nature» of Christ is most truly known under that same category: God's action is the divine nature of Christ.

Occasionally, Hartshorne even speaks of a «besouled body,» but by such language he means only the probability of certain modes of action and experience that embody a given personality's characteristic traits.11 Consequently, he suggests that, when a person's body goes into a deep, dreamless sleep, the soul loses its actuality, only to regain it when the person awakens.12 Understandably, therefore, he disregards as inapplicable to his own view Gilbert Ryle's well - known caricature of Cartesian anthropological dualism as «the dogma of the Ghost in the Machine» — especially since Hartshorne denies that the human body is a «machine» in any materialistic, mechanical sense.13

The other element in the problem consists in the apparent silence of Jesus on particular concrete questions of conduct and on the issue of what is better and what is worse in situations where, given human finitude and sin and a fallen, distorted world, perfect action is not possible.

It has long been held that sexual virtue requires chastity and marriage, that the reproductive flourishing of human beings is best accomplished by spouses committed to one another and to their children, and that actions which frustrate this flourishing — adultery, abandonment, and so on — are for that reason both irrational and immoral.

Here, the idea is not that the person in authority knows better than other people, but that certain kinds of human activity require the coordinated action of many human beings, and the easiest way (often the only practical way) to get such coordination is to set up one person to give directions to others.

Traditional Marxism demanded a lot of its followers and utilitarianism demand complex attention to human suffering and actions that are counter personal good.

Reinhold stresses not the contrast between the good of the whole and defeat of the self - assertive individual parts, but rather the gap between the ideal and actuality — between the absolute ethical ideals that humans conceive and the limited goals that can actually be achieved by collective action.

Against H. Richard's emphasis on human finitude and dependence, Reinhold's awareness of human freedom and the Christian's political responsibility seems better to acknowledge the creative and liberating possibilities of moral action and of God's work in history.

In a recent interview with the Washington Post (part of their ominously titled «Voices of Power» series), Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius discussed Archbishop Joseph Naumann's request that she not present herself for communion because of her public support for legalised abortion: «Well, it was one of the most painful things I have ever experienced in my life, and I am a firm believer in the separation of church and state, and I feel that my actions as a parishioner are different than my actions as a public official and that the people who elected me in Kansas had a right to expect me to uphold their rights and their beliefs even if they did not have the same religious beliefs that I had.

He clarified the ethical demands of a God - centered life by applying obedient love or agape to all human situations, both personal and social, and insisted this included the earthly as well as the eternal, and required our best actions amid the relativities of the present world.

In any kind of hard work (especially work that takes place in public and often under considerable pressure), it is our natural human tendency to attend primarily to our own performance, to our own action, to what we ourselves are doing, to how well we are performing — and, perhaps especially, to how other people think we are doing.

As necessary as its analysis of the self as existence still seems to me to be to any anthropological reflection, the value of this analysis as well as its limitations are more likely to be justly appreciated when it is viewed together with the other post-Hegelian philosophies of human activity that Richard J. Bernstein has so ably discussed in his book, Praxis and Action.

And against Hume as well as Dewey, Whitehead insists that human experience includes the intuition of eternal ideals functioning as objective, yet individualized, standards for action: «There are experiences of ideals... entertained, of ideals aimed at, of ideals achieved, of ideals defaced....

Personal action for a better world is the discernable manifestation of the divine in the human.

The system of checks and balances they built in the Constitution was formed not only by the recognition that good citizens may differ over the proper course of action, but also, at least in part, by the Biblical understanding of humans as fallible and prone to wrong - doing, and therefore frequently in need of some healthy opposition from their fellows.

We have learned from the Enlightenment and its Marxist negative image some bad lessons: a self - righteous view of human nature, individual or collective, a good - evil dichotomy in our judgment on others and in our social action, a shallow sense of human community, and an exaggerated confidence in the power of human beings to manage and control their own destinies.

But perhaps I have not sufficiently stressed still another important matter, namely, that in all human decisions, and the actions that are consequent upon them, there is likely to be serious distortion of, or a sadly imperfect response to, the possibilities for good.