Sentences with phrase «book argues for»

Written as a Platonic dialogue, which I found off - putting, the book argues for two incompatible coherent sets — she calls them syndromes — of moral values that govern work: the guardian syndrome and the commercial syndrome.

The book argues for «citizen scientists,» and shows how young people throughout North America are collecting data to help describe our changing planet.

In fact, later in the book he argues for a long - term alpha value of about 3.0 W / m ^ 2 / °C, indicating a weak positive feedback, rather than a strongly negative one.

Focusing on Philip Guston's mature production in abstraction and his later figuration, this book argues for Guston as a consistent artist whose generic shift in the late 60s, from Monet - like abstract hatchings to the cartoonish forms of his final decade and a half, reminded artists everywhere that courage is what it's all about.

The book argues for capital controls, but those controls often create incentives for greater corruption.

The book argues for a comprehensive approach to redesigning education to fit students» needs.

My desk is cluttered with books arguing for a more compassionate and inclusive way forward.

A traffic expert writes a book arguing for congestion pricing — the more commuter - friendly version of our current gas - price woes.

TERRY MOE MADE his name in the early 1990s when, with John Chubb, he co-authored a much - discussed book arguing for a system of publicly - funded private school vouchers.

This book marries good rhetoric with creative fun: a comic book arguing for the place of comics as fine art.

I've been critical of books arguing for the «1000 Best Interview Questions» for years.

Not exact matches

Malcolm Gladwell set off a mania for practice a few years ago with his book Outliers, in which he argued that to become truly excellent at any skill, you need 10,000 hours of deliberate practice — that's six hours a day, six days a week, over six years of simply sticking with it.

The book argues that most of us are not as creative as we have the potential to be and, thankfully for the time starved business owner, living up to our full creative potential doesn't necessarily mean locking yourself in a practice room for around a decade.

In his book The World in 2050: Four Forces Shaping Civilization's Northern Future, Laurence Smith, a professor of geography and earth and space sciences at UCLA, argues that we're about to see a productivity and culture boom in the north, driven by climate change, shifting demographics, globalization and the hunt for natural resources.

Poundstone's book argues that this answer, however intuitive, is wrong (for the right answer, click here).

In «It's not complicated,» an article published in the RMA Journal last March that will be turned into a full - length book due for release next year, Nason argues that the ongoing troubles in financial markets are in fact more akin to a complex problem.

His latest book, The Reciprocity Advantage: A New Way to Partner for Innovation and Growth (written with Karl Ronn), argues that businesses can gain a competitive advantage by sharing assets and forming collaborative relationships.

By not entering these lucrative fields, women are «setting themselves up for a lifetime of inequity before they even crack open a text book,» argues Berger.

Wright has argued in several books that expanding morality played a central role in human evolution, creating the framework for larger, more cohesive, and more powerful societies.

Deborah Rhode, a Stanford law professor and leading scholar on legal ethics, argues in her book, Pro Bono in Principle and in Practice (2005), that lawyers bear an ethical duty to ameliorate «their monopoly's deleterious effects» by doing more pro bono work for those who are disenfranchised.

4In fact, one book, Dow 36,000, which was published in 1999 shortly before the stock market peaked, argued that «fair value» for the Dow Jones Industrial Average should be 36,000 because the appropriate risk premium for the equity market versus Treasury bonds should be zero.

While some rights holders have argued that the standard for a substantial is very low (the National Post recently argued in a case that «even the reproduction of a small number of words in a newspaper article can be an impermissible reproduction»), the Copyright Board says that its preliminary view is that «copying of a few pages or a small percentage from a book that is not a collection of short works, such as poems, is not substantial.»

We argue in a forthcoming book that most companies with sustainable growth share attitudes and behaviors: (1) They view themselves as business insurgents, fighting in behalf of underserved customers; (2) they have an obsession with the front line, where the business meets the customer; and (3) they foster a mindset that includes a deep sense of responsibility for how resources are used and for long - term results.

Matt Ridley, for example, in his recent book, The Rational Optimist, argues that the oil sands are a much more sane solution to current energy needs than things like wind (too unreliable and too little output) and biofuels (wasteful use of land).

My recollection is by this point in the book he'd had to substitute a proxy scaled market, and argue for the applicability of the measures over short time scales, so this suggests to me a major re-jig of my portfolio would be premature.

In the book, Bremmer argues that disaffected voters are responsible for the rise of populists like Donald Trump, who won the U.S. presidency by promoting anti-establishment, anti-immigrant and anti-globalist sentiments.

In his new book, he argues that a guaranteed income for people in the U.S. could be financed by the one percent — a group that includes Hughes himself.

I'm currently laying the groundwork for a book on American liberty, in which I argue there are five fundamental conceptions of it, one of which is the «economic individualist» liberty....

The principal burden of Levy's book is to show that Wycliffe and Hus were entirely conventional in the ways that they argued for their theological positions.

I will not argue whether or not the bible is the word of a god translated by man, my only question is, why would you follow a book that supports and idolizes a single deity who seems to have intentions of converting the world to his worship alone (for if there are no other gods, why then would Yahweh require that you «hold no other gods above him» — he just confirmed their existance) when said deity's followers have proven that their purpose in life is to grind any opposition to their «holy law» into dust?

As Todd Brenneman argues in his recent book, Homespun Gospel: The Triumph of Sentimentality in Contemporary American Evangelicalism, sentimentality may be a defining characteristic of religious life for many Americans, and so most readers in the dominant Evangelical culture, outside a few hip and urban churches, are more likely to encounter the treacly poetry of Ruth Bell Graham than the spiritually searing work of R. S. Thomas or T. S. Eliot.

In True and False Reform in the Church (a seminal 1950 work disappointingly never mentioned in any of the books under review), the Catholic theologian Yves Cougar argued that the first condition for genuine church reform was charity — caritas, that selfless, unsentimental love that wills only the good of the other.

Or on Yom Kippur, draw on conjecture to argue that the Book of Life is for fools?

Her book Metaphor and Religious Language (Oxford University Press) argues for taking biblical metaphors seriously and for not translating them into some other idiom.

Or is this one of those forums for people who merely love to discuss religion, sort of like people who love to discuss carpentry, read books on carpentry, and argue carpentry, but have never made anything in their lives?

Both are weighty issues that deal explicitly with «high cosmic justice,» so if he argues that a government overreaches its authority to execute justice by attempting to «balance the books of the universe» in repaying blood with blood, then does that mean there can never be any just criteria for one nation to retaliate against another after an unprovoked attack» an attack that in essence would repay blood with blood?

To the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, thanks for the rhythm of exile and return, for teaching us how to argue and for the biblical book of Ecclesiastes (Oh, and Bob Dylan and Woody Allen, of course).

The pope didn't actually mention the world - famous scientist, who argues in a book published last month that the laws of physics show there is no need for a supreme... \

As I have argued in a previous book, Evangelicals at an Impasse: Biblical Authority in Practice, there is no set procedure or program for controlling this theological dialogue.

Felix Rocquain argued in an 1878 book, The Revolutionary Spirit Before the Revolution, 1715 - 1789, that one should not turn to the writings of Montesquieu, Locke, Rousseau, Voltaire, etc., and to the ideals of «liberty, equality, fraternity» for an explanation of what drove Frenchmen to revolution.

Underlying the book is the view that as people believe in moral truths, that is the opening to argue for the theistic foundation for such views.

In a recent book, Our Mathematical Universe: My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality, Max Tegmark, a physics professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, argues that the idea of equivalence means that the universe is a mathematical structure rather than a reality merely describable by mathematics.

As late as the 16th century Martin Luther the «father of the Protestant Reformation» was still arguing for the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation to be dropped from the New Testament altogether because he perceived them to go against some of the doctrines he was promoting.

Read those books and your thoughts are likely to be more clear and your words more coherent, no matter if you argue for or against the existence of God.

After all, Christians worshiped Jesus for several centuries before any of them thought to argue that God created the world out of nothing, and Augustine found the «books of the Platonists» so convincing mainly because the Manichaeans made such a muddle of their version of materialism.

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.

Augustine snatched up the «book of the Apostle» he had been reading, opened it, and read in silence the passage on which his eyes first lighted: «Not in dissipation or drunkenness, nor in debauchery and lewdness, nor in arguing and jealousy; but put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh or for the gratification of your desires» (Rom.

In fact, Dawkins book was called the BLIND watchmaker for that very fact, as he argues the OPPOSITE... that in fact the design shows clear evidence of natural selection, not of a creator.

In his book Man as Male and Female (Eerdmans, 1975), Jewett argues for an egalitarian male / female relationship by calling for distinctions (within the New Testament materials themselves) between Paul the former rabbi and Paul the apostle, or between Paul's perception of the truth and his implementation of it in the first century.

Fox - Genovese complains that «many scholars project upon the past» their own views but falls prey to the same accusation, Neither book offers a history of marriage, but both use ideological interpretations of history and nature to argue for the norm of heterosexual marriage.