Sentences with phrase «by its very nature something»

And information in its turn is by its very nature something general and abstract.

Not exact matches

Pace Donald Sherburne's solution (viz. ditching God altogether, positing the multiplicity of actual entities as the only source of a plural «order, meaning and value»), one possible response might run as follows: in the primordial nature there are no general (fixed a priori) standards of value, there is only the capacity to offer «guidelines» relative to already individuated worlds, This, or something very like it, seems to be the solution implicitly adopted by Christian when he says of the primordial nature:

The abstractness of information is something which, by its very nature, carries us outside the scheme of history.

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.

This is a strange way to honor Jesus, «who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped... but made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant.»

However, the situation by its very nature fails to make the same demands on the worshiper; hence something is lost in its fruits.

This is exactly what Jesus modeled — He «did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant» (Philippians 2:6 - 7 NIV).

What is needed, as Karl Mannheim pointed out years ago in Ideology and Utopia, is a knowledge of how to spot and deal with something which by its very nature eludes most forms of detection.

This is an incredibly difficult question to answer for a variety of reasons, most importantly because over the years our once vaunted «beautiful» style of play has become a shadow of it's former self, only to be replaced by a less than stellar «plug and play» mentality where players play out of position and adjustments / substitutions are rarely forthcoming before the 75th minute... if you look at our current players, very few would make sense in the traditional Wengerian system... at present, we don't have the personnel to move the ball quickly from deep - lying position, efficient one touch midfielders that can make the necessary through balls or the disciplined and pacey forwards to stretch defences into wide positions, without the aid of the backs coming up into the final 3rd, so that we can attack the defensive lanes in the same clinical fashion we did years ago... on this current squad, we have only 1 central defender on staf, Mustafi, who seems to have any prowess in the offensive zone or who can even pass two zones through so that we can advance play quickly out of our own end (I have seen some inklings that suggest Holding might have some offensive qualities but too early to tell)... unfortunately Mustafi has a tendency to get himself in trouble when he gets overly aggressive on the ball... from our backs out wide, we've seen pace from the likes of Bellerin and Gibbs and the spirited albeit offensively stunted play of Monreal, but none of these players possess the skill - set required in the offensive zone for the new Wenger scheme which requires deft touches, timely runs to the baseline and consistent crossing, especially when Giroud was playing and his ratio of scored goals per clear chances was relatively low (better last year though)... obviously I like Bellerin's future prospects, as you can't teach pace, but I do worry that he regressed last season, which was obvious to Wenger because there was no way he would have used Ox as the right side wing - back so often knowing that Barcelona could come calling in the off - season, if he thought otherwise... as for our midfielders, not a single one, minus the more confident Xhaka I watched played for the Swiss national team a couple years ago, who truly makes sense under the traditional Wenger model... Ramsey holds onto the ball too long, gives the ball away cheaply far too often and abandons his defensive responsibilities on a regular basis (doesn't score enough recently to justify): that being said, I've always thought he does possess a little something special, unfortunately he thinks so too... Xhaka is a little too slow to ever boss the midfield and he tends to telegraph his one true strength, his long ball play: although I must admit he did get a bit better during some points in the latter part of last season... it always made me wonder why whenever he played with Coq Wenger always seemed to play Francis in a more advanced role on the pitch... as for Coq, he is way too reckless at the wrong times and has exhibited little offensive prowess yet finds himself in and around the box far too often... let's face it Wenger was ready to throw him in the trash heap when injuries forced him to use Francis and then he had the nerve to act like this was all part of a bigger Wenger constructed plan... he like Ramsey, Xhaka and Elneny don't offer the skills necessary to satisfy the quick transitory nature of our old offensive scheme or the stout defensive mindset needed to protect the defensive zone so that our offensive players can remain aggressive in the final third... on the front end, we have Ozil, a player of immense skill but stunted by his physical demeanor that tends to offend, the fact that he's been played out of position far too many times since arriving and that the players in front of him, minus Sanchez, make little to no sense considering what he has to offer (especially Giroud); just think about the quick counter-attack offence in Real or the space and protection he receives in the German National team's midfield, where teams couldn't afford to focus too heavily on one individual... this player was a passing «specialist» long before he arrived in North London, so only an arrogant or ignorant individual would try to reinvent the wheel and / or not surround such a talent with the necessary components... in regards to Ox, Walcott and Welbeck, although they all possess serious talents I see them in large part as headless chickens who are on the injury table too much, lack the necessary first - touch and / or lack the finishing flair to warrant their inclusion in a regular starting eleven; I would say that, of the 3, Ox showed the most upside once we went to a back 3, but even he became a bit too consumed by his pending contract talks before the season ended and that concerned me a bit... if I had to choose one of those 3 players to stay on it would be Ox due to his potential as a plausible alternative to Bellerin in that wing - back position should we continue to use that formation... in Sanchez, we get one of the most committed skill players we've seen on this squad for some years but that could all change soon, if it hasn't already of course... strangely enough, even he doesn't make sense given the constructs of the original Wenger offensive model because he holds onto the ball too long and he will give the ball up a little too often in the offensive zone... a fact that is largely forgotten due to his infectious energy and the fact that the numbers he has achieved seem to justify the means... finally, and in many ways most crucially, Giroud, there is nothing about this team or the offensive system that Wenger has traditionally employed that would even suggest such a player would make sense as a starter... too slow, too inefficient and way too easily dispossessed... once again, I think he has some special skills and, at times, has showed some world - class qualities but he's lack of mobility is an albatross around the necks of our offence... so when you ask who would be our best starting 11, I don't have a clue because of the 5 or 6 players that truly deserve a place in this side, 1 just arrived, 3 aren't under contract beyond 2018 and the other was just sold to Juve... man, this is theraputic because following this team is like an addiction to heroin without the benefits

Even for developing new technology, if you really want to do something new, then by its very nature future technology can not be imagined.

My brain had been a swirl trying desperately to fix something that was, by its very nature, broken.

In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.

Despite Thomas Pynchon's knack for vivid, cinematic language and his own avowed love of film, his novels haven't exactly proved easy to adapt for the big screen, primarily because they're so densely constructed that any adaptation would be, by its very nature, a dumbing down — and even then you'd still run the risk of ending up with something completely incomprehensible.

Something about this film feels very clunky, as it moves into its second half it drops much of the sexual nature of its interesting but flawed opening and focuses instead on the actual nature of this heist, using a non-linear sequence that, whilst amusing enough, tends to sap almost all of the tension by virtue of its retrospective nature.

But what happens when that student's voice sounds like something that has been produced by a system that, by its very nature, wants to deny authenticity of experience?

This makes the 2015 S - Class coupe almost by its very nature a luxury item, which Mercedes - Benz design chief Gorden Wagener characterizes as «something you don't really need, but you really want.»

You see, by their very nature, credit cards become a crutch when we want something that we can not afford.

By their very nature, CDs aren't something that require constant attention, poking, and prodding.

Border Collies are an all - round sweet dog, usually very soft in nature, but are highly driven by the chase of a ball or something that moves quickly.

By its very nature, Etrian Odyssey has always been something of an acquired taste.

Abstract expressionism, by its nature, is an individual response to something specific — an experience, a person, a memory, a literary work, the season, the time of day: «You can paint a cubist painting by formula and it might not be a very good cubist painting, but you can not paint an abstract expressionist by formula.»

«Here is something that by its very nature should be interesting to huge numbers of people and we want to make it available to them.

When we had our Nature correspondence, Mann hyperventilated about us doing something VERY VERY WRONG in our calculation of verification statistics, by missing this strange and undocumented splicing procedure.

Boating also has some intrinsic risks by its very nature, so it is better to be insured than face considerable costs if something goes wrong on the water.

By its very nature, negotiating relies on both parties giving up something in order to get something.

The Supreme Court did not define what «egregious fault» means other than to say it is something more than ordinary fault, defining it loosely as a term of art that requires not simply more, or even more public acts of marital indiscretion, but acts that by their very nature, are different in kind than ordinary fault that breaks up a marriage.

It is something that we all do by our very nature as social beings; it's called «gossip», and many like to hear it, so you are not alone.