Sentences with phrase «certain ways of thinking»

As detailed in WestEd's brief, Teacher Learning: Your Link to Student Learning, a learning culture is fed when adults and students engage in certain ways of thinking and ways of working.

Other skills are useful to learn to develop certain ways of thinking.

It would seem that certain ways of thinking politically are more dangerous than others.

When we remember that the Son of David type of messianic thinking had a strongly political and nationalistic flavor, we can see why Jesus rejects certain ways of thinking about the Davidic descent of the Messiah.

The target is, rather, those forms of broader modern liberalism which have produced certain ways of thinking about faith and the church which can be found in both conservative and in so - called «liberal» churches.

So many times, leaders get stuck in a certain way of thinking and don't acknowledge a wide variety of different ways to attack an issue.

Their attempts to pressure you into a certain way of thinking is controlling and unfair.

Mindset is unchangeable: The first mistake people make is to believe that our mindset is unchangeable — that we are born with a certain way of thinking, a certain level of intelligence, and a pre-determined potential for success.

Music is often used in films to guide audiences towards a certain way of thinking.

Many seminars plant someone in the audience to guide the group toward a certain way of thinking.

Video gaming is a lifestyle and with that lifestyle comes a certain way of thinking and behaving, but what if some gamers have some embarrassing secrets they want to keep hidden?

Not exact matches

Here's the question for you to ask: If you think a certain way, are you around a bunch of people who think differently?

Zuckerberg said Thursday that «voters make decisions based on their lived experience,» continuing, «Part of what I think is going on here is people are trying to understand results of the election, but I do think that there is a certain profound lack of empathy in asserting that the only reason that some of them are voting the way they did is because they saw some fake news.

«I think the press is on the one hand filled with bravado, in a certain way, with a sense of mission, and good,» Remnick said.

These biases can be cognitive, illustrated by a tendency to think and act in a certain way or follow a rule of thumb.

«Think about it this way: Do you want to show your appreciation for somebody's skills and accomplishments, or for their ability to hold down a chair for a certain number of years?»

So you think it's OK to control the way certain people of your religion dress, act, think.

They may identify themselves as a certain faith, but a reasonable amount of logical thought will lead to the same conclusion: no religion is correct and there is no way to prove anything.

Atheists: I know many there are many people that practice religion just by fanaticism, I've seen many people in my opinion stupid (excuse the word) praying to saints hopping to solve their problems by repeating pre-made sentences over and over, but there are others different, I don't think Religion and Science need to be opposites, I believe in God, I'm Catholic and I have many reasons to believe in him, I don't think however that we should pray instead of looking for the cause and applying a solution, Atheists think they are smart because they focus on Science and technology instead of putting their faith in a God, I don't think God will solve our problems, i think he gave us the means to solve them by ourselves that's were God is, also I think that God created everything but not as a Magical thing but stablishing certain rules like Physics and Quimics etc. he's not an idiot and he knew how to make it so everything was on balance, he's the Scientist of Scientist the Mathematic of Mathematics, the Physician of Physicians, from the tiny little fact that a mosquito, an insect species needs to feed from blood from a completely different species, who created the mosquitos that way?

And don't forget all the victims of Christianity's own Jim Jones... I'm certain you and all you Christian Extremists are in your churches, always trying to find ways to brainwash everyone into committing suicide like Jim Jones and have plans to blow up buildings like Timothy McVeigh and think about as well as act upon your perverted thoughts by molesting young boys... don't you?

Well I'm sure there is no way you ant to prove that here on the blog but I'm equally certain that the next time you walk into a U.S. public classroom you'll have that thought in the back of your mind «I'm breaking the law»

Are these contracts to «represent» a company in a certain way taking away freedom of speech and thought and putting the companies which require them in danger of being insular and abusive?

Each contains certain characteristic categories of thought that determine the way in which its users organize their experience.

The only reason you are having those thoughts or thinking those words is because you thought I was a certain type of god, and I have not turned out to be that way.

Looked at that way, the essential content of revelation, or perhaps the very nature of God (whatever is the ultimate «subject matter» or «object» of the inquiry) dictates certain methods and movements of thought which, if followed, denominate the inquiry as «theology.»

I think for the most part you can't judge an entire group of people all together in a lump, however when most of them act a certain way and the way is contemptible behavior, I think it's time to take a deep look at it.

The pope's statement seems to have been a hastily conceived attempt to communicate a degree of relaxation in respect of certain aspects of Church teaching — overlooking that these hints would happily be passed on to the world by a media delighted to report that the pope had finally come around to their way of thinking.

In particular, the denial that epistemology is wholly prior to ontology; the denial that we can have an absolutely certain starting point; the idea that those elements of experience thought by most people to be primitive givens are in fact physiologically, personally, and socially constructed; the idea that all of our descriptions of our observations involve culturally conditioned interpretations; the idea that our interpretations, and the focus of our conscious attention, are conditioned by our purposes; the idea that the so - called scientific method does not guarantee neutral, purely objective, truths; and the idea that most of our ideas do not correspond to things beyond ourselves in any simple, straightforward way (for example, red as we see it does not exist in the «red brick» itself).

«I think if we change that step and really become students of each other's narratives and ask questions about why people perceive certain things in a certain way instead of jumping to judgment, then I think we'll be better equipped to have more diversity in local churches.»

Its an interesting and concerning that people can and do live in information silos (including me) and are kept their by leaders of institutional church who want them to think in certain ways like you must come to sunday church and made to feel guilty if they do nt.

If I suggest that a certain line of reasoning is disturbingly reminiscent of the Holocaust, I am not suggesting that those who think that way are morally equivalent to the perpetrators of the Holocaust.

But on the other hand, when in talking about sin one talks only of such sins, it is so easily forgotten that in a way it may be all right, humanly speaking, with respect to all such things up to a certain point, and yet the whole life may be sin, the well - known kind of sin: glittering vices, willfulness, which either spiritlessly or impudently continues to be or wills to be unaware in what an infinitely deeper sense a human self is morally under obligation to God with respect to every most secret wish and thought, with respect to quickness in comprehending and readiness to follow every hint of God as to what His will is for this self.

It is enough to provoke both laughter and tears — not only all these protestations about having understood and comprehended the highest thought, but also the virtuosity with which many know how to present it in abstracto, and in a certain sense quite correctly — it is enough to provoke both laughter and tears when one sees then that all this knowing and understanding exercises no influence upon the lives of these men, that their lives do not in the remotest way express what they have understood, but rather the contrary.

But this happens in two ways: first, by reason or intellect, insofar as our mind contains certain general first principles, known to us by the light of natural intelligence, by which we proceed rationaly in thinking and acting, and secondly by tightness of desire, moving us towards what is known to be good.

In a certain sense, the postmodern way of thinking frees the text from the burden of being private property, returning it to what Karl Krumbacher called the «literary communism» of the Middle Ages.

In his search for truth, Augustine was genuinely troubled by the Skeptics» arguments that one can be certain of nothing, and that careful thinking in no way provides a reliable guide to a wiser life.

I for one think he would have no problem in taking it down, possibly providing another alternative, or just being gracious of the fact that certain people prefer to grieve in certain ways.

Being an affective person means that you have the ability to influence another person's feelings, and way of thinking, for them to act and feel a certain way.

This summary of certain phases of the Pauline theology — a summary much too brief to do even scant justice to the power and majesty of Paul's thought — is necessary as a background for the fuller discussion, to which we now turn, of the way in which Paul interpreted the significance of the earthly life of Jesus as related to this saving act of God.

Why would you even begin to think that» I» would so over-generalize in such a way that to (quote you):» Linking the hate of certain violent groups with «all» muslims or immigrants everywhere is wrong.»

It's easy to get wrapped up in the worldly way of thinking that you need to perform a certain way in order to be pleasing to God.

CH: It's not necessary to be a philosopher to be practical, in certain basic animal and human ways — and that is why the world got on for a long time without much of what we now think of as philosophy.

To make the point he quotes Dawkins» own «perceptive» summary of Lot in The God Delusion: «If this dysfunctional family was the best that Sodom had to offer by way of morals, some might begin to feel a certain sympathy with God and his judicial brimstone» (Cheekily adding, «Well, Rabbi Dawkins, I think I'm very happy with that gloss!»)

Because of this divide, this «Christian» label we slap on art, we often think art made by Christians has to look or sound a certain way.

It's hard to give up certain doctrines or ways of thinking that you spent over 30 years believing to be true.

And... I can think of many reasons why certain group of people might not be here, (a ssuming for the moment that your question is accurate), How about... why would «gays» want to be on a belief blog where there are Christians who constantly claim they are an abomination and going to burn in hell, and they are not worthy of God's love, unless they «change their sinning ways.»

If we dismiss certain parts of the Bible because it does not suite our way of thinking we might aswell dismiss the whole lot.

A certain Laplacian cosmology having accustomed our minds to the idea that the phenomena of the dispersal of energy and the way of greatest probability» are the only ones physically possible, we instinctively recoil from the thought of a partial «lapse» of the Universe into Complexity.

There theology stands on one side and preaching on the I other, «as if preaching is something independent of theology and as if preaching is optional and only certain people do that, whereas I would think that having the words of faith on your lips is one of the ways to be a Christian.

I think this is a myth that we probably have had forever, but I think I really see it with this younger generation, where we have taught them «Listen to your heart; expect your job to feel a certain way... find your mission, find your why and then go live out of it.»