Sentences with phrase «changing theories about»

Not exact matches

He has a theory about why the markets swooned: «Necessary changes in the stance of monetary policy removed the complacent assumption that «all bad news is good news» (because it brought renewed stimulus) that many felt underpinned markets.»

The theory behind it is simple: If Facebook has experimented on its users to find new and exciting ways to get us to use it in the way they'd prefer, we should also feel free to experiment on Facebook, and see if those experiments change how we think about what we share with one of the biggest repositories of human data in history.

Demonstrators and organizers posed different theories about what had changed since then.

Someone wants to bring up their conspiracy theory about the globalist origins of the climate change theory?

«Evolutionary theory is great at explaining how an system can change but can't explain how the system comes about.»

The fact that scientific * understanding * changes indicates that we are * learning * more about our world — it does not indicate that the world itself is going through some slow metamorphoses to keep up with scientific theories.

He explained his findings in nontechnical terms in Slate magazine: «Although doubt will always remain about what causes a change in social custom, the technology - shock theory does fit the facts.

southerneyes44, you wrote «Germany doesn't teach about him» in regards to Hitler That's a ludicrous assertion as is «Theories in science change with the newspaper.»

That: the cross of Jesus is something that changes humanity's view of the Divine rather than (as the older substitutionary theories go) changing the Divine's view about humanity.

The theory ABOUT evolution most widely accepted is an updating of Charles Darwin's hypothesis that all of today's species descended from common ancestors due to natural selection based on best current fitness for constantly changing environmental circmmstances.

The timing of what you post today goes with the section talking about «he will come again to judge the living and the dead» which is where I would guess that there'd be that change in the axis on your theory from things understood of Jesus to things understood of the Holy Spirit.

Cobb sketches a process theory about historical change and historical movement, grounded in Whitehead's notion of «living historic routes.»

He argues that this theory allows one to make all the points that can be made about theological changes through history by using Robinson s notion of «trajectories,» but without its postulation of some «essence» of meaning that perdures through the change.

During the debate over «biblical inerrancy» that raged among evangelicalism for several years in the late 1970s, I remember someone observing that Harold Lindsell's 1976 book, The Battle for the Bible, which pretty much got that debate going, was more a theory of institutional change than it was about theology as such.

Thomas Kuhn's work on paradigm shifts in the history of science presents the idea that changes or increases in our understanding not only fill out gaps in previous knowledge, but at times bring about a reorganisation of the structure of the theories or paradigms by which previous ideas were organised and understood.

So - called «subjective» theories see the cross as a revelation of God's love which brings about an inner change in the believer.

Berger has subsequently and substantively changed his thinking about religion and secularization, but the theory set forth in that book continues to have enormous influence on the discussion of these questions.

We do, however, have very good testable theories about how living creatures change, diversify, form different species, and go extinct.

One might say that just as nuclear war has made of the whole planet a potential battlefield, thus raising new questions about war itself, so, too, has modern advertising made of the whole planet an actual constant marketplace, thus provoking radical changes in the practice and theory of human intercourse.

Theories of modernization, despite the rather serious attacks to which they have been subjected in recent years, have been so prominent in the social sciences, and have played such an important role in our thinking about social change, that any effort to consider the changing relations between states and religious institutions must begin here.

I know that i have prayed and things changed for the good and i have learned that faith requires a courage that atheist just don't have, so now you atheist can start your shallow explanations about how you can think for yourselves and your laughable big bang theories and your evolved from monkeys nonsense and i'll just stay with truth.

Although he initially rejects physicalism because he thinks that a human person is not just an organism and mental changes are not simply physical changes, he concludes «physicalism is the most reasonable theory about the nature of human beings».

In still other cases certain catchwords and theories of the church - growth people appear in a denomination's literature, but they are either so poorly integrated into the total approach or so changed from what movement theorists Win Arn and Donald McGavran write about that one wonders why the terminology is even used.

During the last twenty years, changes in family life and in church demographics have rekindled interest in Christian nurture and in new progressive theories about human nature.

The medieval scholastics, themselves largely responsible for the terminology of this doctrine, were uneasy about it: that a substance could change without the accompaniment of a change in the accidental attributes of that substance was a concept that their logical theory ruled out..

The American Christian debate about just war theory is in a sense nothing other than a debate about America's role in the world, a debate little changed since, say, 1968.

There's this thing called the scientific method — something about repeatable findings and, get this, an understanding that existing theories are subject to change (gasp!)

This quotation, coming from the field of literary studies and theory has something to say to those of us who are concerned about the rediscovery of the relevance of the Bible in a rapidly changing world.

Twists are better recognized when they occur in concrete situations than when they are defined or described in generalized theories about change, because, by their nature, twists contort the accepted definitions of things.

I thought Evangel readers would appreciate knowing about my Christianity Today interview with James Davison Hunter, Professor of Religion, Culture, and Social Theory at the University of Virginia and author of To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World (Oxford, 2010), which promises to be the most important book written on Christian cultural engagement in the last 50 years.

In tracing broad processes of social and cultural change, these theories also offer some guidance in thinking about the possible direction of changes in the future.

Furthermore, there was no school of thought in China that would have presented a substantialist alternative to the view of being as change; the closest candidate would be the common - sense view of things attacked by the Buddhists as illusion, and even here it was the Indian, not Chinese, sources of Buddhism that became most exercised about criticizing the theory of permanent substances.

The process theory of sequential societies of actualities, each of which is created and then persists thereafter as an objectified datum of prehension in later actualities, seems calculated to take the complexities into account more definitely and naturally than any talk about a rigorous continuity of action defining a single, identical, yet changing individual.

Evolution is simply a theory explaining what we have observed about how life changes on this planet.

Quantum physics, the principle of indeterminacy, relativity theory, and the like, were all instrumental in bringing about this change.

It is interesting to me to think about evolution, where things change over long periods of time and where there may only be theories about the catalysts, in contrast to those that we have put on the fast - track ourselves, such as those you have exemplified.

The great thing about a theory is, it's open to dissection, new discovery, and change.

And let's remember that evolution, while it's a theory, is a theory about the beginning and the transformation of life based on things we have observed, namely that cells change and mutate and that those mutations can produce cells that are unique and new, and that it would follow that it's possible for molecules to form into single - celled organisms which mutate and combine into multi-cellular organisms which mutate, adapt, and grow over time into new forms of life.

The difficulty that stems from just assembling therapeutic components from different sources is that this approach usually produces a kind of hash eclecticism — a theory from here, a technique from there — with no integrating structure, no internally consistent core of assumptions about the nature, process, and goals of therapeutic change.

PDX — It doesn't take a Genius to realize from my statements that i have read things other than the Bible you moron i have spent many hours reading and listening to scientists about their theories on the big bang, i have listened to ideas from the most revered scientists including Hawking and others, and they all admit that there are holes in their theories, that nothing fully explains their big bang theory, the physics doesn't add up let alone the concept, there are plenty of scientists hard at work trying to make the numbers fit and the theory hold weight but if you ask any of them they can not give you the answers and the reason being... there are none, the theory doesn't work, If by the observable laws of Physics, Matter in this Universe can not be created or destroyed, you can only change its state, i.e. solid to liquid, to gas... to energy... There is no explanation for how an entire reality full of Matter can be created out of nothing... Scientists know this... idiots that are atheists and simply would rather NOT believe that their lives and actions they take within their lifespan are being witnessed by an Omnipotent God do not WANT to believe... but Your belief in God does not change whether or not he exists you will be judged.

Because of the particular situation, I don't know that it is totally about life being «easier» with his bmom but more the sudden change from not being in his life to being in his life and possibly going from thinking «she doesn't care» to «she does care» (because even though we as adults can understand why she might not have made contact in theory, it is different in practice).

Child development theories are all about how children grow and change during the course of childhood.

Models provide a kind of map for thinking about the overall direction of political change, which is undeniably useful, but these theories require considerable fleshing out in terms of their understanding of social life.

He says conspiracy theories about the result of the referendum aren't helping his party's cause, asking: «How do we engage with a very rapidly changing media landscape in which facts are not common and people have their own facts?»

Defense lawyers hinted at other theories independent of Aiello Jr., including changes to Ball's job responsibilities and ongoing conversations about where his permanent desk would be.

Recent progress in cosmology, string theory and quantum mechanics, though, has brought about a change of heart.

In his book, Evolution for Everyone: How Darwin's Theory Can Change the Way We Think About Our Lives, Professor David Sloan Wilson of Binghamton University in New York state cites an example, from the Lest culture of Micronesia in the 1930s, that shows how gossip can be a first line of defense against social aberration.

Brokaw: Let's say all the theories and all the facts about climate change are wrong.

«There are a lot of disparate theories about what could have a profound impact on aging and age - related processes, but at this point, we simply do not have evidence - based strategies to significantly change our life expectancy that come in the form of a pill,» says Ronald DePinho, professor of cancer biology and president of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

But theories about the cause of this abrupt climate change are numerous.