Sentences with phrase «evolution as a process»

May we not envision cosmic evolution as a process of aesthetic unification of often temporarily irreconcilable aspects into a «creation» of unimaginable beauty?

Solly Zuckerman, «Correlation of Change in the Evolution of Higher Primates,» Evolution as a Process, editors Julian Huxley, A. C. Hardy, and E. B. Ford (London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1954), p. 307.

In The Origin of Species, published in 1859, Charles Darwin described evolution as a process subject to diverse influences.

Not exact matches

But the process of evolution is as sustaining for corporate life as it is inevitable.

Since 1979, I would suggest, there have been five key evolutions that have helped bring to life the idea of entrepreneurship as a systematic, replicable process.

The reason is because while debt plays a key role in understanding the recent evolution of the Chinese economy and the timing and process of its upcoming adjustment (as it also does for all if not most major economies), there seems to be a remarkable amount of confusion as to why debt matters.

Dr. Levin sees EXCITE as the next step in the evolution of assessing technologies through a single process, doing away with the multiple, evidence - based approaches currently applied to new health technologies by many countries, which may be stifling innovation.

Increased energy efficiency of transport vehicles & lower energy prices in future may dampen the speed of growth in demand but, as part of the evolution and R&D process, creation of better and more economical products can be expected.

you are either for creationism or for science while ignoring what people such as myself believe that, yes, God created us but through the process of evolution according to the laws of His Nature.

From a pluralistic perspective, methods specifically designed to reveal the multiple processes behind the pattern are necessary, as they challenge attempts to explain all patterns by a single process (e.g. all evolution by a tree - like process of descent).

Muchembled also resists a Western triumphalist narrative by suggesting that the taming of domestic violence was not simply the result of a progressive civilizing process» marking European civilization as the height of human evolution» but came at the price of colonial conquest on other continents and terribly destructive wars among nations in Europe.

Stephen Barr criticizes me for confusing two very different things: the modest scientific theory of neo-Darwinism (which he defines as «the idea that the mainspring of evolution is natural selection acting on random genetic variation») and what he calls the «theological» claim that evolution is an «unguided, unplanned» process.

(3) Evolutionary scenarios share in the naturalistic bias of science (as the investigation of natural processes), which tends to weight evolution in the direction of a philosophical naturalism.

You know how your creatures can come into being only, like shoot from stem, as part of an endlessly renewed process of evolution.

For if, along with Teilhard, we see evolution as «primarily psychical transformation» (that is, evolution as the rise of consciousness), then, at least, it should not be too hard to suppose that religious belief could be part of the psychical process, as the next dimension of the evolution of rational consciousness.

God is evolution in His process of will implementation, humanity change in this process but not necesarily aware because our existence is very limited in time.and we are not as individual the ultimate objective, but God himself, Our existence is just part of the process for Him to become Himself in the future.We exist only in our time of existence.From pure Energy which is Him 13.7 billion years ago, to us humans 200,000 years ago, to what we are now today, to super humans in the future, to what He will be in the far Future.THE ULTIMATE HIMSELF Is the objetive, you are just part of the process you IDIOT.

today you will know the true reality from a me, true GENIUS, The real purpose of God is the evolution process for Him to Exist.we are just part of the process especially you Theists.Science explains everything soo you will understand that The Ultimate purpose is for Him to Exist.In the very far future He will be as He Willed and you today is just part of that process and just forgotten to oblivion.the proof of that is that you are just a living IDIOT today.your idiocity is the proof of all of this.

Molecular biology, contrary to the article, does not support evolution by natural chance because evolution can not occur without inheritance, inheritance can not occur without DNA and DNA is so complex it could not have evolved by chance unless we are to assume that molecules just happened to arrange themselves into the DNA molecule at the same times as a nucleus formed to hold the DNA, at the same time as the cell membrane just happened to form around it, at the sametime as all the cell maintaining process in the cytoplasm just happened to come into existence to form a single cell and that all these aspects just happened to come together and work harmoniously.

The whole process of evolution, as a matter of fact, tended toward reason in order that through it, the universe comes to an awareness of God as its Ground.

not a random process at all), evolution as «just a theory» (might want to learn what theory means in science), and Darwin's BS deathbed recantation identify you as having gotten your information from misleading sources, i.e., sources that have little understanding, and perhaps very little honesty, concerning evoutionary research.

Now, then, reason as part of the macrocosmic process is likewise in process, that is, it is still undergoing development as is manifested in the development of culture and civilization; the very constitution of history itself is the evolution of rational consciousness.

What ultimately turned the tide in a direction which could accommodate theological thinking to the evolutionary view was a resurgence of personal idealism which purported to see the entire process of evolution, animal as well as human, in the context of a cosmic drama presupposing a Creator God.

your role now as atheist, is to be the opposing argumenter for the modern day change process or evolution of the present religion from monotheism which you have shown in your arguments to be flawed so that the future faithfuls will shift to the ultra modern faith called PANTHROTHEISM - the synthesis of theistic monotheism vs.humanistic atheism.I suggest to you to be more aggressive and conscise in your arguments, God needs you

This «cooking» process was of utmost importance because it produced the chemicals necessary for the evolution of planetary bodies such as our earth, and thus it made possible also the eventual appearance of life and human beings.

As seen from the perspective of science, evolution is simply a process involving the gradual emergence of more and more complex entities and societies.

Thus, God who gives «birth» to the universe, or God as Creator - Ground, is the Alpha or he - who - was; God as Ground of evolution or growth is God as he - who - is; and God as the Absolute Future of the universe, the term of the process, is the Omega, or he - who - is - coming, or will be.

your reaction questioning the evidence of god is readily answered by my presence as the concsious part of him, and his delegation to me the responsibility of initiating the evolution through dialectical process.

I do not mean that they had a knowledge of scientific evolution but that they looked upon reality as a process of growth.

science is not everything, the problem is when the critical and objective philosophy of science is accepted as absolute in reality.God is beyond logic at this point of our consciousness, The process of gods will manfistation is evolution which accepts all variables in the process, the input could be not what scienctists wants.Thats why faith or religion is part of reality.

Let me proceed to argue the point, first by a theoretical analysis of the nature of evolutionary time, contrasting it with the hellenic view of time, and second by a confirmation and verification of this analysis of evolutionary time as non-contingent and immanent by observing the actual process of evolution itself.

the evidence is your negative reaction and my response, remember i am part of him and He delegated to me as his conscious being now th this point in time of the evolution as the thesis and you will act or represent the anrithesis of the process

He may be either spiritual as in the Bible or an alien species who introduced their DNA into prehistoric man to jump - start the evolution process but he is real for sure.

Many scientists are certainly skeptical of many of the finer points of evolution, but as a whole, the evolutionary process is accepted as fact amongst any and all biologists that put science ahead of religion.

Candidates for intrinsic ordering properties include such things as the course of biological evolution or organismic development (Bergson), the direction of increasing entropy or of irreversible causal processes (Reichenbach), or the asymmetrical relations of prehension (Whitehead).

To say, as Joe says, that «God making evolution appear undirected is similar to the idea that he planted dinosaur fossils and created geological strata to fool us into thinking the earth has been around more than 6,000 years,» is in my view completely to misunderstand what scientists and ordinary people mean when they speak about random processes.

That antiquity for them included evolution — total or in part — of life, a process that nearly all scientists define as purposeless, unguided, random.

Colin, as in ALL my debates with atheists... you have resorted to your first bread and butter, which is to describe the process of natural evolution that not even Christians dispute.

The modern historian, as Friedrich Gogarten has pointed out, sees history as a linear process of evolution, comparable to the flow of experience reflected in the consciousness of the unrelated I.

For philosophical vitalism evil is the static, anything that stands in the way of vital evolution, while good is vital movement, which it is assumed will ultimately be triumphant, as if there were still another principle of good underlying the whole process.

They appeared in the process of evolution as novel patterns, and patterns of patterns, of organic functions.

It would mean that the whole evolution of our earth and of life could be regarded as a continuous causal process.

For Bergson, like many process thinkers (Peirce, James and Dewey come particularly to mind), the entire concept of «necessity» only makes sense when applied internally to abstractions the intellect has already devised.11 Of course, one can tell an evolutionary story about how the human intellect came to be a separable function of consciousness that emphasizes abstraction (indeed, that is what Bergson does in Creative Evolution), but if one were to say that the course of development described in that story had to occur (i.e., necessarily) as it did, then one would be very far from Bergson's view (CE 218, 236, 270).

My point is that those statements should be held to the same scrutiny as biological evolution, and yet there is not even a hint of the process by which God's will becomes physical reality.

If you are really able to do more than «chip away» at cosmology and evolution, then provide a superior explanation of «divine orchestration» in at least same the level of detail as natural processes you are calling inadequate.

As the ordered development of evolution itself demands, this process will be subject to a law of inter-action, of being and becoming, in which each new entity will find its intelligibility.

Categories such as «process» [or «evolution»] and «organism,» categories which were present in a number of dynamic philosophies similar in many respects to Whitehead's, 7 were seen as the philosophical basis for a new Christian theism consistent with modern science.

If cosmology and evolution are too full of holes to be acceptable, then surely the superior explanation of «divine orchestration» should be understood in at least same the level of detail as natural processes.

We must see the universe as in process of evolution.

Gradual evolution by introducing a long time frame into the process insidiously erodes our perception of God as almighty.

Since the issue of the relation between creation and evolution has been so prominent, and since the contribution of process thought is so distinctive in this discussion, I shall focus on it as paradigmatic of process theology's treatment of the relation between science and religion.