Sentences with phrase «explained as an attempt»

It is explained as an attempt to increase transparency within fund management, as clients will directly see how their money is being used.

He explains this as he attempts to add some remixed tracks from the movie The Matrix to his Web site.

The omission could perhaps be explained as an attempt to avoid losing leverage in its judicial dialogue with the CJEU.

Not exact matches

The bad news is that the company poured a lot of time and resources into what in retrospect was a quixotic attempt to out - Facebook Facebook, as a Mashable analysis of the search engine company's shift in direction explains.

This teaches children to be more persistent when they're attempting a difficult task and to see failure as just another step toward success,» explains Shelly Phillips on Lifehack.

From the print edition, my 2700 - word attempt to explain the turmoil at the PMO this summer: Twice before, Stephen Harper overhauled the team around him as he prepared to meet

As Common Cause explains in its DOJ complaint, U.S. nationals running Cambridge Analytica and its political committee clients may have aided and abetted foreign nationals in violating U.S. laws, and may be liable for conspiracy or attempted conspiracy to violate U.S. laws — all of which are crimes under U.S. law.

Largely I would echo what Christine has already said about the way in which we feel accepted within our community, but if you'll bear with me for a little bit, I'd like to attempt to explain to Trey in particular what I see as the difference between this type of acceptance and the attitude of the many Christians who view homosexuality as sinful such as what you have encountered with your sister.

As any student of Comparative Mythology knows, the Garden myth in Genesis was taken from the Sumerian Chaos myths, and was a HUMAN attempt to explain «disorder».

Your story of genesis attempts to explain the world as people 3000 years ago would have needed it explained, and so you treat scientists as trying to give you the same type of story.

now as far as science it seeks the most realible and testible idea about everything in the universe to attempt to explain what we are dealing with; it would be a sad world to live in if science simply said «GOD DID IT» GIVE THAT SOME THOUGHT;

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).

@tru — Yes, you got the gist of what I was wanting to say, except that I attempted to explain as best I could what you summarized in the first two points, but as for the «don't ask» part, I still think this is a very important question.

Whoever wants to replace the Creator's realization of this plan by a totally autonomous evolution, inevitably either ascribes some mythic creative power to evolution, or else abandons any attempt at rational understanding and explains everything as the blind play of arbitrary chance.

Other critics have attempted to explain America's preoccupation with work as a reflection of her basic pragmatic, or utilitarian, outlook.

Intelligent design is based on the scientific method3: Intelligent design might base its ideas on observations in the natural world, but it does not test them in the natural world, or attempt to develop mechanisms (such as natural selection) to explain their observations4.

If someone can not further explain an answer without being accused of attempting to change their «wrong» answer (in your view) without admitting mistake then I guess you hold people to an impossibly high standard and as you say «one that you can not keep yourself.»

In an opening theoretical discussion, he characterizes conspiracy belief as an attempt «to delineate and explain evil,» guided by three basic principles: Nothing happens by accident; nothing is as it seems; and everything is connected.

Hence, in attempting to address the theme of the symposium, my objective will be to explain the epistemological standpoint (as well as the cultural background) underlying my interest in process thought, a standpoint which makes me regard it as a conceptual framework.

As for the «No serious attempt to explain an acausal event» I will leave you with a, albeit paraphrased, quote from Stephen Hawking: «The very notion of nothingness necessitated the eventual creation of everything.»

To attempt to explain this away as being a religious fairy tale is a denial of this inate quality within most humans.

As C. S. Lewis pointed out in his reflections on the Hegelian versus the Christian approach to history, history does have an ultimate telos, but that is known to God alone and therefore any human attempt to explain it fully is doomed to failure.

My question to you is that being aware that the Creation scriptures do not, just state an instant «all at once» creation by God, but detailed steps of Creation, can you explain how the writer of Genesis came to see these steps when it would take mankind hundreds of years to attempt to define the steps as evolution?

Ernest M. Wolf has explained this translation as an attempt to reproduce in the German some of the basic linguistic features of Hebrew.

Attempts have been made to force the meaning of the Greek in the passage, and to explain it as meaning that the Elder preferred the order of the fourth gospel, and was criticising Mark's gospel as not giving events in the right order.

The next pages will be devoted to an attempt to explain the newness of axial existence first as individuality and then as freedom.

The primary reason for my attempt to relate the resurrection to Jesus simply as a man is soteriological: if it is only Jesus» divinity which explains and guarantees...

Mythical thinking is not to be thought of primarily as an attempt to explain the external world, for such a concept presupposes a consciousness of the duality of subject and object, internal and external, which is not characteristic of the mythical mentality.

Cobb attempts to explain explains how we can intelligently affirm the unique presence of God in Jesus in such a way as to avoid detracting from his humanity and yet understand explain his strange authority.

The recognition of other beliefs (other religions as well as other beliefs in our religion), the desire to understand, the hope to explain to another, the wish to know the truth, and the attempt to unify all of one's beliefs into a coherent whole are motivations for reasoning about religious beliefs.

As a philosophy professor, I have attempted to explain Whitehead's thought in both undergraduate courses and graduate seminars.

Citizens who take part commonly explain their efforts as attempts to «give back» for all that they have received from the free society, or to meet the obligations of free citizens to think and act for themselves.

CNN: Seeking the truth about Jesus Jay Parini, author of the forthcoming book Jesus: The Human Face of God, writes that «there are probably as many visions of Jesus, and versions, as there are Christians,» which explains why «all attempts to classify Jesus seem hopelessly inadequate.»

As for pictures, I am beginning to think that we think in pictures more than we admit, and our words (and theology) is an attempt to explain what our mind sees.

As Robert Mellert notes, our present historical criticisms are very similar to efforts by the Christians of the first centuries: «We are attempting to explain the primitive Christian experience of Jesus in the language of a philosophical perspective of God and man to suggest how that perspective might deal with the inter-relation of humanity and divinity in the person of Jesus, who is called the Christ (WPT 79f).

Lear reads Plato's dialogues as attempts to explain, by the articulation of a psychology, how irony is possible: «why it is that we are creatures who, for the most part, do not grasp the real situation we are in; and how it is that on occasion an individual is able to break free of appearances and engage in genuine acts of pretense - transcending aspiring.»

Any attempt at applying «logic» to explain the bible by people who are believers and still think of themselves as rather intelligent (self - delusion is a symptom / cause of religious belief) always ends up in ridiculous arguments...

As is frequently the case with autistic people, Sean has an unusually complete and accurate memory of his past, and he has analyzed his childhood memories in an attempt to explain behavior that was incomprehensible to other people.

Recent attempts to explain away the fine - tuning of the universe's laws by hypothesising a «multiverse» of different universes do not convince Davies: «The multiverse theory is increasingly popular, but it doesn't so much explain the laws of physics as dodge the whole issue.

Section 4 has so far defied attempts to identify its original location, but its very presence is best explained as displaced material.

Rahn... Do i really need to back up what i think online... and you being the expert... why do nt you fully explain to me the state that the country is in... enlighten me... but you already know how far that will go... just as my attempt to change others mind's fell short... so will any others opinion... i have my mind made up for my own well founded reasons... all im saying is that spending all day protesting and postulating is of no benefit to anyone... going about your life and making things best for yourself is in the best interest of this country as a whole... I believe Adam Smith said it best... the best results come from one person doing whats best for himself and the team... not throwing a hissy fit

Does it not strengthen Hartshorne's position to view it as an attempt to explain the categories indirectly in terms of all past divine decisions in time regarding the concrete rather than in terms of a nontemporal decision by a source so indeterminate that it renders all talk about itself meaningless (PS 10: 95 - 97)?

If we are to abide by the Whiteheadian ideal of coherence, as Hartshorne so typically does, it seems that the categories» status must be explained in part by some sort of reference to the noncategorial order, as option 3 suggests and as my interpretation of Hartshorne attempts to do.

This Platonic mode of explanation (if the mature Plato did sanction such an approach) seems as misguided as an attempt to explain the motions of football players by reference to the «coherence» or «formal possibility» of the interactions of their shadows.

Several of these attempts were summarized in the previous posts when we looked at several of the views of how people seek to explain the violence of God in Scripture, but the tragic fact is that violence of Israel can not easily be explained away, and often the same reasoning that is used to get Israel if the hook in her violence toward neighboring nations is then used to justify (and even encourage) violence today from our own country toward those we view as enemies of God.

What he opposes most stridently in this book is not religious doubt itself or attempts to understand religion as a human construct or a biological phenomenon, but rather what he sees as a very artificial and incomplete view of human nature and its purpose: the very presumption that religion can be explained away as unnecessary and that such materialistic perspectives could be definitive or anywhere near ultimately satisfactory for beings who are obviously designed to crave so much more than mere birth, death, and extinction.

On the contrary, he finds it useful to ponder an array of reductionist attempts to explain the existence of religion, from that which seeks to pinpoint the area of the human brain or the specific genes connected to religiosity to that which sees religion as a malfunction of the human mind or a vestigial remnant from a primitive stage of human development suitable only for whimpering, immature dullards (a point of view championed by the new atheists).

It is, then, with a certain confidence that he attempts the rather prodigious task of explaining the simultaneous engendering of intelligence and material bodies: ~ we are now, then, to attempt the genesis of intellect at the same time as the genesis of material bodies — two enterprises that are evidently correlative if it be true that the main lines of our intellect mark out the general form of our action on matter, and that the detail of matter is ruled by the requirements of our action» (CE 2040.

Until then, we just muddle through as best we can, using sign - language and unvocalized grunts in attempts to explain the infinite mysteries and wisdom of God.

Evolutionary epistemology has attempted to explain and validate the human power to attain reliable knowledge as something originating through Darwinian development.