Sentences with phrase «for objects seen»

Teams are looking for objects seen floating in the ocean there in images taken by a satellite last weekend.

Not exact matches

If it became a robust community, you would undoubtedly start to see people create and trade virtual objects for real money.

The custom chip would presumably handle artificial intelligence - related tasks, like the ability for cars to «see» objects and drive themselves.

Must - see 3 - D It's 3 - D depth control allows viewers to control the «distance» between near and far objects on the screen, for a bespoke 3 - D experience.

The Detroit Institute of Arts is also experimenting with augmented reality technology and is partnering with Google for an Ancient Egypt exhibit in which visitors can use the museum's smartphones to see special digital graphics and information overlaid on certain objects, like a mummy's sarcophagus.

That the bragging happened a decade ago doesn't change the reality that a man who might be president sees half the country's population not just as objects for his own aesthetic gratification — we knew that thanks to the beauty pageants and the string of model wives — but objects for his physical gratification as well, regardless of how the women in question feel about it.

Creativity isn't always about creating something from scratch, but about seeing multiple uses for one idea (or object).

Imagine, for example, augmented reality heads - up displays that see everything you do, and provide real - time cloud - driven information about the people and objects around you.

A person involved in the investigation said, however, that experts from Boeing and the National Transportation Safety Board who had seen the object, a piece of what is known as a flaperon, were not yet fully satisfied, and called for further analysis.

Let's see, hmmm, even if I didn't have to pay for it or the cleaning of it with my tax dollars, I would object to any monument to any religion being placed in a public space that I pay to keep clear for my and others use.

Just because that something is the second brightest object in the night sky and you've probably seen it just about every single night of your entire life is no excuse for not saying something.

See John 12:4 - 6, for example: «But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected [to Mary anointing Jesus with expensive perfume], «Why wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor?

They see a shiny object and they go for it.

He then utilized terminology that for decades informed the basic stance of process theology on the nature of true power, though, as we shall see, that is open to challenge: God «persuades the world by an act of suffering with the kind of power which leaves its object free to respond in humility and love.»

Just as the seed must learn to see beyond the world of the seed, beyond the forms and objects found there, so reason must learn to see beyond its world, beyond its logic, beyond the forms and objects found in it, for its «Other» and Ground.

As Ambrose, the fourth - century bishop of Milan, told the recently initiated: «You must not trust, then, wholly to your bodily eyes; that which is not seen is more really seen, for the object of sight is temporal, but that other eternal, which is not apprehended by the eye, but is discerned by the mind and spirit» (Ambrose of Milan, De mysteriis, III, 15).

For it is only when it is plainly seen that the great purpose is the building of the universal Kingdom of God, and that the object of human living is the development of the human spirit, that the irrelevance of such things as material success becomes apparent.

Our life of suffering is not a spectator sport for God; indeed, it is he who submits to become the object of our speculation: «Look and see if there be any sorrow like unto my sorrow.»

The love of Radha, the beautiful gopi, who later became a goddess for some cults, and Krishna, the youthful dark deity, who is the object of widespread devotion, is less a story remembered than a random succession of episodes seen and heard, sung and danced.

Of course a Catholic who looks eastward finds nothing to which he objects, because what he sees is the Church of the Seven Ecumenical Councils (but» here's the rub» for him, this means the first seven of twenty - one).

Because there are credible explanations for most of those objects and phenomenon based on science and I have seen no credible evidence for any supernatural being, God or otherwise.

See, for example, the quotation already cited in which James indicates that relations of objects are known through our feelings of relations.

We saw that for Farley theological inquiry is defined as precisely theological by the nature of its subject matter (or «object» of inquiry)-- namely, faith - within - its - situations.

For a superb summary of how the concept of relation functions within contemporary personality theory see, Stephen A. Mitchell, Relational Concepts in Psychoanalysis (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988) and Jay R. Greenberg and Stephen A. Mitchell, Object Relations in Psychoanalytic Theory (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983).

The tasks of infancy are first to learn the differentiation of objects; second to master spoken language; and third, to be able to use that language for a classified and enlarged enjoyment of objects (see, AE 31).

For Reid it is by a «natural kind of magic» that we take them to stand for these objects; there are no grounds in experience for making this association.9 As we have seen, Whitehead disagrees with Reid in that he holds that we have a direct intuition or «feeling» of external objects as causes of sensatioFor Reid it is by a «natural kind of magic» that we take them to stand for these objects; there are no grounds in experience for making this association.9 As we have seen, Whitehead disagrees with Reid in that he holds that we have a direct intuition or «feeling» of external objects as causes of sensatiofor these objects; there are no grounds in experience for making this association.9 As we have seen, Whitehead disagrees with Reid in that he holds that we have a direct intuition or «feeling» of external objects as causes of sensatiofor making this association.9 As we have seen, Whitehead disagrees with Reid in that he holds that we have a direct intuition or «feeling» of external objects as causes of sensations.

These may then be seen as the objects of Christian mission, for heathens need to be saved from darkness, ignorance and sin.

As we have seen, what the examination of perception brings to light for Whitehead is an occasion of experience which is a self - creative process, a subject synthesizing past objects into a novel unity.

We believe that this representation of the structure of eternal objects by Prolog programs could be a helpful tool for further analysis of Whitehead's discussion of the structure of eternal objects (see SMW, chapter 11).

For example, apes have extreme difficulty with photo - object matching and with seeing the relationship between a TV picture of a space and the real space, or between a dollhouse model of a room and the real room (MA 99 - 108).

On reflection we can see that the above argument for the internal relatedness of God as cognitive subject presupposes that there are alternative possibilities for God, at least with respect to what creatures, or what states of creatures, He has as objects of knowledge.

He is, rather, a very complex structured society which sustains, among many other societies, a regnant, personally ordered, subordinate society (an enduring object) which Whitehead refers to as «the soul of which Plato spoke» (Adventures of Ideas 267 — see also pp. 263 - 264 for a clear statement of the distinction between «the ordinary meaning of the term «man,» which includes the total bodily man, and the narrow sense of «man,» where «man» is considered a person in Whitehead's technical sense, i.e., as the regnant, personally ordered society which he identifies as his equivalent of Descartes» thinking substance and Plato's soul).

Hmmm, a quick google and every result I see for «farthest observable object speed of light» says that they're only moving at 90 % of c.

The object allows anyone to see it, whereas the word is not for just anyone; it is addressed to someone in particular.

Jesus is seen as a witness to faith or the historical occasion for faith rather than the object of faith.

The problem is that while at times Whitehead conceives of God's ordering of the eternal objects to be eternally unchanging, at other times «the ordering is such as to specify the initial aim for each new occasion... (it) is extremely difficult to see how one unchanging order can provide a specific and novel aim to every new occasion.

Because the breasts have been made only object for pleasure by «ordinary» guys, that is all they can see.

Such different ways of conceiving it ought of themselves to arouse doubt as to whether it possibly can be one specific thing; and the moment we are willing to treat the term «religious sentiment» as a collective name for the many sentiments which religious objects may arouse in alternation, we see that it probably contains nothing whatever of a psychologically specific nature.

Hartshorne intrepidly draws numerous conclusions of this sort, stoutly maintaining that his theory makes for more comprehensive sense than the traditional view that holds that, when one sees an external object, he really sees the object and not just a certain shape in his own brain.

Some Christians, for example, object to the use of alcohol, whilst others see nothing wrong in its enjoyment in moderation.

For whoever so judges either sees in prayer merely a psychological phenomenon, which can become the object of interesting analysis, or he arrogates to himself God's own right.

Kukai's method for attuning oneself to the «eternal cosmic harmony» cultivates the experience of underlying unity in the relationship of mind and matter, subject and object, seer and seen.

We strongly object, however, to what we see as the misuse of the First Amendment, by commercial interests, as a cover for a quest for profit.

The NCC objects to what they see as the misuse of the First Amendment, by commercial interests, as a cover for a quest for profit.

Hence, I will only point out very briefly some of the ways in which Whitehead's metaphysical ideas, and his related understanding of the objects of physics, form a foundation for seeing inorganic, living, and conscious organisms within one scheme of thought.

It may be readily seen that Lango's interpretation leans heavily upon a consistent usage of «realization» in these passages that is taken as univocally synonymous for «ingression,» along with the further assumption that ingression is a doctrine that only deals with the admission of eternal objects into actuality in some one given way.

In doing so, he shifts the initiative for perception's causation from God to the individual object, or cosmic event, to see it in his terms.

For the third group, who take symbolism seriously, religion is seen as a system of symbols which is neither simply objective nor simply subjective, but which links subject and object in a way that transfigures reality or even, in a sense, creates reality.

The Pragmatist version of this tends to see no other intelligibility in such objects than their practical potentialities for us, famously collapsing the «fact — value» distinction.

In one way or another, the fact that Suchocki sees concrescence chiefly as a synthesis of eternal objects has a part in this (see, for example, MGWG 242).