Sentences with phrase «from modern humans is»

The fact that dozens of erectus fossils exist and that their skull anatomy in particular is quite different from modern humans is concealed.

The authors should be more circumspect in reporting their results, acknowledging that the stature estimates from modern humans are likely exaggerations, and focus their interpretations on the more appropriate (but still tenuous) australopithecine - based predictions — still with the caveat about the limitations of the data from which the predictor is derived.

Not exact matches

That doesn't mean that every kid growing up in the suburbs of Dallas will succeed — far from it — but it does mean you have access to the tools modern humans need to be economically competitive.

Of the people identified as victims of modern slavery in Britain last year, 139 were Polish nationals brought over for labor exploitation with West Midlands Police currently investigating 70 claims of human trafficking from Poland.

Understanding that by nature, humans will often walk away from a system that is overly complex, modern brokers do an excellent job of supplying interfaces that are straightforward and user - friendly.

Could it have been god telling us how to protect ourselves from disease, germs, and bacteria?Couldn't you see a scientist from today's time, going back to the bible days, and trying to explain, the things we as the human race didn't know till modern times?

There's Arkansas, bounty hunters, snakes real, human, and symbolic, being rescued from a snake pit by a very errant knight, a display of the gratuitous slaughter that comes when you take the law in your own hands, a deep commentary on place, displacement, the state of nature, and the techno - forces of the modern world and modern government, solidly American thoughts on law, property, justice, and keeping your word, and so forth and so on.

By extension, evolving from less advanced life forms is distasteful to those same individuals, as that necessitates a point in evolution at which humans are not really humans at all in the modern sense, which then brings up problems such as «do slugs go to heaven?»

Looking at society from a modern perspective, there seems to be very little reason not to maximize human happiness, as long as it hurts no one.

I see humans read the Bible as if it were written originally by modern day americans using modern day English... one has to remember that the Bible was written from a Jewish culture of 2000 plus years ago..

They DISGUST the human race, and should be removed from our modern world.

Still, such theorists also continue, as did Kant himself, the modern natural law tradition, at least in the following way: The duties prescribed by nonteleological liberalism are defined in terms of rights that are prior to any inclusive good; that is, these rights are separated from, and respect for them overrides, any inclusive telos humans might pursue.

The comprehensive purpose exiled from modern moral and political thought is reasserted as the purpose of human rights.

Jenkins, on the other hand, describes appreciatively theological schools, from the Orthodox doctrine of theosis to Teilhard de Chardin to the modern «creation spirituality» movement, which one way or another allow humans to share with God in the evolution of the world to a glorious transformation ¯ although, as Jenkins points out, there's a danger that that could veer off into anthropocentric management.

So a magical all - powerful being living in some fantasy world in the clouds created the earth, placed a modern day man and woman on the earth from whom all humans are modeled in a fantastical garden 4.5 billion years ago, allows «good» people to live in a cloud kingdom where everyone who has ever died lives (like a Florida retirement community in the sky), and sends «bad» people to a fiery pit of despair for all eternity.

To speak of sexual undertakings in the way implied by the traditional marriage rites of the churches is to deny people access to a basic human good from the start and for reasons that are difficult if not impossible for modern people to grasp.

The research adds to a growing body of evidence that runs counter to the popular perception that there was a linear evolution from early primates to modern humans.

In one sense the discovery of human individuality was necessary for the development of human rights, the economic individualism orientated to profit and free market produced the modern economy; the separation of human being from nature coupled with the autonomy of the world of science helped the development of technology; and the autonomy of different areas of life like the arts and the government, each to follow purposes and laws inherent in it, did make for unfettered creativity in the various fields.

This situation is nowhere more clearly described in modern literature than in the novels of Franz Kafka: «His unexpressed, ever - present theme,» writes Buber, «is the remoteness of the judge, the remoteness of the lord of the castle, the hiddenness, the eclipse...» Kafka describes the human world as given over to the meaningless government of a slovenly bureaucracy without possibility of appeal: «From the hopelessly strange Being who gave this world into their impure hands, no message of comfort or promise penetrates to us.

Also in the face of the ecological disaster created by the modern ideas of total separation of humans from nature and of the unlimited technological exploitation of nature, it is proper for primal vision to demand, not an undifferentiated unity of God, humanity and nature or to go back to the traditional worship of nature - spirits, but to seek a spiritual framework of unity in which differentiation may go along with a relation of responsible participatory interaction between them, enabling the development of human community in accordance with the Divine purpose and with reverence for the community of life on earth and in harmony with nature's cycles to sustain and renew all life continuously.

In our generation there is danger and hope — danger that these noncognitive accouterments will lose their aesthetic harmony and hypnotic power when integrated with the basic prehensions of science, and be reverted into impotent and empty symbols, jarring, ugly, and without force in final satisfactions: hope that the power of Jesus as lure will reassert itself in an aesthetic context devoid of supernaturalism, a context such that (the language now picks up echoes of van Buren) the vision of Jesus, the free man, free from authority, free from fear, «free to give himself to others, whoever they were «1 — such that this vision in its earthly, human purity will lure our aims to a harmonious concrescence, integrating scientific insight and moral vision and producing a modern, intensely fulfilling human satisfaction.

This situation is witnessed to by the fact that the only metaphysical issue where there is a virtual consensus among mainstream twentieth century Catholic thinkers, apart from the reality of human subjectivity mentioned above, is the claim that the discoveries of modern science should not have a significant influence upon metaphysics.

The problem of modern man is not that of finding deliverance from the unseen powers of evil, or from the burden of guilt, but is the search for meaning in human existence.

Ford, like his critics, is misled by the fact that in presenting his case for internal relations or prehensions in Science and the Modern World Whitehead begins from the human experiential side.

The Holy See might also have taken a leaf from John Paul's 1991 social encyclical Centesimus Annus and boldly urged the view that human beings are the basic resource for development, because the source of wealth in the modern world is human creativity.

Our modern separation of secular values from religious values is therefore utterly foreign to the ontological facts of human nature and is «un-Lawful» or «a negation of the Law».

Most important, at a time in human history when there is urgent need for wisdom to guide us through a crisis of unparalleled proportions, it removes any interest in wisdom from the intelligentsia in general and the modern university in particular.

His aim is so to bring the Christian perspective into the concrete political and social experience of modern life that the possibility of achieving justice and brotherhood in human affairs will be increased because men are in some measure freed from the sentimental and romantic notions which can only lead to bitter disillusionment.

Yet from all sides today modern knowledge of the human creature and his world is forcing us to face up to the finiteness of human existence, to which, in so many ways, Israel pioneered the road.

In short, the Nature we know from modern science embodies and reflects immaterial properties and a depth of intelligibility... To view all these extremely complex, elegant and intelligible laws, entities, properties and relations in the evolution of the universe as «brute facts» in need of no further explanation is, in the words of the great John Paul II, an «abdication of human intelligence».»

The only relevant question for the theologian is the basic assumption on which the adoption of a biological as of every other Weltanschauung rests, and that assumption is the view of the world which has been molded by modern science and the modern conception of human nature as a self - subsistent unity immune from the interference of supernatural powers.

To teach, as some writers have, that we must accept the «insight» of modern Evolutionists, as true beyond reasonable doubt, that humans came into existence in various places at differing times (so - called «Polyphyletism») is to compromise the Church's infallible teaching that there was one first man (Adam) and one first woman (Eve) from whom we all descend.

First it requires us to find and describe what Tillich called the «boundary situations,» that is, those points where modern men and women reach the limits of their human existence, where they sense they are alienated from society and other people, or feel a lack of personal meaning, or fear being useless and having no worth.2.

According to Murdoch, the thoughtful modern person can no longer conceive of men and women as rational creatures who are slowly expunging evil from their midst; instead, it is necessary to think of human beings as «benighted creatures sunk in a reality whose nature we are constantly and overwhelmingly tempted to deform by fantasy.»

My own lecture was titled «The Right to Belong Where I Come From,» and dealt with the importance of home in the human imagination, the struggle against placelessness in modern culture, and the cultural forces that come to bear on the human consciousness to weaken attachments between person and home place.

It is a curious fact that while the general culture of contemporary theologians is still markedly literary, rather than scientific, they seem to forget the many lessons concerning the human situation to be learnt from tragedy, whether ancient or modern.

How can anyone witness this ape - $ h + reaction in the Middle East and not come to the conclusion that modern humans are descended from earlier forms of primates?

YOU seem to be suggesting that these modern concepts of human rights are leading us away from God and to hell, a belief that makes you a perfect example of why more and more people are rejecting Christianity!

Matthew Rose's assessment of the great Swiss theologian Karl Barth claims that (1) Barth is appreciated by theologians and scholars for «liberating theology from modern captivity,» though (2) Barth took for granted modernity's limitation of natural human reason to the empirical world.

Deep ecologists have pressed the question of why civilized human beings, and especially those in the modern West, have become so alienated from nature.

The fact that Whitehead understands human experience to consist in discrete «drops» or «actual occasions» of experience may be an example of the fact that Whitehead's generalizations were developed from more than one starting point, in this case modern quantum theory as well as psychology.

It is not hatred, at least from me, so much as it is frustration that we can not as modern, rational humans leave this silly religious nonsense behind us.

«Listener to the Christian message, «2 occasional preacher, 3 dialoguer with biblical scholars, theologians, and specialists in the history of religions, 4 Ricoeur is above all a philosopher committed to constructing as comprehensive a theory as possible of the interpretation of texts.5 A thoroughly modern man (if not, indeed, a neo-Enlightenment figure) in his determination to think «within the autonomy of responsible thought, «6 Ricoeur finds it nonetheless consistent to maintain that reflection which seeks, beyond mere calculation, to «situate [us] better in being, «7 must arise from the mythical, narrative, prophetic, poetic, apocalyptic, and other sorts of texts in which human beings have avowed their encounter both with evil and with the gracious grounds of hope.

What results from the foregoing is that, confronted by this technico - social embrace of the human mass, modern man, in so far as he has any clear idea of what is happening, tends to take fright as though at an impending disaster.

Thus the whole burden of modern earth studies is to narrate the story of the birth of the human from our Mother the Earth.

But in the light of modern science these explanations are obvious myths, no different from the hundreds of other creation myths through out human history.

Mass media news is descended from this basic human practice of sharing and spreading information, but modern high technology and the political economy it serves have altered its nature.

But if it has any message for modern man, if it has any place for him to stand and fight against the demoralizing and tyrannizing structures of a culture that has been severed from its true secular responsibility to serve human need, then those Christians who know this must speak and act.

From the most primitive of savages to the sophisticated modern, the urge to «speak» to an Other not human would appear to be almost universal.

We shall not understand the Yes - saying of a New Zarathustra unless we realize that it is a total negation of the human and historical world of Christendom, and a negation following from the modern prophet's proclamation of the death of God.