Sentences with phrase «general argument of»

Nevertheless, the officer's incompetence in that case in operating the approved screening device was what was at issue and Ducharme, J. held that his failure to turn his mind to the issue of residual mouth alcohol fed into the general argument of incompetence in the administration of the ASD in that case.

The general argument of the critics appears to be the lack of evidence to support «dramatic» programs of harsh greenhouse controls (e.g. 80 % reductions in emissions).

The general argument of Confucius is this: our first responsibility is not to be a charitable case ourselves, and once we have our personal matters settled, our obligations flow outward: you take care of your spouse, then kids, then parents, then extended family and closest friends, then friends, then acquaintances, then your township, city, state, and so on.

To speak for a moment of the general argument of the Intelligent Design movement before getting specifically to Professor Johnson's latest book, I would like to make the following point clear.

Furthermore, «the state can not use general arguments of public policy, fiscal discipline or refer to other financial or economic gains, but instead must prove that other rights provided for under the Covenant have been improved by the measure».

Not exact matches

The general argument, as reflected in the title of the book, is that unless we progress with people in mind, as opposed to in spite of them, the world will continue to be a very treacherous place to navigate.

The commonplace argument that increases in the volume of immigration, by themselves, lower wages and take jobs from Americans - an argument which Attorney General Jeff Sessions used to defend ending DACA - has neither empirical nor theoretical support in economics.

In general, these comments reiterated arguments made as part of the notice and comment process for the Rule and PTEs.

Arguments have been made that banks in general often do not face criminal prosecution for violating anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing regulations, but instead, according to the author of the aforementioned article referred to above,» (accept) settlements that either defer or erase the threat of criminal suits.»

Analysts who retain sympathy for the gold standard, like self - confessed «gold bug» John Mauldin, have always understood that the main argument in favor of gold is that it imposes an unbreakable trade and capital flow discipline — indeed that is also the main argument against gold — but many of them have tended to de-emphasize reserve currency economics mainly, I think, because this particular problem is to them subsumed under their more general concerns about money.

Heather Dietrick, Gawker's president and general counsel, presented a more hopeful view of the case to Capital, and suggested that the Florida jury would be moved by their argument that Hogan had turned his own sex life into a public spectacle long before Gawker published this tape.

Part of my argument is that the general credit quality, and ability to make any down payment, in the remaining pool of potential first time buyers is dwindling.

Despite my general sympathy with what Dreher seeks to do in this book, I am less enthusiastic about other facets of his argument.

It's an argument I've been making for years, with little success: Social observers in general and religious folk in particular vastly overestimate the influence of the news and entertainment media.

Although I can not agree with the details of Kreitzer's argument, in general terms such a position is plausible, as far as it goes, but it does not go very far.

His general response, I believe, consists in his view of falsification as the crucial element in the method and argument of metaphysics.

Halphen's argument runs like this: (1) by the end of the eighth century, Charlemagne had emerged as master of the West; (2) under these conditions, it was to be expected that a more general title should be added to his collection, to reflect his full power, when local conditions permitted; (3) local conditions in Rome in December, 800, demanded the intervention of an Emperor; and (4) Byzantine imperial power was at that time temporarily disrupted and incapable of intervening in Rome.

Daniel McArthur, the general manager of Ashers, said: «The fact that the Supreme Court is willing to hear arguments is very encouraging and reflects the importance of the issues and the high - profile nature of the case.»

The Wahhabi movement in Arabia was a reaction against the worship of saints, but it made use of force rather than arguments, and failed to establish a general reform.

Since then, this conception of metaphysics has given way to one of metaphysics as the study of most basic or general presuppositions, and of the metaphysical argument as hypothetical in the manner of a scientific theory, but on a level of higher generality.

(New York: Association Press, and London: SCM Press, 1966); Arthur Rich, «La révolution, problème théologique,» Borosov, «Rô1e de la théologie dans les révolutions sociales,» and Richard Shaull, «Le défi révolutionnaire lancé a la théologie,» in the journal Christianisme social (Nos. 1 and 2; Paris, 1967) Let me summarize succinctly their general line of argument.

Speaking of non-researched opinionated shlt, not one argument there we see, just a general «ad hominem».

Turgidity of language and argument belies its usefulness for the general reader, while its essentially descriptive character prevents the manifestation of anything profoundly new in relation to the ever - increasing corpuso f Newman studies that would require it to be essential reading for the scholar or expert.

It might be argued that the survival success of a species which bases its immediate actions, especially those in which the survival of its individuals is at stake, on a particular experience constitutes a powerful argument for the general reliability of that experience.

On this second argument, general adherence to any such ethic prevents maximization of the good.

Hamlyn notes that «epogoge is involved in the application of general principles to cases, not just in the argument for the general principles themselves» (170).

Indeed, ad hoc engagements in discourse always presuppose this widest possible discourse because any argument about the validity of social prescriptions is potentially an argument about the most general moral principles and thus about social action generally.

The argument that is being debated now falls, in terms of some of its aspects (not cohabitation in general so much as male homosexual couples specifically), within limits that are held to be inviolable.

Name - dropping may not always be the most convincing argument, yet one has to show respect for any movement that can draw to itself support from such notables as Marshall McLuhan, Buckminster Fuller and Major General Franklin Davis, former commandant of the United States War College.

A lot of text offering no positive evidence for an alternative, just one painfully long disjointed argument of incredulity based in arguments of general (and clearly personal) ignorance...

Sherburne even claims that in this way he has «educed arguments that strongly suggest the desirability of limiting immediate objectification to contiguous occasions as a general metaphysical principle» (PS 1:113, italics mine).

They are often specially trained to critically analyze arguments, to seek clarification of terms and root out presuppositions, to provide a general perspective that covers a variety of details, and to convey a continuity of valuable ideas derived from a distinguished line of predecessors in the history of philosophy.

Consider the following restatements of these arguments in general terms.

Here I will distinguish between a very general line of argument that I do not regard as successful, and a more specific line of argument that seems to me to be completely successful.

Such arguments as «the Church teaches --» were destined to become less and less sufficient to win immediate acceptance for the ideas they prefaced The validity of traditions was questioned; general beliefs about physical phenomena were subjected to various tests.

Perhaps evangelicalism's most common argument concerning Biblical authority runs as follows: If one will grant the general reliability of the New Testament documents as verified historically, then, as the Holy Spirit uses this witness to create faith in Christ as Lord and Savior, the Christian comes to accept Jesus Christ as authoritative.

Christians will find this aspect of the book especially challenging and, in general, there is much to disagree with in Goodman's argument by both Christians and Jews.

Hall's general take is that the question of online church is forcing evangelicals to re-evaluate the presuppositions they are making in their own churches (an argument I am rather....

«116 Nevertheless he believes that Hartshorne's arguments for God's existence are fully relevant to those outside these traditions because these arguments appeal to faith assumptions which are neutral, that is, aspects of general secular experience.

And to accept the arguments of the abolitionist, our great - great - grandparents had to see beyond the «plain meaning» of proof texts like Ephesians 6:1 - 5, Colossians 3:18 - 25; 4:1, and I Timothy 6:1 - 2 and instead be compelled by the general sweep of Scripture toward justice and freedom.

Not meaning to contradict your argument in any way, but the truth is that the problem isn't only in pointing out se - xual impurities, but a general blindness to other forms of sin.

Anyone with a general knowledge of ELE's and comet / meteor impacts on earth could look at your argument in 5 seconds and dismiss it in 6.

Although his general observation is interesting at best, the problem though, is that all of his supporting arguments are nothing more than judgmental in the most narrow - minded way.

Arthur is wrong because of the radically anti-majoritarian bias of his argument — a bias not shared by the Framers because the Framers in general, and Madison in particular, defined «factions» differently from the way in which Arthur defines the term.

After his long and many - sided argument, Tertullian leaves us in no doubt that the general resurrection is to be understood in terms of flesh and blood.

In order to anticipate for the reader the line of argument to be followed and so to facilitate progress, it will first be urged that the concept of God's operation as an enduring, active support of cosmic reality, must be elaborated in such a way that this divine operation itself is envisaged as actively enabling finite beings themselves by their own activity to transcend themselves, and this in such a way that if the concept holds good in general, it will also hold good for the «creation of the spiritual soul» (see below, section 3a).

The cogency of that argument depends wholly upon the first - century expectation of the general resurrection of the dead in terms of which Paul and the early Christians interpreted their experience of the risen Christ.

While they amplify understandings of the structures of becoming that seem to be exemplified everywhere in history, and while they build general arguments based on those structures, they can not be said to be primarily interested in examining any particular historical society This is not to deny that, say, Whitehead or Charles Hartshorne made pungent and perceptive commentaries on the histories in which they lived — for they did.

Hartshorne asserts that, because the question of God's existence is a question of meaning, there are as many possible arguments for God's existence as there are purely general categories.

The general structure of Griffin's argument can be stated quite simply.