Sentences with phrase «human knowledge seems»

Not exact matches

When it comes to medical treatment, the brain and central nervous system remain the darkest, most forbidding frontiers in the human body — and yet our knowledge of how the brain and mind actually work seems to be growing by leaps each year.

If you can not distinguish the truth being communicated from its culturally and historically conditioned manner of expression, then it seems impossible to cope with advances in human knowledge which show up the limitations and inaccuracies of the earlier ideas.

In every truth there is something more than we would have expected, in the love that we receive there is always an element that surprises us -LSB-...] In all knowledge and in every act of love the human soul experiences something «over and above», which seems very much like a gift that we receive, or a height to which we are raised.»

In the light of man's unrelenting attack on disease, some biologists believe that development of deadly germs is a betrayal of the human race as well as of the ideals of science; one - hundredth of an ounce of botulism toxin could kill a million people, and its production seems to further neither scientific knowledge nor any peacetime applications.

As human knowledge advances, it seems, the realm of mystery, at least as it is often understood, will gradually shrink and eventually disappear from view altogether.

The cosmic tide may at one time have seemed to be immobilized, lost in the vast reservoir of living forms; but through the ages the level of consciousness was steadily rising behind the barrier, until finally, by means of the human brain (the most «centro - complex» organism yet achieved to our knowledge in the universe) there has occurred, at a first ending of time, the breaking of the dykes, followed by what is now in progress, the flooding of Thought over the entire surface of the biosphere.

The claim to absolute knowledge, the appeal to a form of universalism that should inform civilization that is not based on empirical indexes alone, and the regulation of human sexuality that religious traditions promote make religion seem a threat to modern liberal society.

Baden Powell believed that it was within the power of science to make rapid advances in human knowledge in all directions and to unravel sooner or later those mysteries which at the moment seemed miraculous and mysterious.

Suffice it to say that the conceptuality which I accept — and accept because it seems to do justice to deep analysis of human experience and observation, as well as to the knowledge we now have of the way «things go» in the world — lays stress on the dynamic «event» character of that world; on the inter-relationships which exist in what is a societal universe, on the inadequacy of «substance» thinking to describe such a universe of «becoming» and «belonging», on the place of decisions in freedom by the creatures with the consequences which such decisions bring about, and on the central importance of persuasion rather than coercive force as a clue to the «going» of things in that universe.

But you seem to be missing a very important point: nobody will have the knowledge and experience and not develop a bias one way or the other, it's just plain human nature.

In this era of the human genome map, it would seem a simple matter to pinpoint the bit of DNA responsible for each disease and use that knowledge to find a cure.

But it seems uninterested in players and their accomplishments, and with that lack of interest comes a lack of the human touch necessary to make sense of the knowledge it offers... The Witness is like the island on which it takes place: a machine, to the core.

What's most difficult to believe about this aspect is that 20 years prior, the world populace already had a scare in which apes from the future proclaim that humanity's reign will end thanks to the apes, so to think that this knowledge would be largely ignored by humans willing to train apes into being as smart and skilled as possible seems a pretty big implausibility pill to swallow.

The answer is simply that the publishers will have the full control over your use of written human knowledge that they've always wanted - which should be a prospect that makes the convenience argument seem largely irrelevant.

As in dreams, these phantoms seem intent on communicating knowledge and human emotion through symbols and their pantomime of cryptic gestures.

Climate knowledge is growing rapidly now and while there still remain some interesting challenges to the status quo on certain points (for example, exactly how it is that CO ₂ and CH ₄ started rising some 5000 years ago, if not by human impacts, or how it is that humans overwhelmed expected gradual declines and added enough to achieve those rises that far back) that need further research... the very conservative consensus, which must be conservative by its nature since it takes time for consensus to develop as further research helps to close gaps and remove or improve assumptions, is always playing catch - up it seems.

If the skep response seems a bit overwrought, what of those lining up to robustly defend it as excellent scientific work that should be lauded for it's advancement of human knowledge?

historical baseline, whilst I am talking about a 2C rise above our current / the most recently calculated (2017) GAST which unarguably will take us into temperatures, weather and climate conditions that humans have never before experienced... to the best of my knowledge (though I seem to remember a line in one version of the bible that says something like»..

I never claimed genius nor deep knowledge of human physiology, but it seems to me that Willis is over-simplifying what some climate scientists are saying so he can build a straw man and then knock it down.

This lack of vision seems to be more a sort of self imposed blinders than an example of the limits of human knowledge or imagination.

In my notes I wrote: «don't really know what's coming next, but need to seize on this opportunity, you plus Watson, the assistant who knows all of the research / knowledge in your domain; humans can't do this alone, ability, biases, etc.» Although, it seems I also commented: «fascinating and terrifying.»

This article carefully treads around key questions that are unfortunately neglected far too often by human science publications: how did the assumption that it's normal for heterosexual men to gaze at (what they perceive as) women's bodies come to be, and how does this normalization intersect with cultural practices and knowledges that make rape seem inevitable?