Of course, many individual economists do care about how income is distributed on the basis of
ideas about human beings derived from sources other than their discipline.
Not exact matches
The
idea of a paperless office seemed like a joke, and there
was even a book written
about it, «The Myth of the Paperless Office,» which theorized that certain
human characteristics made going paperless an impossible feat.
The
idea, which
was primarily based on the research of psychologists John Mayer and Peter Salovey, quickly took off — and went on to greatly influence the way we think
about emotions and
human behavior.
David Gould, creative services director at online marketing firm Vertical Measures, puts it well: «For users, this reinforces the
idea that the result
is reputable: this link isn't just the result of robotic SEO manipulation, but rather it
's from a
human being who we can learn more
about.»
«The harmful misconception
about entrepreneurship in our region
is that an entrepreneur
is some sort of young genius who has an
idea impossible to understand for the normal
human being,» Fadel says.
To understand why he doesn't listen to them, it
's helpful to know something else
about Thiel: He
is deeply invested, philosophically and financially, in the
idea of extreme
human life extension.
They have no
idea what they
are talking
about, no
idea how the universe came into
being, how universal laws came into
being or how self searching organisms like
Humans came into
being, but know pretty well that Christianity
is just plain bad.
I don't accept anybody else's subjective experiences because I have some
idea about how easily the
human brain can fool itself into experiencing things that aren't real.
The
idea that a
being would create the entire thing — with 400,000,000,000 galaxies, EACH with 100, 000,000,000 starts and even more planets, then sit back and wait 13,720,000,000 years for
human beings to evolve on one planet so he could «love them» and send his son to Earth to talk to a nomadic group of Jews
about sheep and goats in Iron Age Palestine (while ignoring the rest of the 200 million people then alive) makes no sense to us.
The concept of international
human rights from which no country
is exempt
is consonant with the
idea that Shari'a, the large body of legal tradition that informs the Muslim community
about how God requires it to live,
is in some sense the rule of God.
Instead, every
human philosophy and religious system
is filled with
ideas about working our way back into the good graces of whatever deity
is being worshipped, and
about pleasing and appeasing the gods who
are angry with us.
It
's interesting that all
humans from all cultures pretty much share the same
ideas about what
is right and wrong, good and evil.
But sometimes we earthlings can not get much further in our thinking
about such things as love, fidelity, commitment and caring than to summon forth the image of some mama somewhere who will always
be for us the concrete
human experience of such divine
ideas.
Complaints
about the cultural «imposition» of
ideas about universal
human rights
are, more often than not, in the service of nationalism, racism, ideology, or power politics - or all of these in combination.
Anytime I questioned the
idea of God damning the majority of the
human population to hell, I
was told that this subject
was not negotiable, that God picks and chooses who He wants to save and we can't do anything
about it.
The
idea that we
are not
human beings on a spiritual journey, but instead spiritual
beings on a
human journey, and we can sense and know all kinds of things
about God through Jesus.
Oh, the Calvinists could make perfect sense of it all with a wave of a hand and a swift, confident explanation
about how Zarmina had
been born in sin and likely predestined to spend eternity in hell to the glory of an angry God (they called her a «vessel of destruction»);
about how I should just
be thankful to
be spared the same fate since it
's what I deserve anyway;
about how the Asian tsunami
was just another one of God
's temper tantrums sent to remind us all of His rage at our sin;
about how I need not worry because «there
is not one maverick molecule in the universe» so every hurricane, every earthquake, every war, every execution, every transaction in the slave trade, every rape of a child
is part of God
's sovereign plan, even God
's idea;
about how my objections to this paradigm represented unrepentant pride and a capitulation to humanism that placed too much inherent value on my fellow
human beings;
about how my intuitive sense of love and morality and right and wrong
is so corrupted by my sin nature I can not trust it.
Stephen Fry speaking
about atheists: «The glory — anything — we take credit for what
is great
about man and we take blame for what
is dreadful
about man, we neither grovel or apologise at the feet of a god, or
are so infantile as to project the
idea that we once had a father as
human beings and we therefore should have a divine one too.
Humans is not
been without their countless
ideas about how to get to heaven, but when it comes to our word verses God's word, I always bet on God's Word.
Finally, the fact that religion - at least in the West - learned something
about human rights from democratic experience does not mean that «
human rights
is not a religious
idea,» as Schlesinger dogmatically asserts.
While there
are serious reasons to have reservations
about research into
human cloning, the
idea that it would undermine the relationship between men and women or the basic family unit
is not morally or theologically convincing.
Just imagine — If the
human race
is still around in a thousand years and we
were somehow able to listen in on a discussion regarding what we now think
is true in all of these areas, I
'm guessing there would
be lots of chuckling
about our «primitive»
ideas.
I'll even offer observations -
humans have manipulated existing organisms dna, created new virus and bacteria, clone animals, and attempt to create new animals - yet simple minded folks still reject the
idea that another more intelligent creature might have done the same thing and created life on earth in the same fashion while at the same time acknowledging that there
is a strong likelihood of other life existing in this universe - talk
about being dumbed down and arrogant.
The Holocaust
was, in largest part, the consequence of
ideas about human nature,
human rights, the imperatives of history and scientific progress, the character of law, the bonds and obligations of political community.
If the Bible
is nothing more than a true and accurate record of
human ideas, then it doesn't help us much at all in knowing anything for sure
about God, ourselves, our condition, or anything of eternal significance.
Once one has given up as incredible and impossible (save for mythological purposes) the Greek
idea of a god who comes down to earth and walks
about as a
human being, there
are two possibilities open for the interpretation of Jesus Christ.
This raised questions
about the Enlightenment
idea that the sort of reason embodied in academic disciplines could liberate
human beings from error and provide the basis of social life.
I think the most disappointing thing
about religion (and I don't mean to offend here)
is that it diminishes the
idea of
human potential.
The
idea that non believers have nothing to care
about, nothing to live for and no reason to treat their fellow
humans decently
is a lie perpetrated by those who wish to keep people in bondage to the myth of a loving, yet just deity.
This optimistic approach to man's virtue and the problem of evil expresses itself philosophically as the
idea of progress in history.17 The empirical method of modern culture has
been successful in understanding nature; but, when applied to an understanding of
human nature, it
was blind to some obvious facts
about human nature that simpler cultures apprehended by the wisdom of common sense.
The
idea that a
being would create the entire thing — with 400,000,000,000 galaxies, EACH with 100, 000,000,000 starts and even more planets, then sit back and wait 13,720,000,000 years for
human beings to evolve on one planet so he could «love them» and send his son to Earth to talk to a nomadic group of Jews
about sheep and goats in Greco - Roman Palestine (while ignoring the rest of the 200 million people then alive) makes no sense to us.
What would happen if... the
idea of developing
human beings was considered so important and vital that each neighborhood had within walking distance a Family Growth Center which
was a center for learning
about being human, from birth to death?
It
is knowledge of God, not the
ideas of
humans about God.
He holds simultaneously that existing democratic
ideas, traditions, and institutions
were often championed in actual history by those who
were non-Christians or even anti-Christian; and yet that, in building better than they knew, such persons
were often generating in
human temporal life constructs whose foundations
were not only consistent with Jewish and Christian convictions
about the realities of ethical and political life, but in a sense dependent on them.
The
idea that a
being would create the entire thing — with 400,000,000,000 galaxies, EACH with 100, 000,000,000 stars and even more planets, then sit back and wait 13,720,000,000 years for
human beings to evolve on one planet so he could «love them» and send his son to Earth to talk to a nomadic group of Jews
about sheep and goats in Iron Age Palestine (while ignoring the rest of the 200 million people then alive) makes no sense to us.»
We
are so used to thinking
about the
human quest for God that we can not easily grasp the
idea of God's taking the initiative in making himself known, especially when it
is affirmed that he has done so in specific historical events and developments.
Religion certainly
is an invention of the
human mind, meant to organize and express
ideas we have
about spirituality.
So in case what has
been expounded here
is correct, in case there
is no incommensurability in a
human life, and what there
is of the incommensurable
is only such by an accident from which no consequences can
be drawn, in so far as existence
is regarded in terms of the
idea, Hegel
is right; but he
is not right in talking
about faith or in allowing Abraham to
be regarded as the father of it; for by the latter he has pronounced judgment both upon Abraham and upon faith.
Calvin understood that doubt
was a part of the faith experience, because
human nature itself finds
ideas about God and His goodness so outside of what we can understand: «For unbelief
is so deeply rooted in our hearts, and we
are so inclined to it, that not without hard struggle
is each one able to persuade himself of what all confess with the mouth: namely, that God
is faithful.»
One can tease out of the way the story
is told some
ideas about the structure of
human beings: body, emotions, will, soul, spirit, and so forth.
The
idea that you can not bring any objective
ideas about metaphysics or the good of the
human being to public debate
is sometimes called «procedural liberalism», or in the words of the late, great R.J. Neuhaus, the «naked public square».
But please don't ask me to
be quiet
about their
ideas, because frankly, I think there
are a mega-ton of «Christian»
ideas out there that
are actually harmful, damaging, abusive, and even cruel to the
human being and to community.
But the
idea that every
human law
is imperfect, and therefore unjust to some extent, does indeed make sense, because we can imagine a perfectly just judge who administers perfect justice» who assesses a person's talents, motives, opportunities, weaknesses, ideals, history, and everything else
about him, and then judges all his actions against the standard of what he
is able to do.
For those who have the patience, the chief reward of Participant Observer
is a first - hand account of the wars of
ideas about human nature that have dominated much of the intellectual history of the past half century.
In this cross-disciplinary conversation I turn first to what
is known
about the brain, then to what we understand
about belief, and finally, on the basis of that convergence of
ideas, to an examination of the cultural symbol - images of Byzantine and medieval architecture, which express both cognitive and cosmic ways of understanding
human life.
In the dominant world view the inclusion of
human beings in nature meant that all these
ideas about God acting in the hearts and minds of believers became irrelevant.
The
idea about having to have
human like beingS, visable or invisible, manipulate things to prove intelligence,
is the underlying fallacy of any argument against an intelligent universe.
To this formidable process of natural compression there may well
be added the artificial constraint imposed by a stronger
human group upon a weaker; we have only to look
about us at the present time to see how this
idea is seeking, indeed rushing towards, its realization.
As you say, Marx appears to talk
about ideas that
are good, and you don't notice the essential elements that
are missing from his ideologies — such as the rightful place of
humans under God and in relation to one another — the recognition of imperfect and sinful nature of humanity, the inherent dignity of created things.
All these show that ours
is a historical context conducive, not only to inter-religious but also to religion - ideology dialogues on building a common body of insights
about being and becoming
human - a dialogue in which Christianity can make a contribution from its
idea of reconciliation of humanity and the creation of a Secular Koinonia across religions, cultures and ideologies.