Sentences with phrase «intelligent people think»

Lesser intelligent people think they need to come up with an answer for everything, even the unknowable.

Not exact matches

When it's time to say no, emotionally intelligent people avoid phrases such as «I don't think I can» or «I'm not certain.»

Emotionally intelligent people build strong relationships because they are constantly thinking about others.

Emotionally intelligent people separate their thoughts from the facts in order to escape the cycle of negativity and move toward a positive, new outlook.

When it's time to say no, emotionally intelligent people avoid phrases like «I don't think I can» or «I'm not certain.»

This happy situation would not last long, but many intelligent people sure thought it would.

«I think all of us are very bright, intelligent people — but we have, to different degrees, limited experiences in all the aspects that are necessary to run a successful business,» Chapin explains.

People can tell you you're beautiful, smart, intelligent, the best, or they can tell you that you are the most horrible human being on earth — but what matters is what you think about yourself.

But being persuasive means being convincing — which means sounding intelligent, since few people spend much time listening to people they think are not intelligent.

You may be wondering: How is it possible for people as intelligent as the Bitcoin Core developers to fail to see the obvious mistakes in their thinking?

So a large number of good and smart people in good faith developed an investing strategy that they thought was supported by the peer - reviewed research but in reality was the OPPOSITE of what the peer - reviewed research would support once all the peer - reviewed research needed to make intelligent choices had been published.

It allows me to think and put my thoughts together and put it out there and get feedback from very intelligent people so it helps my training in that way.

I think that, in most instances, groups of intelligent people have so many inherent liabilities that a lone individual has a far better chance of making good decisions.

I think we both are free thinking intelligent people who disagree about this subject.

The clergy is no more inherently intelligent and qualified than anyone else, but plenty of people meekly think whatever they are told to think, without introspection.

I am glad that there was a well - thought out debate between two very intelligent people who happen to adhere to different viewpoints.

You said, «I thought you were looking for the kind of response i gave and so many of the people that I have been studying with are very intelligent and humble about it but again with you there is no serious response.»

I thought you were looking for the kind of response i gave and so many of the people that I have been studying with are very intelligent and humble about it but again with you there is no serious response.

I think it's hilarious that CNN has a «Belief» blog with the sole mission of ridiculing these lower intelligent people.

No intelligent person would think that the only real things are those which are proven with evidence.

There was a time when I was, independently, reading Behe and all about intelligent design and was thoroughly involved in debating «evolutionists» and arguing with people accusing them of thinking only within the «trance» of science.

your «webbed» creatures never would have made it out of the dustbin of extinction and i believe a majority of intelligent and logically - thinking people would agree with me.

People who equate the two are often those who think people who agree with them are more intelligent than people who dPeople who equate the two are often those who think people who agree with them are more intelligent than people who dpeople who agree with them are more intelligent than people who dpeople who do not.

i love it when people come on post sites and the best they have is to critique grammar and not thought... please come up with something more intelligent to say than that... you look foolish, too

This person obviously thinks this bumper - sticker nibblet of thought is in some way ironic, intelligent, biting, whatever...

I think you have it backwards CaptianObvious... the majority of intelligent people can reconcile the realities of science with the faith in religion.

This President, some think, is the poorest exemplar of of intelligent internationalism one could imagine, the last person on whom to rely to to build a credible case for this position.

I thought it vital at this stage to find intelligent people who were both Christian and literate: Christians who'd read Proust, that sort of thing.

I think its a fantastic idea to «create your own religion,» but I know of no intelligent person who would say that «man exists by accident,» so I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.

I think religious people aren't necessarily less intelligent or less educated than atheists — although a disproportionate number of highly educated people tend to reject religion.

The fact that people think this video makes an intelligent point, m shows how unintelligent americans are.

What kind of thinking can a reasonable, intelligent person use to justify this kind of character assassination upon someone they hardly even know and had never had a hard word pass from my lips to theirs?

Look folks, most intelligent people have a problem with thoughts, they never stop coming, and so one can deduce that any intelligent being may go from one thought to the next and while focused on the latter answer a question in turn.

So I think it's more accurate to say that religion makes otherwise intelligent people believe stupid things.

Do you have any idea at all how absolutely retarded you religious wackos seem to normal intelligent rational thinking people?

With all the evidence, religious people ought to be intelligent design (I mean god - guided evolution by this) supporters at worst, though I would hope that after some serious thoughts on the moral paradoxes induced by belief in the «divine» people would come to their senses.

One bishop, in his self - serving statement of resignation after an unsavory incident with a teenage boy was revealed, went so far as to suggest that his problem was that he was a particularly caring and intelligent person who was attuned to the latest thinking about matters sexual.

Many times I think that people who are not very intelligent get bombarded with too much information and can not handle it or do not understand symbolism and metaphor.

This assumption is common among highly intelligent people, like Weinberg, who haven't thought much about the history and character of Christianity except as a sociological or psychological phenomenon.

Such questions can be difficult - either inherently or contingently so» and imperfect or even unsound positions can be adopted by intelligent and well - informed people who are doing their very best to think honestly and carefully about them.

At the end of the day, those people who can accept and respect that others think differently than them, and can realize that making generalizations about a race / religion / philosophy truly makes you ignorant, those are the people who are truly intelligent.

Moreover, the typical American liberal thinks all morally serious and intelligent people agree with him.

Looking people in the eye, listening to what they have to say and making an intelligent response that lets them know we really heard what they were saying, not acting like we're in a hurry to move on but have time to listen, letting them know they are more important than our stupid cell phones, encouraging them and letting them know we think they can succeed — all of those things are extremely important in building relationships, including relationships with homeless people.

The problem is that organized religion is as much political animal as any other human convention involving more than 2 people, and spiritual, thinking individuals are intelligent enough to know that churches / mosques / community reprogramming centers actually have very little to do with what one actually believes...

Person's aim, much more modest than the title would seem to indicate, was to write «an introduction to Kirk's thought that will serve the intelligent, interested reader, in a manner accessible to the nonspecialist.»

I thought it would be easy for all the really intelligent people like yourself to be able to prove he doesn't exist.

A great gulf began to open up between what intelligent people were thinking and saying on the one hand, and what the church continued to teach on the other.

You'd think that we would at least have one intelligent person to vote for yet here we are, forced once again to choose the better amougst the worst... why even vote?

I can't imagine anyone sitting around thinking to themselves: «Gee, I wonder whether I should choose to be straight, which is considered normal and acceptable; or perhaps choose to be gay, which is roundly condemned by a large percentage of otherwise intelligent people, considered a sin by many churches, was once illegal in most states, will likely result in my being shunned, abused, ridiculed, abandoned, abused, and beaten — possibly killed; will deny me many rights and advantages available to married people; may cost me jobs; and which in general will set me outside of society, marginalized and ostracized.

Any attempt at applying «logic» to explain the bible by people who are believers and still think of themselves as rather intelligent (self - delusion is a symptom / cause of religious belief) always ends up in ridiculous arguments...