Not exact matches
Those sorts of
questions are much more
interesting and useful than
questions about whether a particular politician should accept paid speaking engagements, and certainly more important than the borderline silly
question of whether money that was accepted in good
faith ought to be paid back.
The Pascals wager I always found a
interesting hurdle for those not of
Faith to overcome but the
question you raised
about the multiple
Faiths.
Since our position here raises
questions about the «permissive» spirit in counseling, it is
interesting to observe the way in which Erich Fromm treats this problem of whether life can be understood without
faith in God.
This sparked an
interesting conversation around the table
about our own
faith journeys and how they have changed course in recent years, which raised some
interesting questions that I would like to pose to you:
It asks a few personal
questions but it is necessary that one fills it with utmost good
faith and does not lie
about their
interests and hobbies.
There's been a range of
interesting reactions to my piece on Pete Seeger's
question about whether confidence in science as a source of human progress is underpinned by fact or
faith.
At a moment at which there are many serious criticisms of liberalism and / or
questions about its future, combined with substantial unanimity among legal academics
about various progressive values (as seen, to be clear, through an establishment lens) and the routine invocation in current scholarly and public writing of things like «rule of law,»
faith in judicial review, and so on, there is a lot of room for
interesting and valuable work
questioning those assumptions and premises.