Sentences with phrase «know whether humans»

Most of the time, he says he doesn't know whether humans are causing global climate change.

«We don't know whether humans were part of that death.

How would we know whether humans had introduced those DNA sequences unique to BioBrick parts?

The president of Kinder Morgan Canada, Ian Anderson, recently claimed he is not smart enough to know whether human activity — i.e. the fossil fuel industry — causes climate change.

Level 4b: Uncertainty with quantification; says or implies that it's not known whether human input to global warming is > 50 % or < = 50 %.

Not exact matches

As the fourth industrial revolution, otherwise known as Industry 4.0 or I4.0, builds momentum around artificial intelligence, robotics and machine learning, one of the biggest concerns expressed is whether human workers will be replaced by robots.

Several years ago Liberal MP John Mckay introduced a private member's bill known as C - 300, which would have compelled the federal government to determine whether Canadian companies were upholding certain environmental and human rights standards when operating abroad — and withdraw federal support from offenders.

It is a lesson of human experience whether the issue is playground bullying, Enron or Europe in the 1930s that the worst outcomes occur when good people find reasons to accommodate themselves to what they know is wrong.

Whether 12 ordinary citizens can ignore as jurors what they know as human beings is another question.

And it's that upside from the part where human accumulation of science, technology know - how, deployment in creative ways whether it's a technology product, something that somebody uses technology to produce a non-technology product or just somebody with a crazy - assed idea that people end up liking.

• Wesley Smith says yes, Ross Blackburn says no, to the question of whether one can use secular arguments to defend human dignity, arguing in the pages of the Human Life Review, the always interesting and ever - useful quarterly edited by our good friend Maria McFadden Maffhuman dignity, arguing in the pages of the Human Life Review, the always interesting and ever - useful quarterly edited by our good friend Maria McFadden MaffHuman Life Review, the always interesting and ever - useful quarterly edited by our good friend Maria McFadden Maffucci.

To not only claim to know there is a God but to claim you know his name and how he wants all his slave humans to behave is beyond hubris, it is self deification, claiming to know the mind of God, regardless of whether you rely on some ancient book for that knowledge or not.

And to say that Biblical teachings are invalid because there are other similar beliefs that have older known written sources invalidates the Biblical teachings also should take into consideration that for certain Biblical believers that all those truths whether they are known to have been placed in the Bible first or known thus far to have been placed elsewhere that they believe that they all come via deity who at the beginning of human history on this world dispensed those truths to humanity and that to those who believe in the biblical teachings believe that through time they are more complete than those of other ancient beliefs due to God restoring those truths through revelations given to later prophets like say Moses and other later Old and New Testament prophets and apostles.

I don't know how that can come as a great surprise to anyone with much experience in human friendship, whether same - sex or different - sex.

I have contended further that one can not know what the essence of experience is, or whether temporality is a part of it, merely through generalization of features found in human experience.

People often can not understand the question of human nature because their way of understanding it is framed (whether they know it or not) by the ideas of positivist empiricism.

Uncouth: No, my point is that religion influences human decisions, whether that is to go to war, to torture people, etc..

But the Virgin Birth, like the Cross itself, confounds what we think we know; it confounds our belief that power, whether human power or the brute force of nature, prevails in the world.

-LSB-...] The human community lives on the basis of assumptions it knows not how to produce -LSB-...]- whether we call it trust, fraternity, solidarity or friendship!

The Faith movement's push for such coherence involves affirming, in a neo-Augustinian manner, the dynamic relationship of spiritual mind (whether of the absolute God or of the human soul in his image) with the objects of its knowing, as a metaphysical first principle.

Whether we answer yes or no, we have to grapple with its ultimately having deep human influences on the text.

An interesting perspective... because we can still wonder whether the entire universe is controlled by an alien being who might at any moment do something for which there has been no precedent in all of human memory... we could still see beyond that practically all - powerful being a being that we could rightfully know to be God even to that other being to whom we are at their mercy.

Calvin asked whether human beings have a natural knowledge of God (his answer was yes); whether they can arrange what they know from nature into an intelligible pattern known as natural theology (his answer was no); and whether redeemed — and only redeemed — human beings can construct a legitimate theology of nature by reclaiming nature as a useful source of the true knowledge of God (his answer was yes).

We do not know whether this experience is as old in human history as that of the mythological cosmos.

Then, too, it will presumably be possible to leave it an open question whether the history of human descent as known to us does or does not possess features which only after the Fall of the first man can be thought of to some extent as a predominance of his pre-human past and of his environment, over a sensitivity to the world around him no longer protected by the gift of integrity, and over his lack of adaptation to a particular milieu.

And, oh, when the hour - glass has run out, the hourglass of time, when the noise of worldliness is silenced, and the restless or the ineffectual busyness comes to an end, when everything is still about thee as it is in eternity — whether thou wast man or woman, rich or poor, dependent or independent, fortunate or unfortunate, whether thou didst bear the splendor of the crown in a lofty station, or didst bear only the labor and heat of the day in an inconspicuous lot; whether thy name shall be remembered as long as the world stands (and so was remembered as long as the world stood), or without a name thou didst cohere as nameless with the countless multitude; whether the glory which surrounded thee surpassed all human description, or the judgment passed upon thee was the most severe and dishonoring human judgement can pass — eternity asks of thee and of every individual among these million millions only one question, whether thou hast lived in despair or not, whether thou wast in despair in such a way that thou didst not know thou wast in despair, or in such a way that thou didst hiddenly carry this sickness in thine inward parts as thy gnawing secret, carry it under thy heart as the fruit of a sinful love, or in such a way that thou, a horror to others, didst rave in despair.

«The fundamental convictions as to relations between the human and the divine are sometimes different [from the American religion] among Catholics, Lutherans, and Jews in America, but nearly all else who are believers are American Religionists, whether they are capable of knowing it or not.»

Since God is the hidden, incomprehensible, infinitely difficult end of our human quest, whether or not we come to know Him depends ultimately upon whether God Himself so acts upon us that He produces the kind of sensitivity through which we can respond to Him.

Whether there was ever a time in the past with only one human culture, however primitive, we do not know.

MacIntyre's position is, I think, similar to his characterization of Rosenzweig's in Edith Stein: «We do not begin with some adequate grasp of the concepts of knowledge and truth and in the light of these pass judgment on whether or not we know something of God or whether or not it is true God exists, but rather it is from our encounters with God — and with the world and with human beings — that we learn what it is to have knowledge of what truth is.»

Such intimations of the divine, whether in nature, in personal human intercourse, or elsewhere, can be unmistakably genuine, wonderfully vivid, and inestimably significant, but we are mistaken if we suppose that the God of Christian faith could be known through these alone.

The human will is simply in no way independent of God's all - embracing providential causality.47 «As far as men are concerned, whether they are good or evil, the heart of the Christian will know that their plans, wills, efforts, and abilities are under God's hand; that it is within his choice to bend them whither he pleases and to constrain them whenever he pleases.»

The deeper one is that, at the frontier of a system creaking at the seams, one human being still looks upon another with affection, pity, and mercy, Heart of Jesus to Heart of Jesus, whether we know it or not, whether we admit it or not.

The council has taught us to treat all human beings as «invaluable gift [s]» from God, as truly our brothers whether they are near or far from the fullness of truth known to the Catholic Church — whether they are non-Catholic Christians, the adherents of non-Christian religions, or indeed hardened atheists.

It's hard acknowledging the limits of a medium through which my own writing career has flourished, but I want you to know: The conversations we have here — as encouraging, informative, and life - changing as they can often be — are meant to be brought to dinner tables, coffee shops, AA meetings, parks, church fellowship halls, long car rides, dorm rooms, and diners, among people who (whether they agree or disagree) can look you in the eye and take you in, not as a brand but as a human being.

All I know is that in the end given a choice I would choose to rather believe in God whether real or imagined than any human alive today.

Human Problem No. 1 is no longer that of deciding whether we can escape the socio - physical in - folding of the human race upon itself, since this is irrevocably imposed on us by the physico - chemical structure of the EHuman Problem No. 1 is no longer that of deciding whether we can escape the socio - physical in - folding of the human race upon itself, since this is irrevocably imposed on us by the physico - chemical structure of the Ehuman race upon itself, since this is irrevocably imposed on us by the physico - chemical structure of the Earth.

In the broadest sense it includes everything we know, or think we know, about the human past, whether based on faith, on vague general impressions, or on methodical investigation.

Thus the Protestant Reformation is a decisive moment in the history of the understanding of love, whether one accepts this position or not, for it raises in the sharpest possible way the question of the meaning of the human loves when seen in the light of the love of God as known to faith through Jesus.

Just maybe God has set this human existence up in a way that all the world prays to a different Savior or «God» not knowing who he is But all the prayers — whether they come from Muslims, Buddhists, Jews, and the diverse christain beliefs of Catholics, Protestants, Baptists, Evangelicals et al all end up going to the same Savior or God — and when we get to the afterlife, the Savior — God — Messiah — will reveal himself and greet us by saying - you were all praying to me and did not know it was I becasue of your human limitations

The question is whether a generation which has lost its faith in all the gods of the nineteenth century, that is, in «history,» or «progress,» or «enlightenment,» or the «perfectibility of man,» is not expressing its desire to believe in something, to be committed somehow, even though it is not willing to be committed to a God who can be known only through repentance, and whose majesty judges all human pretensions.

Whether we are teetering on the brink of a grand mistake, or quickening in our rush toward rock bottom, human nature knows all too well the feeling of loss of control.

I saw a cultural Christianity with preachers who often gained audiences, locally in church meetings or globally on television, by saying crazy and buffoonish things, simply to stir up the base and to gain attention from the world, whether that was claiming to know why God sent hurricanes and terrorist attacks or claiming that American founders, one of whom possibly impregnated his own human slaves and literally cut the New Testament apart, were orthodox, Evangelical Christians who, like us, stood up for traditional family values.

The judgement whether human rights had been violated was no longer the exclusive monopoly of national governments.

In finding human cognition «paradoxical» Fr McDermott seems unsure whether hylomorphism (the analysis of all entities into unifying form and individuating matter) reflects simply man's inadequate way of knowing, which can not attain the full structure of reality, or whether this really is the structure of reality.

Whether formulated by Durkheim (a system of beliefs and practices related to sacred things), by Weber (that which finally makes events meaningful), or by Tillich (whatever is of ultimate concern) religion in its «classical» sense refers not so much to labels on a church building as to the imagery (myth, theology, and so forth) by which people make sense of their lives — their «moral architecture,» if you will.6 That human beings differ in their sensitivity to and success in this matter of «establishing meaning» there can be no doubt.

Because this is the sole ideal that has the solidity once owned by Catholicism and the flexibility that this was never able to have, the only one that can always face the future and does not claim to determine it in any particular and contingent form, the only one that can resist criticism and represent for human society the point around which, in its frequent upheavals, in its continual oscillations, equilibrium is perpetually restored, so that when the question is heard whether liberty will enjoy what is known as the future, the answer must be that it has something better still: it has eternity.29

A research community that has no moral standards for directing its investigations or judging the results, that has no way of knowing whether it really knows anything at all, and that saddles human beings with expectations and demands that they (being human and not divine) are constitutionally incapable of fulfilling is in desperate circumstances.

For example, the Church does not know whether the planet is getting warmer, whether such change would be good or bad, or whether human activity is the cause; nor does she know whether minimum - wage laws do more good to the poor by increasing the income of those who work, or more harm to the poor by throwing those with marginal skills out of work.

I doubt whether the human Jesus on his way to the cross knew that resurrection awaited him.