Sentences with phrase «knowledge about science»

Be part of the Conference and showcase your work and join the CPPA in its mandate to disseminate knowledge about the science and practice of positive psychology, and to facilitate collaboration and communication amongst all parties interested in this field.

We can have knowledge about science without being scientists.

The reason why no scientist has said this is because they know full well that knowledge about science is not binary — science isn't either settled or not settled.

«No scientists would be scientists if they thought there was nothing left to find out... The reason why no scientist has said this (that the science is settled) is because they know full well that knowledge about science is not binary — science isn't either settled or not settled.

What keeps me from figuring out that question is his general lack of knowledge about the science.

This book is a collection of narrative essays that presents expert knowledge about science, technology, and innovation policy without the use of buzzwords and jargon.

Americans» general knowledge about science is no more than modestly related to their views about climate matters.

Any of their investment books are worth reading if you want to deepen your knowledge about the science of investing, or need more convincing that you should pay attention to it.

The major barriers to integrating educational computer games into the classroom included lack of computers (70 %), lack of time (49 %), time needed for preparation for school and national high - stakes testing (27 %), lack of knowledge about science games (27 %), and a lack of technology support within schools (24 %).

Teachers in TEC were provided with opportunities to review and update their knowledge about science.

The growth of realistic knowledge about science, geology, astronomy and evolution in the 18th and 19th centuries showed that there was no need for religious and orthodox explanation of the various phenomenons and process of Nature.

The rehab coach will have far more detailed knowledge about the science of injury, recovery and low level performance, whereas the strength coach will have more experience and skill at the high end of the spectrum.

Self - practice is crucial for deepening the knowledge about the science.

And three - quarters of AAAS scientists say too little STEM education is a major factor in the public's limited knowledge about science — which an overwhelming majority of scientists see as a problem for science in general.

It is clearly recognized that the diffusion among the general public of knowledge about science and its methods is a difficult, slow, and never - ending job.

Teachers who have worked as scientists or engineers bring real - world knowledge about science that teachers with just an education degree can't match, Prival says, and students respond to that.

It illustrates the strength of connection between political affiliation and opinion, and it shows issues for which other factors — such as educational attainment, knowledge about science, religious affiliation or demographic characteristics — are strongly tied to the public's views.

Especially ones that encourage, support, finance, participate in, teach and share knowledge about science.

Science teachers should teach whatever is the current knowledge about science.

You just have to take the time to think about it long enough to see that these ancient written texts were written by humans with less knowledge about science than we have now.

The first explanation I looked at was people's level of education and their knowledge about science.

Not exact matches

In uBiome's case it was citizen scientists — regular people who dig science and like to learn about themselves and apply that knowledge to their own health and other people with similar interests.

Learn more about the science of influence and persuasion and how you can use this knowledge to build your business in the infographic below:

The fact that our knowledge of the natural world has changed and our belief about the cause of natural events has changed over time only highlights the importance of Science.

However, in practice, religion uses its supposed knowledge and makes claims about the natural world, sometimes in conflict with what science says.

But what is most striking about this image is again its similarity to Miller's A Canticle for Leibowitz, where a religious order like the Benedictines is what keeps at least a fragmentary knowledge of science alive after a nuclear catastrophe.

Many people place man at a higher plateau in knowledge as we learn more and more about our universe through science, and yet our predecessors knew enough to not throw out their religion just because their knowledge grew in scientific matters.

But before expressing this belief, Fr Holloway makes a general remark about the nature of scientific knowledge which may serve as an introduction to Polanyi's refutation of Scientific Positivism and his proposal that science is Personal Knowledge: «It is most significant that here, as so very often in the discoveries of science, it was not the inductive data which was the real beginning of the breakthrough in knowledge, but a deductive vision glimpsed through scanty data which thrilled and excited the mind... from then on the hunt is up for the clues and the final prooknowledge which may serve as an introduction to Polanyi's refutation of Scientific Positivism and his proposal that science is Personal Knowledge: «It is most significant that here, as so very often in the discoveries of science, it was not the inductive data which was the real beginning of the breakthrough in knowledge, but a deductive vision glimpsed through scanty data which thrilled and excited the mind... from then on the hunt is up for the clues and the final prooKnowledge: «It is most significant that here, as so very often in the discoveries of science, it was not the inductive data which was the real beginning of the breakthrough in knowledge, but a deductive vision glimpsed through scanty data which thrilled and excited the mind... from then on the hunt is up for the clues and the final prooknowledge, but a deductive vision glimpsed through scanty data which thrilled and excited the mind... from then on the hunt is up for the clues and the final proof.»

It seemed that, right or wrong, my original essay was all about science, about real, tangible, factual knowledge of the material world.

Science was created by God to observe and gain knowledge about Gods creation... Evolution like I said is still only a theory still unproven and still looks silly in the eyes of Science was created by God to observe and gain knowledge about Gods creation... Evolution like I said is still only a theory still unproven and still looks silly in the eyes of sciencescience

During thisperiod our knowledge of the natural sciences has progressed and there are now significant tensions between the Thomistic synthesis and what the scientific method has revealed about our world.

Thomas Kuhn's work on paradigm shifts in the history of science presents the idea that changes or increases in our understanding not only fill out gaps in previous knowledge, but at times bring about a reorganisation of the structure of the theories or paradigms by which previous ideas were organised and understood.

As science learns more and more about how the Universe works, the ignorance gaps in our scientific knowledge become smaller and smaller... the same with your man made god named Jehovah.

The Holy Quran is all about giving simplified examples for the brains of that time, and addressed to illiterate Nomadic Beduins of the dry Arabian desert to understand and they have managed to do understand it and achieved miraculously for centuries in creating a multinational Islamic communities that has contributed so much to today's knowledge and science.

Especially when those people lived long before the modern era of science and had no knowledge of the things we now know to be true about the universe.

Science is constantly in motion as we strive to fill the gaps in our knowledge and understanding, and the scientific method leaves nothing off the chopping block for further refinement and alteration to fit the mounting evidence about how the world works around us.

In the separation model, theology and science abide by different rules on different turfs, say different things about life and bespeak «different levels of knowledge.»

I can count the many times I have relied on my knowledge of science when telling people about my faith, happy to state that the most influential scientists also believed and saw God in the workings of the universe.

Neither the alleged source of divine revelation, nor modern science can make this claim about the knowledge to which they lead us.

The physical sciences and the life sciences also yield their full harvest of knowledge about man only when the understanding gained through direct self - consciousness is used in the interpretation of the methods and results of objective scientific investigation and of technical invention.

Thus, socia1 science is a man - made system of knowledge about man - made social systems.

Science and metaphysics too, providing the latter is viewed as a natural mode of cognition and is not unconsciously supplemented by theological knowledge about God's saving action in the history of redemption, can each from their own angle quite well think of God as the transcendent ground of all reality, of its existence and of its becoming, as the primordial reality comprising everything, supporting everything, but precisely for that reason can not regard him as a partial factor and component in the reality with which we are confronted, nor as a member of its causal series.

He also says that, for any knowledge of God beyond «the bare outline of the dimensions of his being,» we must look to empirical science and theology.6 This, says he, is the reason why purely philosophical theology can say nothing about such pivotal religious doctrines as sin, grace, and forgiveness.

The only reasonable answer I can come up with is that the bible was the word of man — not god — and it was based on legends, stories, knowledge and science as it existed about 2000 years ago.

All science is, is the philosophy of gaining knowledge about the material world through observation and experimentation.

The result was a split that forced the theological reformers back onto faith presuppositions whenever they spoke about religion, and onto an increasing reliance on naturalistic approaches to the sensible world whenever they wanted to speak about ethics, science, or knowledge in general.

Within liberal churches we need movements stressing a more vital personal religious experience — so long as that experience is enriched by all the knowledge about nature, persons and society which God has more recently revealed through responsible science.

This article is about evolution, Darwinism, being a part of God, a force that pushes things to evolve, and Stephen Hawking's argument is linked to the limitations of science or knowledge.

Knowledge about individual community leaders, the history and development of a town, the way decisions are made in its institutions and social groups, the deals being made in the world of politics and business, the norms and values in the arts and sciences, the presuppositions and operational concepts of the professions — this is grist for the mill of a core group which has the responsibility of planning strategy for the mission of a particular church in an American community.

You say base your wisdom and knowledge on science, and know one has provided evidence to you about christianity.