Sentences with phrase «living in a science world»

Not exact matches

The slice of patients above the age of 60 consumes about 85 % of the drugs and devices and diagnostics out there,» says Justin Stephenson, senior life sciences analyst at Vancouver - based independent investment dealer Haywood Securities Inc. «That is only going to get significantly bigger in the western world, which is the main market for Canadian health - care products in the next five to 10 years.

Shortly thereafter, in 1992, just as Berners - Lee's World Wide Web had come to fruition, Neal Stephenson was inspired by the recent invention, which led to him publishing Snow Crash, a science - fiction novel that illustrated much of today's online life, including a virtual reality where people meet, do business, and play.

More than 35,000 oncologists, researchers, life science executives, and other stakeholders flocked to the world's largest cancer conference between June 3 and 7 to discuss the most exciting new advances in the field.

By investing our resources in our people, we are creating a world - class global infrastructure for the health - care and life science industries.

«Data and insight that comes directly from patient records — real - world evidence — is transforming how pharmaceutical and life science companies develop more precise, targeted therapies,» said Cota CEO John Hervey in a statement.

If you've always dreamed of a world where all marketing's science, technology, and psychology finally align behind truly making a difference in people's lives, this is the trend you've been waiting for.

Our vision is to one day see a world where degenerative brain diseases do not exist and science and technology play a direct role in extending the healthy lives of ourselves and our loved ones.

I came away from this recent conversation with a deeper understanding of the ethical risks posed by AI, insights into behavioral data science, and cautious optimism that we can use these tools and technology to create the financial world we want to live in.

Because of a court case in Louisiana that expressly forbid Biblical Creationism being taught in school science classes, the wording changed and the authors removed references to catastrophism, a world - wide flood, a recent inception of the earth or life, the concept of kinds, or any concepts from Genesis.

I will have to live my whole life surrounded by a world filled with mental midgets who have fooled themselves that faith and belief in deities is the answer instead of using their minds to work out problems, study science and figure out how we leave this planet when it becomes inhabitable in 4 billion years.

now as far as science it seeks the most realible and testible idea about everything in the universe to attempt to explain what we are dealing with; it would be a sad world to live in if science simply said «GOD DID IT» GIVE THAT SOME THOUGHT;

and being aware of your environment, being respectful of those of all beliefs and none beliefs, and of our world, and its about personal responsibility, with that said why is is such a bad thing to believe in something greater than yourself, how can somebody live there life without believing in something, what kind of life is that, life is meant to be discovered, its one big mystery, and all the science in the world can still not prove how we exactly came to be?

I wish we would live in a world where science is encouraged to its fullest.

They were living in a world without science, a world that did not make sense, a world that was scary and illogical, a world that needed explanation.

But you should at least be honest and know that one who believes in the forensic science of origins of life has to have as much faith in the person asserting the theory as one has to have believing God was the witness to the event and told man kind how the world came about in simplistic terms.

The International Information fundamentally represents the dominance and penetration of the technocratic culture into the life of the peoples in the third World, either in the form of science and technology transfer, or in the form of economic development and coqercial advertisement, or in terms of the inculcation of military values such as national security doctrine and peace propagenda.

But I want to live in a world where people generally know that the world is not flat, and where science and knowledge can advance without having to overcome religious obstacles.

Science does explain all your questions, you just simply refuse to believe that evolution, over millions and billions of years, could result in the wonderful world we live in.

Vannevar Bush, for example, a former president of MIT and director of the government's Office of Scientific Research and Development during the war, published an influential article in the Atlantic Monthly which «offered an amazingly prescient view of the effect of science on the world economy and of computers in daily life.»

We must take pains to show that acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord does not carry with it the three - storey universe; that to be a Christian does not imply that one believes that God is the immediate cause of all that happens, however true it may be that he is «first» and «final» cause; and that the findings of modem science as to how God in fact works in the world only illuminate the central truth that in Christ he has worked with a singular intensity and (as we might say) directness to bring to men wholeness of life.

The indeterminacy that science has found at the levels of matter (uncertainty), life (chance mutations), and human existence (freedom) are essential cosmological ingredients if the autonomy of the world is not to collapse into the being of the Creator - God (in which case it would no longer be a world distinct unto itself).

We have to begin to realize that laws and codes of conduct handed down in a time before science, before understanding biology and evolution, before our world was so grossly overpopulated, should no longer govern our lives, even if we otherwise subscribe to the faith.

But in the modern world several sciences have converged to press home to us the rational conclusion that each individual man is a psychosomatic unity, a living physical organism whose various organs, both physical and psychical, can only function as part of the total organism.

1) Evidence of God in Science & Math: Reading some of the worlds leading cosmologists (Hawking, Dawkins, Ross, Behe), etc., they make long and interesting claims of the intricacy of the universe and the balance of the natural elements and gravitational forces necessary for life to exist on this planet.

So, for instance, with the discovery of the New World and the rush of Catholic missions to far - flung lands, many Catholics understood that they were living in a new era of exploration, industry, education, art, literature, devotion, science, and philosophy.

I love how you live in a world built by science, with modern medicine, technology, etc, yet sit here and deny it when it comes to things you disagree with.

science created this marvelous world you live in, your god wants to destroy it.

We live in a world rightly fascinated by the mysteries of the universe and of science, and what we learn over and over again is how small and fragile we really are.

As a christian and one who has lived in the world of science all my working life the answer is that God was the orgin of life that started in a way that is still largly unknown to both the religious and scientific communities.

You're living in a fantasy world Jason and you're completely ignorant of science.

If you believe in science that is fine but i cant force you to believe in GOD like I do but I will tell you that whether or not you except it or not GOD loves you and cares for you and wants you to believe in him but please think about this John 3:16 - 17 For god loves the world he gave is only son that whoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life 17 for god sent not his son into the world to condemn it but through him the world might be saved

With that in mind, I generally discount all of the science and knowledge that has been developed throughout human history as being useful for living in the world we understand, but not truth by any means.

In other words, they have neither gone the way of experience - rich evangelicalism, nor have they offered an experience that relates honestly to people informed by science and a humanistic world - view in their own liveIn other words, they have neither gone the way of experience - rich evangelicalism, nor have they offered an experience that relates honestly to people informed by science and a humanistic world - view in their own livein their own lives.

In one sense the discovery of human individuality was necessary for the development of human rights, the economic individualism orientated to profit and free market produced the modern economy; the separation of human being from nature coupled with the autonomy of the world of science helped the development of technology; and the autonomy of different areas of life like the arts and the government, each to follow purposes and laws inherent in it, did make for unfettered creativity in the various fieldIn one sense the discovery of human individuality was necessary for the development of human rights, the economic individualism orientated to profit and free market produced the modern economy; the separation of human being from nature coupled with the autonomy of the world of science helped the development of technology; and the autonomy of different areas of life like the arts and the government, each to follow purposes and laws inherent in it, did make for unfettered creativity in the various fieldin it, did make for unfettered creativity in the various fieldin the various fields.

We can not share in this mythological picture, continues Bultmann, because we live and think within «the world - picture formed by modern natural science» and within «the understanding man has of himself in accordance with which he understands himself to be a closed inner unity that does not stand open to the incursion of supernatural powers.

What actually happens with Gutiérez and others close to him is something like this: they turn to the social sciences for help in understanding the dynamics of the world in which they live; among those they read is Marx, who describes a world in which a «class struggle» is going on.

Just as sciences, technologies and scholarly disciplines arise out of and return to the life - worlds of everyday living and dying, so the logical and theoretical methods of argumentative discourse arise out of and return to participatory «fusions of horizon» in the «mutual agreements» of historical narrative praxis (BOR 144ff, TW 113ff).

But as I hope my earlier analysis of the scientific writing on life extension made clear, there is no working picture or vision of what our lives, as individuals or living in common, might actually be like in the world that science might bring about.

So far as I understand the matter, the conditions of reasonableness in our situation are secular, even if not secularistic, conditions, i.e., they demand the unqualified acceptance both of the method and world - picture of modern science and critical history and of the reality and significance of this world of time and change, which is the context of our lives as secular men.

The chapter headings give us an overview of the work: Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ: the theological project of Joseph Ratzinger; The critique of criticism: beginning the search for a new theological synthesis; The hermeneutic of faith: critical and historical foundations for a biblical theology; The spiritual science of theology: its mission and method in the life of the church; Reading God's testament to humankind: biblical realism, typology, and the inner unity of revelation; The theology of the divine economy: covenant, kingdom, and the history of salvation; The embrace of salvation: mystagogy and the transformation ofsacrifice; The cosmic liturgy: the Eucharistic kingdom and the world as temple; The authority of mystery: the beauty and necessity of the theologian's task.

However you understand Genesis 1 - 4, C. John Collins invites you to realize that these chapters lay the foundation for all good science and philosophy, for they tell us that the world came from a good and wise Creator, who made the world for us to live in, enjoy, and rule (p. 266).

It may be called modernism, but surely one can live in the modern world, accepting its science and engaging in its work, without falling into idolatry of the modern.

It follows in the footsteps of the very best of the science fiction genre in forcing us to ask uncomfortable questions about the world we live in.

Hitherto, in the eyes of a Science too much accustomed to reconstruct the world on one spatial axis extending in a line from the infinitely small to the infinitely great, the larger molecules of organic chemistry, and still more the living cellular composites, have existed without any defined position, like wandering stars, in the general scheme of cosmic elements.

Here and there it may be, we can catch a glimpse of the wonderful order in nature, the regularity of the stars, scattered over the wide spaces of the universe yet obedient to one law; the order to be found even in the microscopic world, as also within visible things concerning which science has given such amazing information in recent years; the order in the construction of a flower or of an animal, from the flea to the whale, a noteworthy obedience to law even in the life of man.

Heck without incest there wouldn't be anyone living in the south and Chad wouldn't be here to share his simple visions of science and the world.

«Science,» she writes, «is important for exactly the same reason that the study of history or of language is important — because we are beings that need in general to understand the world in which we live, and our culture has chosen a way of life to which that understanding is central.»

The world students» design - science revolution may possibly result in a general reorientation of world society's awareness, common sense, and intelligence which, just «in the nick of time,» will bring mankind into conscious promulgation of the do - more - with - lessing invention revolution to be applied directly to gaining man's living advantage, which can accomplish the 100 percent physical success of all humanity in less than one - half the time it would take to occur only as the inadvertent by - product of further weapons detouring of human initiative.

Rizal Mercado, Hawking has lived longer with this disease than should be physically possible, and in fact perhaps the reason why he went so far in the world of science rather than other interests was BECAUSE he had the disease.

Considering his condition is likely what allowed him to spend most of his time thinking and doing physics, thus making him one of the world's most well respected physicists and living far longer with ALS than any other individual before him, and is still able to communicate, I would imagine Maire is correct and he is an atheist not because he is all that bitter, but because the further people tend to go in science, the less they tend to believe in religion.