Sentences with phrase «modern human sciences»

Not exact matches

LeadGenius uses a unique combination of the most modern data science technology and skilled human researchers working in concert with each other on client - defined B2B marketing and sales data projects.

«This scenario reconciles the discrepancy in the nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA phylogenies of archaic hominins and the inconsistency of the modern human - Neanderthal population split time estimated from nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA,» says researcher Johannes Krause, also of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human Hishuman - Neanderthal population split time estimated from nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA,» says researcher Johannes Krause, also of the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human HisHuman History.

Ancient religions should welcome the political achievements of modernity while calling modernity to open its windows and doors to a world of transcendent truth and love: ``... the great achievements of the modern age» the recognition and guarantee of freedom of conscience, of human rights, of the freedom of science and hence of a free society» should be confirmed and developed while keeping reason and freedom open to their transcendent foundation, so as to ensure that these achievements are not undone....

I do find it puzzling, however, to watch theologians, both conservative and liberal, come to the defense of the human, the rational, objectivity, the «text,» «moral values,» science, and all the other conceits the modern university cherishes in the name of «humanism.»

The bible was written by primitive, desert dwelling humans who wrote these stories over 1500 years before mankind discovered what we now know to be modern science.

With these words, President Clinton announced one of the great feats of modern science, the mapping of the human genome.

Although fully familiar with the enormous power of modern science, medicine and technology, he held high Christian love as the answer to human needs in the broadest sense: «If you have Christian love,» he declared to a stunned audience, «you have motive for existence, a guide for action, a reason for courage, an imperative necessity for intellectual honesty.»

The modern sciences of genetics and ecology have clearly provided empirical grounds for rejecting these traditional race concepts and for recognizing the fundamental role of education in the creation of human personality — especially in respect to qualities that are so manifestly reflections of cultural patterns.

Maybe modern science is wrong and the world really is only 6,000 years old... maybe God created primates to turn into humans, and the first to become man was Adam... maybe the Big Bang theory was God on the first day creating the heavens and the universe... the fact is, I don't know.

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 fields.

In our generation there is danger and hope — danger that these noncognitive accouterments will lose their aesthetic harmony and hypnotic power when integrated with the basic prehensions of science, and be reverted into impotent and empty symbols, jarring, ugly, and without force in final satisfactions: hope that the power of Jesus as lure will reassert itself in an aesthetic context devoid of supernaturalism, a context such that (the language now picks up echoes of van Buren) the vision of Jesus, the free man, free from authority, free from fear, «free to give himself to others, whoever they were «1 — such that this vision in its earthly, human purity will lure our aims to a harmonious concrescence, integrating scientific insight and moral vision and producing a modern, intensely fulfilling human satisfaction.

On balance, Berger's theoretical perspective has provided a modern apologetic for the value of religion, arguing not from theological tradition but from the secular premises of social science that humans can not live by the bread of everyday reality alone.

This situation is witnessed to by the fact that the only metaphysical issue where there is a virtual consensus among mainstream twentieth century Catholic thinkers, apart from the reality of human subjectivity mentioned above, is the claim that the discoveries of modern science should not have a significant influence upon metaphysics.

Modern science's discovery of objective facts is no exception to this basic pattern of human observation.

I appreciate that St Thomas didn't get everything right - no mere human being ever could; I also agree that a theological synthesis in the light of modern science is desirable.

Ford, like his critics, is misled by the fact that in presenting his case for internal relations or prehensions in Science and the Modern World Whitehead begins from the human experiential side.

Back in the early seventeenth century Francis Bacon, the first modern philosopher of science, recognised that the developmental nature of modern scientific methodology provided a truer vision of how human knowing arrives at formality than the scholastic theory of abstraction.

Fr Coyne thus risks confusing the complementarity of the distinct realms of determinism and freedom; this complementarity is inherent to human, self - conscious, creative engagement with our deterministic environment - an engagement which modern science exemplifies in such an important way.

earthquakes, and that the rise of modern science (inspired, of course, by Enlightenment values exalting human reason over divine revelation) has rendered religion obsolete.

Indeed, most cultures in human history have generated no such marvel as the modern scientific movement, and even in our own culture, scientifically oriented as it is supposed to be, most people accept the benefits of technology and use the vocabulary of science but do not in fact choose to abide by the disciplines that alone make scientific productivity possible.

Modern scientific disciplines such as biology, psychology and medical science have started to study the effects of empathy on the human mind and body, on our health and relationships.

Lewontin thus saw creationism as falsified not so much by any discoveries of modern science as by universal human experience, a thesis that does little to explain either why so absurd a notion has attracted so many adherents or why we should expect it to lose ground in the near future.

Modern economics is thc science of self - interest, of how to best accommodate individual behavior by means of markets and the commodification of human relations... In this economic world view, the traditional human faculty of reason gets short - changed and degraded to act as the servant of sensory desires.

In addition to improving the lot of modern people, science and technology have contributed to the rise and development of problems we have never had to face before in human history.

Whitehead is trying to complete the Copernican Revolution; he is trying to construct a conceptuality which is firmly rooted in the developments of modern science, which at the same time will enable him to do justice to human beings, and yet will enable him to exhibit that human being as rooted in nature.

Moderns have found Augustine's transcendent basis for temporal meaning incredible, and have believed instead that time is meaningful because the human powers of science, reason and morals will progressively lead toward a perfection that can not be lost.

Rather than a fall from a pristine state, modern science sees the human race arising from a long struggle characterized by natural selection and survival of the fittest.

We present a differing emphasis in our editor's review of Stephen Barr's generally excellent use of modern science to show the existence of God and the human soul.

In short, the Nature we know from modern science embodies and reflects immaterial properties and a depth of intelligibility... To view all these extremely complex, elegant and intelligible laws, entities, properties and relations in the evolution of the universe as «brute facts» in need of no further explanation is, in the words of the great John Paul II, an «abdication of human intelligence».»

The only relevant question for the theologian is the basic assumption on which the adoption of a biological as of every other Weltanschauung rests, and that assumption is the view of the world which has been molded by modern science and the modern conception of human nature as a self - subsistent unity immune from the interference of supernatural powers.

Like Whitehead prior to Science and the Modern World, he brackets out the human knower from the world he studies.

The three books — Science and the Modern World, Process and Reality, Adventures of Ideas — are an endeavor to express a way 0f understanding the nature of things, and to point out how that way of understanding is illustrated by a survey of the mutations of human experience.

But in the light of modern science these explanations are obvious myths, no different from the hundreds of other creation myths through out human history.

Modern science: evolution created Humans over the course of billions of years Church: God made evolution and 6000 years was just a metaphor

Peter learned two things from the dissidents: the notion of «living in the truth»; and the disconcerting thought that Communism and Western liberal democracy had things in common, modern science to begin with, that challenged human freedom and dignity.

Modern science and technology would have to be more modest, human rights would have to receive better grounds and be coupled with duties and gratitude, and the validity of a «personal point of view» on things would have to be recognized.

I have found their ideas to be faithful not only to important religious intuitions of ultimacy but also to the demands of common human experience, logic and, most importantly for our purposes, modern science.

Nevertheless, the layman's common - sense view of reality is baffled by such conundrums as the nature of time and space, the reality of human freedom, quantum jumps in physics, or the claim of modern science that colors are not really present in the objects of perception but only in the mind of the beholder.

A key task, then, which twentieth - century Catholic theology largely ignored, is to show the fundamental compatibility of the modern natural sciences with a deeper philosophy of nature and a metaphysics of the human person, one religious in orientation.

But insofar as prehension, the mechanism of concretion developed in Science and the Modern World (and later in Process and Reality), can be interpreted in specifically human terms, this aesthetic principle is especially crucial to the increase of value in human existence, providing persons adjust themselves to it.

Our editorial argues, among other things, that the object of modern science is not a radically delimited subset of the physical realm, and thus that scientific methodology, properly understood, is just a part of that exercise of human reason which is ultimately in profound synthetic harmony with faith.

As often in these pages our Cutting Edge and Letters columns highlight approaches to science and religion which we think are at the heart of the modern crisis given the fundamental role of human observation of the physical realm to human thought.

The western development of modern science and technology in the past has excluded the human subject from the epistemological world; now its advancement allows the powers to dominate human subjectivity for the domestication of life itself.

The ascension is therefore as great a scandal for ancient science as for modern, as are all subsequent human incursions into heaven, from the assumption of Mary to the rapture of St. Paul to the final resurrection.

I had always believed that the vitality of religion after the rise of modern science, which tended to discredit the legends of religious history, was due to the simple fact that faith in an incomprehensible divine source of order was an indispensable bearer of the human trust in life, despite the evils of nature and the incongruities of history.

Given that St. Thomas» theological project is both materially and intentionally open ended, and given that the Magisterium recognises that philosophy must take adequate account of the advances of modern science, if one could demonstrate that the perspective proposed by Holloway and now by Faith movement and magazine fulfilled all of the criteria mentioned above - i.e. it is a unified vision of the Catholic faith that gives due place to the role of human reason without blurring the distinction between nature and grace and one that presents our revealed faith uncompromisingly and in its entirety - one could justifiably claim that the Faith vision is totally coherent with, if not the total content of St. Thomas» theology, then most certainly the aims and intentionsset out in Aeterni Patris.

Let me confess at the very outset that I think it is possible to reconcile the human hope for some cosmic purpose with what modern science has told us about nature.

The techniques have been viewed by many as invaluable in the development of modern science and the understanding of the human condition.

But the modern era of science - driven assisted human reproduction is less than a century old.

After all, she said, modern science is beginning to yield important insights into empathy, altruism, forgiveness and mindfulness - key human traits of interest to the religious community, too.