Sentences with phrase «modern humans was more»

«Many studies examine the question of what led to this displacement — one hypothesis postulates that the diet of the anatomically modern humans was more diverse and flexible and often included fish.»

Foolish, HC: The guess of an educated modern human is more valuable than the guess of a Bronze Age Palestinian.

Some modern humans are more like their ancient forbears than they like to think.

The findings lend support to the idea that these early modern humans were more advanced with maritime technology than previously thought, and that they were capable of thriving on small, geographically isolated islands.

Not exact matches

Not only does this suggest modern humans might have been stepping tentatively into Europe and getting friendly with Neanderthals long before the wave of migration that led to today's population, it shows Neanderthals were more diverse than we thought.

«The dialogue of robos vs. humans or old vs. new really misses the richness of what's going on, which is an entire industry re-inventing itself to be more modern, more in line with what investors want to pay for, and to be more in line with the consumer experiences of today.»

Tony Zambito, an advisor to our business, is an evangelist for a more human centered approach to modern marketing.

The report is essentially a diagnostic tool to assess every country's efforts on fighting human trafficking, or more accurately, modern day slavery.

I believe that stories communicate both the gospel and the truth about the human existence, but more importantly, they awaken in us something long repressed by our modern culture: life itself is a story.

What could be more comforting to modern consciousness than to discover that «ultimate concern» and «sin» are essential and unavoidable characteristics of the human condition?

In any event, the actual answer to your query will be lost on you, but apes and humans had a common ancestor that was indeed more like modern apes in many ways (especially with respect to cognitive development), but identical to no modern species.

It's more important because, as Hart rightly diagnoses, the modern mind is trapped in various false dichotomies — like thinking one has to be a personal theist or an anti-theist, or that the human person is either a ghost in a machine or a machine - generating ghost — and these false dichotomies themselves make it impossible for us to think rationally about topics such as natural law.

One understanding of human nature common to the modern era sees man as standing both above and outside nature (after Descartes, as a sort disembodied rational being), and nature itself as raw material — sometimes more pliable, sometimes less — for furthering human ambition (an instrumentalist post — Francis Bacon view of nature as a reality not simply to be understood but to be «conquered» and used to satisfy human desires).

Since it is at a minimum passé to speak of God publicly, there are those who try to make the Decalogue more palatable to modern sensibilities by lopping off those Commandments directly referring to God, concentrating instead on the ones that govern human relations more generally.

The problem may not be with rights per se, whose articulation is invaluable to our conception of modern republicanism (and may even help more fully articulate what is true about Christian morality), but with an interpretation that takes rights as the whole of moral discourse and therefore, understands the abstract Lockean individual to be a comprehensive account of the human person.

This situation is nowhere more clearly described in modern literature than in the novels of Franz Kafka: «His unexpressed, ever - present theme,» writes Buber, «is the remoteness of the judge, the remoteness of the lord of the castle, the hiddenness, the eclipse...» Kafka describes the human world as given over to the meaningless government of a slovenly bureaucracy without possibility of appeal: «From the hopelessly strange Being who gave this world into their impure hands, no message of comfort or promise penetrates to us.

Fortunately life is more than logic, and modern predestinarians like their Calvinistic forebears are seldom consistent if the issue is one in which human responsibility is clearly evident.

While his account is often sloppy, he is nevertheless right that the transhumanist agenda is a logical consequence of Gnosticism (which he and many others mistake for Christianity), and that this Gnosticism, which has theological roots in the Scotist - nominalist revolution in metaphysics, ever more exclusively shapes the modern cultural imagination and our understanding of what it is to be human.

One could cite many possible causes: modern biology led some to question the possibility that the human brain could ever «contain» such an unimaginable breadth of knowledge; or more commonly, many theologians argued that Christ's genuine humanity is somehow undermined if he shares in the Father's own self - knowledge.

The biblical answer to the problem of evil in human history is a radical answer, precisely because human evil is recognized as a much more stubborn fact than is realized in some modern versions of the Christian faith.

Our modern and enlightened 20th century has witnessed the slaughter of more human beings by their fellows than any other.

The problem is much more radical: the modern West's rejection of objective morality, grounded in divine wisdom and intrinsic to human nature, the knowing and following of which is the only path to individual happiness and a just social order.

The Darwinian metaphor of evolution was used to express a faith in a Historical future, in either the coming end of History (Marx) or a more indefinite perfectibility in which our alienating technological progress would finally be ennobled by a corresponding moral progress (say, John Stuart Mill or Walt Whitman) that would be the source of the elusive human happiness promised by modern liberation.

we need to be wary of reading our modern individualism into an ancient text that emphasises much more the corporate, communitarian (solidarity) dimension than the individual and his Genevan human rights.

Whatever conclusion one reaches on this point, no one could be more affected than the preacher by the changes in the structure of the human psyche and the shifts in the areas of sensitivity within modern man's sensorium.

Or perhaps more modern history, as we execute other human beings?

YOU seem to be suggesting that these modern concepts of human rights are leading us away from God and to hell, a belief that makes you a perfect example of why more and more people are rejecting Christianity!

As George Weigel notes: «To those who object that the essence of the modern human condition is its plurality, John Paul says — you are right, and that is precisely why wehave to think more seriously about the possibility of moral truths and their relationship to living in freedom.»

Human nature comprises evil as well as good, and that has never been shown to be more obvious than in this century, when 6 million Jews were killed by the most important, modern nation in the world, the most democratic, and the most intellectually and educationally advanced.

Yet it would be overly romanticizing to say that everything in modern Japan shows a perfect blending of humans and the environment; that is more likely a private achievement, expressed more in one's enclosed garden than in the public arena — witness the beer bottles littering the pilgrim's path up Mt. Fuji!

The fact that Whitehead understands human experience to consist in discrete «drops» or «actual occasions» of experience may be an example of the fact that Whitehead's generalizations were developed from more than one starting point, in this case modern quantum theory as well as psychology.

No one was more influential in the definition of the modern state than Thomas Hobbes, who through the conceit of the «state of nature,» portrayed humans as naturally autonomous and individual, with a shared membership solely through one institution» the State.

This claim seems to me to be far more philosophically penetrating, and more disturbing, than the often - heard but more piecemeal criticisms of modern technology's negative environmental, economic, or social - political consequences, or even the critique of present uses of technology as «inhumane» or contrary to basic human values.

But viewed in terms of human relationships and the quality of life, there are many indications that peasants in the Middle Ages and the early modern period had more dignity and enjoyment than the industrial workers of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.

The American church has largely purported just one theology about the modern state of Israel, but now questions are being asked - especially by younger Christians learning of persecution and human rights issues happening in the region - if the church should have a more active role in peacemaking.

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.

At several points he touches upon the paradoxes of modern urbanism and the tragic ironies of our cultural attitude toward cities: although we now have more individual freedom, technical ability, and, arguably, social equity, we do not live in places as hospitable to human beings as were our cities of the past; we are pragmatists who build shoddily; our current obsession with historic preservation is the flip side of our utter lack of confidence in our ability to build well; while cultures with shared ascetic ideals and transcendent orientation built great cities and produced great landscapes, modern culture's expressive ideals, dogmatic public secularism, and privatized religiosity produce for us, even with our vast wealth, only private luxury, a spoiled countryside, and a public realm that is both venal and incoherent; above all, we simultaneously idolize nature and ruin it.

As modern humans were first migrating out of Africa more than 60,000 years ago, Neanderthals and Denisovans were still alive and well in Eurasia.

However, the strongest and most persistent single criticism of Ezekiel from modern commentators is precisely here in the charge that the proclamation of redemption betrays no more of human compassion and gentleness than his treatment of the theme of destruction.

This mode of consciousness is «present as a kind of feeling for life, in man's pre-scientific consciousness and has as such impressed itself on modern man's everyday experience of life».1 As a result «man's consciousness of his own identity has become weaker and more damaged in the course of human progress.

We can learn perhaps from a more rigid piety that our efforts to make doctrine and liturgy relevant to modern experience ought not to dilute the forms of God's liturgical presence to what is easiest for human experience to accept and integrate.

Our modern obsession with being happy often makes it far easier for us to love happiness more than we ever love another human.

To take control of them is, we must admit, part of the Human Genome Initiative — indeed, still more, part of the modern project whose «legitimacy» and «curiosity» have been defended by Hans Blumenberg in his provocative (if Teutonic) book The Legitimacy of the Modermodern project whose «legitimacy» and «curiosity» have been defended by Hans Blumenberg in his provocative (if Teutonic) book The Legitimacy of the ModernModern Age.

Such a catchall approach may be sufficient for those who take a more diffuse approach to natural law but for those who uphold theabsolute sanctity of human life against the worst elements of modern technology it is not good enough.

It is therefore a mark of modern thought that it offers sharper and more sustained attention to the nature and the rights of the human person than did ancient thought.

If the horrors of the modern age suggest that human evil is perhaps even more awful in its reach than he imagined, it is also the case that there is a broadly shared human revulsion against such evil.

Indeed, I am shocked to the core to note that the hybridization of the wheat by human intervention has caused the wheat to be so deconstructed that the property of the modern wheat actually caused more harm than good to the human body.

But today's report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC)- The Invisible Workforce: Outsourcing and Employment in the Cleaning Sector - shows pay and conditions are more akin to Victorian London than a modern economy.

As the world is becoming more international in its relations, that is an increasingly less realistic goal, even though it can not be denied that the idea carries a lot of appeal to modern humans as their behavior and decision - making has evolved in tribal contexts over most of their biological existence.

At more than 300,000 years old, Olorgesailie is significant because this kind of interaction is a hallmark of modern humans that researchers previously thought developed around 100,000 years ago.