Sentences with phrase «more objects which»

One study found that scenes from Japanese cities were «busier» than those in the USA as they contain more objects which compete for attention.

Ideally though, you'll gravitate towards the campaign first as completing each level unlocks more objects which can be used in the editor.

Not exact matches

As of May 1, the company began curating a catalog of designs, which totaled more than 450 3 - D objects.

The sources said Pruitt's decision to put Greenwalt in charge of his international travel, which came just months into his tenure at EPA, fit a pattern of Pruitt assigning the most sensitive responsibilities to his small cadre of aides who had previously worked with him in Oklahoma before he became EPA administrator — aides who sources said were more likely to acquiesce to his demands, even as other EPA staffers objected to Pruitt's spending and travel decisions.

The I.F.O. is fuelled by eight electric engines, which is able to push the flying object to an estimated top... Read more»

It's hoped that this, as well as other methods such as multi-sensory services which include more pictures, sounds, tastes and objects to hold or feel, will help dementia sufferers.

The self is more closely replicated than its objects, which differ (come and go, change position, etc.) across the series of replications.

And from There You Shall Seek by Joseph Soloveitchik Ktav, 230 pages, $ 29.50 Near the end of Courage to Be, Paul Tillich writes: «God as a subject makes me into an object which is nothing more than an object.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the punishment meted out after the Fall, that place where the nakedness which once bespoke trust and mutual self - gift now becomes an object of shame and concealment.

And it is the object of Thomas More's prayer: that we may have the grace to labor for that for which we pray.

We have already recognized the sense in which eternal objects are internally related: the more general or abstract function includes the less general as a constituent or term.

In manus tuas commendo spiritum meum.17 Into the hands which broke and quickened the bread, which blessed and caressed little children, which were pierced with the nails; into the hands which are like our hands, the hands of which one can never tell what they will do with the object they are holding, whether they will break it or heal it, but which we know will always obey and reveal impulses filled with kindness and will always clasp us ever more closely, ever more jealously; into the gentle and mighty hands which can reach down into the very depth of the soul, the hands which fashion, which create, the hands through which flows out so great a love: into these hands it is comforting to surrender oneself especially if one is suffering or afraid.

The more completely the beings thus illumined attain to their natural fulfilment, the closer and more perceptible this radiance will be; and on the other hand the more perceptible it becomes, the more clearly the contours of the objects which it bathes will stand out and the deeper will be their roots.

P0rnography is comprised of nothing more than inanimate objects which are incapable of doing anything.

Whitehead nowhere in Process and Reality argues explicitly for such intermediate entities, but it is interesting that he maintains a gradation of enduring objects, from the one extreme of the atomic material body to the opposite extreme of the presiding thread: «But just as the difference between living and non-living occasions is not sharp, but more or less, so the distinction between an enduring object which is an atomic material body and one which is not, is again more or less.»

As Ambrose, the fourth - century bishop of Milan, told the recently initiated: «You must not trust, then, wholly to your bodily eyes; that which is not seen is more really seen, for the object of sight is temporal, but that other eternal, which is not apprehended by the eye, but is discerned by the mind and spirit» (Ambrose of Milan, De mysteriis, III, 15).

Let us call the two parties A and B. B's property or treasure, B's heritage, B's right, is adjacent, or appears to be adjacent or is declared to be adjacent — adjacency is a phenomenally flexible term, subject to interpretation according to what is deemed to he adjacent by the powerful covetor; B's thing which is B's by rights, by inheritance, becomes in its adjacency an object of passionate desire, an obsessive craving, on the part of a more powerful A.

With a certain simplification of the state of affairs, which however brings out more clearly the decisive factor without falsifying it, we might say that formerly the object and situation of a man's action were simply data supplied by nature with which he was in contact and by simple human realities which recurred from generation to generation again and again.

No more does it help to suggest that God's value is wholly independent of his relations to the world, whether of knowledge or of will, for this only means that the particular characters of the objects of his knowledge, or the results of his willing, are to him totally insignificant, which is psychologically monstrous and is religiously appalling as well..

Beneath intelligence as beneath perception, we discover a more fundamental function, «a vector mobile in all directions like a searchlight, one though which we can direct ourselves toward anything, in or outside ourselves, in relation to that object.»

It is my contention that both the existential phenomenologists and Whitehead have gone «beyond skepticism and realism» in a much more satisfactory way than Laszlo with his «complementarity» theory, which, although brilliant, seems contrived and artificial in many respects.6 Laszlo believes that a complete phenomenological reduction can be carried out; he believes that intentional objects are discrete and therefore isolatable as pure essences.

Hartshorne is willing to begin with the metaphysical reality of God and other selves (not just as a postulate, but as concrete existences), and then to use inference and imagination to provide an account of their nature and relations — an account which can he more or less adequate to its object, given the limitations of our form of consciousness.

«If there be such things as feelings at all, then so surely as relations between objects exist in rerum naturâ, so surely, and more surely, do feelings exist to which these relations are known» (PP1 245).

They are what Whitehead called the «more abstract things» which emerge from the more concrete things» (PR 30), the former being universals, or more accurately, patterns of eternal objects which it is the task of philosophy to explain, or in Whitehead's more empirical manner of expression, to describe.

It is indeed in the more basic levels that the object appears to be exerting an influence to which the experient responds.

... [Americans] have become a nation that may defy every foe but that most dangerous of foes, herself, destined to a majestic future if she will shun the excess and perversion of the principles that made her great, prate less about the enemies of the past and strive more against the enemies of the future, resist the mob and the demagogue as she resisted Parliament and King, rally her powers from the race for gold and the delirium of prosperity to make firm the foundations on which that prosperity rests, and turn some fair proportion of her vast mental forces to other objects than material progress and the game of party politics.

We can no more return to that sphere which we recently left than a three - dimensional object can enter a two - dimensional plane.

Metaphor, which serves as a medium that provides insight into Jesus» parabolic language, is a comparison based on everyday objects or experiences.108 In the words of Wilder,»... a true metaphor or symbol is more than a sign, it is a bearer of the reality to which it refers.

One final comment: The assumption of protopsychic matter is no more revolutionary than our epistemological knowledge that all objects which we see have no color, because color only arises in sense cells and brain.

I must now explain just why Christian and Leclerc believe that eternal objects play a more significant role in objectification than the role which I have granted them.

To be sure, it is possible to interpret those particular possibilities as pure eternal objects, but it seems more likely that Whitehead was contrasting them to eternal objects, but was still groping after their proper ontological status, which I take to be real propositional possibilities requiring divine temporality.

«From indetermination accepted as a fact,» Bergson claims that he can «infer the necessity of a perception, that is to say, of a variable relation between a living being and the more or less distant influence of objects which interest it» (MM 24).

Now this Idea corresponds completely with the synthesis demanded by pure reason or, more exactly, with the transcendent object which causes that synthesis.

It can not be objected to this, that the finite efficient cause produces its effect in the potentia of another (the materia from which it educes the form), so that it does not itself become more than it was.

Griffin & Sherburne, New York: The Free Press, 1978, 250) Whitehead's more fundamental account then is that God, the primordial actual entity which prehends the eternal objects, is the source of the initial subjective aim which produces novelty in actual occasions.

In addition to such practical distancing of objects, there is a more radical form in which the object is accorded its freedom also from the interests of the subject.

The first of these principles is that the old logic of identity never gives us more than a post-mortem dissection of disjecta membra, and that the fullness of life can be construed to thought only by recognizing that every object which our thought may propose to itself involves the notion of some other object which seems at first to negate the first one.

With the modernist position that being does not transcend consciousness (being is posited by consciousness), any subjective foundation which is achieved can be the object of a further more radical subjective foundation.

I can not here investigate why language in our time has become flat, nonallusive, and impoverished, but simply to observe that it has and ask what this means for our churches as they seek to recover ways of worship which shall be more adequate to the object of worship, and more fully reflective of the long history of the people of God in their life of worship.

But Rabshakeh is acquainted with the reforms of Hezekiah.4 Hezekiah has removed holy things, the Canaanite deities, the brazen serpent which had become an object of worship, the more or less pagan cultic sites.

Jesus Christ, is and it will be forever more the unique object lesson of living, the human being not ever, although we may be Christians we don't leave of to sin, for the very her writing she says Aerquémonos confiadamente at the throne of your handsomeness in order to reach forgiving in order to the perpetual help, in as much as not tenemos one God which not it can feel pity for of we, rather one which fué tempting all over, but without sin, according to the letter at the age of Hebrews, and the apostle John she says, whether various hubiere sin, solicitor tenemos in order to with the parent to Jesus Christ the that's right, not ever not any human being it will be the best object lesson not other than The Christ Jesus, nor Buddah bo Mahoma nor none, we don't follow to humanity rather at a God which fué tempting all over but without sin, not ever we owe put her scope in the humanity not other than in the.

First, he distinguishes from classical empiricism a revisionary description of experience according to which sense perception is neither the only nor even the primary mode of experience, but is rather derived from a still more elemental awareness both of ourselves and of the world around us» (PP 78).6 On Ogden's analysis, both the classical and this first type of revisionary empiricism «assume that the sole realities present in our experience, and therefore the only objects of our certain knowledge, are ourselves and the other creatures that constitute the world» (PP 79) 7 With these «two more conventional types of empiricism» he contrasts a «comprehensive» type of revisionary empiricism distinguished from them by its consideration of the possibility (and then also by its claim) that the internal awareness it asserts together with the former revisionary type is «the awareness not merely of ourselves, and of our fellow creatures, but also of the infinite whole in which we are all included as somehow one» (PP 87, 80, 85).

If explaining a state of affairs consists in substituting for a lesser known object ones which are more accessible and familiar, and in then explaining them, the objects of knowledge can be discriminated by the extent to which they lend themselves to this rule of explanation.7 That is, they can be discriminated by the extent to which explaining them can be meaningfully replaced by explaining something else without thereby explaining away just what was to be explained.

On the other hand, as a union of eternal objects it is more concrete than any of those eternal objects which form the components of this union.

Here too it is true that I not only have my body in a subject - object - relationship, but much more, that as subject I am my body, a body that for me is something more and quite other than just a peculiarly intimate bit of the surrounding world (PR 81) with which I am not identified.

It is the more categorical form of the conclusion to which I object.

What one can historically describe as the «mechanization of the image of the world» is, at any rate in an environment formed by machines, a process which is also being looked at psychogenetically; this process advances the same object categories and ideas of movement, if only in a rudimentary, pre-reflexive manner, which might, especially for that reason, influence thinking so much more persistently.

We do not have to decide at this point if, and in which regard, the early childlike interpretation of reality in the mode of «ontological egocentricity» is more adequate or more inadequate than the later object - oriented perception of reality.

When, through the «breaking - through,» i.e., through a «cutting off» of the ego from the world, and through an identification of the ego with the motivating dynamis of the unconscious, this severance is once more resolved, God disappears as object and becomes the subject which is no longer distinguished from the ego, i.e., the ego as a relatively late product of differentiation, becomes once more united with the mystic, dynamic, universal participation (participation mystique of the primitives).1

Much more is at stake for Hartshorne than a mere rejection of Platonism (which he finds unacceptable even in the guise of Whitehead's doctrine of eternal objects).