Sentences with phrase «more than that your argument»

The most disingenuous aspect of creationism is that is alleges evidentiary problems with evolution (generally, nothing more than arguments of incredulity based in arguments of ignorance), but then invariably requires invocation of magic to patch up their «legitimate alternative.»

Evans concludes his fine book by recognizing that the «encouragement» of nonbelievers to «take a fresh look at the issues» will involve more than his arguments.

More than the argument from docility, it was this ritual cleansing on the altar that persuaded me, as if it had been a surface refreshment of the deeper mystery of the priest's consecrated hands.

«Calculations» about whether or not to kill an innocent person become no more than arguments of advocacy based on hypothetical scenarios of the future.

But it took more than arguments about educational quality to persuade most state lawmakers.

Thus I don't say anything more than that your argument is not valid.

As a result, the opinion reads as a long series of assertions more than an argument for the result it reaches.

Most trial lawyers know that winning a jury trial requires more than argument and technical sufficiency.

Not exact matches

While there's an argument to be made that AI is over-hyped as a technology, there's data to back up Sanwal's tongue - in - cheek advice: Mergers and acquisitions of AI startups increased by a factor of seven between 2011 and 2015, from five to more than 35 deals, according to the research firm.

But I've yet to see a really robust version of that argument, let alone an explanation of why firing makes more sense, ethically, that this punishment alone is the right one, ethically, than all those other outcomes, or — for those who believe this is true — why he deserves everything on the menu.

Earlier this year, Wall Street Journal editor Gerard Baker made a similar argument, saying the word lie «implies much more than just saying something that's false.

But there's more going on here than poor planning and backroom arguments — something that is making even wary investors outside the corporate bond market sit up and take notice.

I made the same argument more than two years ago in «20 reasons for ending Canada Post's monopoly.»

, and in the piece they discuss why stories are much more influential than facts (again, a conclusion backed by numerous studies) through their ability to change emotional beliefs in a way that «logical» arguments just can't touch.

While organized labor contends that a union workforce is a quality workforce, that argument, more often than not, doesn't resonate with business.

The essence of Chamorro - Premuzic's argument is that, a few very technical situations aside (and if you're involved in those, insufficient IQ probably isn't a major concern of yours), more real - world problems get solved with people skills than raw intelligence.

Now, you may or may not find that to be a persuasive argument about the state of income inequality in Canada — as our own Chris MacDonald has pointed out, determining the fairness of CEO pay is more complicated than it seems.

Once you understand what the market is paying, you need to build an argument for why you offer create more value for the business than they expect in an entry - level hire, said behavioral scientist Matt Wallaert, co-founder of fair - pay site GetRaised.

«Any argument they make for keeping that in would result in the same kinds of legal challenges presented by Section 3 (c), which poses the question of, «Why have people from these countries been deemed more dangerous than others?»»

The episode made me far more famous among people who advocate the design argument than anything I could have without the participation of the atheists.

While organized labor contends that a union workforce is a quality workforce, that argument, more often than not, does not resonate with business.

«You often get more by finding out what the other person wants than you do by clever arguments supporting what you need.»

As behavioral psychologist Susan Weinschenk explained on her blog recently (via a great personal story, of course), by putting us in their protagonists» shoes, stories manage to engage more of the brain than straight recitations of facts or dry arguments, leading to more arousal and interest.

On Hacker News, Y Combinator's message board, the post has more than 690 comments, many of them supportive of Altman's argument.

In fact, there's an argument to be made — as Dennis Berman does at the Wall Street Journal — that the Verizon bid for AOL says more about Verizon's difficulties than it does about any intrinsic value that its target might have.

But he says MJ Ervin's study is little more than an attempt to create a straw man argument.

She reiterated Trump's argument that the NFL protests, which began more than a year ago when 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick sat during the anthem in protest of police brutality, «disparage [s] the brave men and women in uniform» and American values more broadly.

In future, the sharks» appetites might even make people safer: Stingrays injure beachgoers on California's coast far more frequently than white sharks do, Lowe says, though he acknowledges that's a hard argument to sell to a shark - phobic public.

In Millionaire Success Habits, Graziosi argues makes a convincing argument that your not - to - do list is far more important than your to - do list.

GE calls the sharing concept the GE Store, and it's one of the company's main arguments for why its parts are more valuable together than separated.

With national security driving the debate, Democrats see a more powerful argument than simply advocating the need to curb gun violence in a country of 320 million that has more than 310 million weapons.

«In my experience people who assert statements like that are often immune to evidence or rational argument, and envision themselves as superior beings who are more enlightened than the rest of us.»

Its argument now is that breaking up EMC would provide shareholders more return — that the piece parts are worth more separately than they are as part of a semi-unified whole.

The argument can been made, has been made, will be made again in the days ahead that Keystone is no more a contributor to carbon emissions than an apple crate makes apples.

In fact, one of the arguments used by TransCanada to gain American support for the $ 7 - billion Keystone pipeline is the more than 250,000 jobs the project will create for the U.S. economy.

And that's just at the conversational level — you would need much more time than that to understand complex legal arguments.

Additionally, Alphabet's case for the monetary damages it wanted — more than $ 1 billion for a single trade secret — will rest squarely on its own arguments.

At least, this argument was more understandable in 1979 than it had been in 1949.

They can't win votes saying they'll bring up the global price of crude any more than they can make the unemotional economist's argument, that anything but the most interventionist government action won't do much to help short - term job prospects.

The one major point in favor of your argument that you didn't highlight is that most people using a Roth IRA assume that they'll make more money in the future than they do today, thus realizing a lower tax rate by paying taxes now than they would have in the future (even assuming tax rates stay constant).

This argument, which seems more ideological than empirical, is based on standard trade theory in which there is an implicit assumption that any intervention will drive trade performance away from its optimum, so that the United States always gains from the further opening up of its own market, even if trade partners don't reciprocate.

Some may argue this comparison is too simplistic and «apples to oranges» but the annual terawatt hour consumption figures persist none the less, and Bitcoin costs roughly 10x more energy than CERN Meanwhile, most, if not all of us will probably find it very difficult to demonstrate a cost / utility argument in support of Bitcoin having 10x more benefit than CERN.

Admittedly, one could make the same argument about gold, but gold has been widely accepted by humankind as a thing of value for more than two - and - a-half thousand years — compared to less than a decade for bitcoin.

Some 50 per cent of Canadians see each of these arguments as more compelling than the other.

It might benefit investors to consider these arguments more closely, and with greater focus on a century of economic evidence than on the verbal arguments of enthusiastic talking heads.

In fact, more Quebecers (64 %) say the B.C. government's argument holds the most weight than British Columbians themselves (58 %).

Neal and Taylor's argument was rooted in math: there were more consumers than there were IT users, which meant that over the long run the rate of improvement in consumer technologies would exceed that of enterprise - focused ones; IT departments needed to grapple with increased demand from their users to use the same technology they used at home.

In spite of this data, you could make an argument for people holding more stocks in their portfolios for the simple fact that people are living longer than ever, so maybe they need more stocks to grow their money in retirement:

Still, it's not exactly a convincing argument; acquisitions also incur significant costs: the price of the acquired asset includes a premium that usually more than covers whatever cost savings might result, and there are significant additional costs that come from integrating two different companies.

The key thrust of Jarret's arguments in various articles on this topic seem to be «people who have much more experience in this than Musk have already proved this doesn't work.»