Sentences with phrase «most philosophers of»

Most philosophers of science would argue that theory should be backed by the evidence, and not vice versa.

Or consider the explanations for religious belief proposed by evolutionary psychologists, now recognised by most philosophers of biology as involving more theoretical assumptions than empirical evidence.

Not exact matches

The Unemployed Philosopher's Guild makes the most fun mugs of all time.

However, beyond what many of us were exposed to in high school, and as most are generally familiar, Physics actually branches out expansively, into numerous realms, many of which philosophers have played around with for ages.

We sit down with one of the sector's most prolific and successful philosopher - investors: Venrock's Bryan Roberts.

The political philosophers Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson reject not only Tutu's invocation of religion and charged that, by seeking to transform the attitudes, emotions, and moral judgments of citizens, he improperly imports soulcraft into statecraft and transgresses the autonomy of citizens — contemporary liberalism's most sacrosanct value.

How will you grasp what Gadamer is saying if you are resolutely unprepared (as most philosophers are) to acknowledge the ontological mystery of a Being that speaks directly to us» that is, to our troubles, our innermost issues of identity and value?

He is surely correct in this, and his identification of Wilhelm Reich as the key ideologue is important, as is his use of Augusto Del Noce, perhaps the most important modern philosopher whom Protestants have never heard of.

What, for example, can the life of the fellow with the wool ties and Teutonic humor tell us about what was most vital and central to Hans - Georg Gadamer, the German philosopher who died almost two years ago, on March 14, 2002, at the remarkable age of 102.

And, not coincidentally, most enlightened philosophers have ultimately come to similar conclusions, for the good of society and mankind, as well as the individual.

The Canadian thinker Charles Taylor, in any case, is gaining status as the world's premier philosopher of modernity, the most judicious, the one who makes the most apt and discerning distinctions, the one who best sees both modernity's grandeur and its misery.

Clearly the best collection of essays from a Kentucky farmer - philosopher, this book demonstrates the breadth of Wendell Berry's work, as well as his status as one of the most important commentators of our time on matters of community, land and ecology.

Since most modern thinkers began with the premise that God exists, these philosophers have used their great philosophic arguments for the existence of God.

Throughout most of recorded history, theologians and philosophers have extolled propriety and correct social behavior as virtues akin to morality.

In the preface to Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method, Hartshorne celebrates «our English inheritance of critical caution and concern for clarity»; he seeks to learn more from Leibniz, «the most lucid metaphysician in the early modern period,» as well as from Bergson, Peirce, James, Dewey, and Whitehead, «five philosophers of process of great genius and immense knowledge of the intellectual and spiritual resources of this century.

Do you reject the philosophical teachings of most of the most influential philosophers of all time - Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, etc.?

The first is relatively uncontroversial to most believers except, perhaps, to evangelical philosophers and fundamentalists of various types — namely, that laypeople are in no position to adjudicate disputes among experts in New Testament scholarship because the scholars have an expertise in languages and ancient history that laypeople lack.

The book of Job has served as a philosophical Rorschach blot for its most outspoken interpreters, from the Talmudic rabbis and Church Fathers through their medieval philosophical successors and down to modern philosophers, theologians, and creative writers.

Most philosophers have done so, and this kind of thinking has dominated the West.

But most modern philosophers have supposed that when we analyze these events fully, we can explain them in terms of the activities of subjects or the motions of objects.

You don't have to be the most educated person in Laodicea to know that the Greek philosophers were rather insistent upon the importance of maintaining a household in which the man exercises unilateral authority over his wives, children, and slaves.

But my basic convictions about them were derived not from these philosophers but partly from my being surrounded from birth with the reality in question; partly from Emerson's essays and the works of James and Royce; partly from the poems of Shelley and Wordsworth (which similarly influenced Whitehead); and most of all from my own experience, reflected upon especially during my two years in the army medical corps, when I had considerable leisure to think about life and death and other fundamental questions.

And what of Nietzsche, the philosopher who, with the exception of Plato and Rousseau, most influenced Bloom as teacher and thinker?

He also possessed the works of most major post-scholastic philosophers - Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Bergson, Sartre et al - and modern philosophers of science like Heisenberg.

The philosopher who did most to shape this vision of the world, Rene Descartes, regarded the human mind as wholly different in nature.

In his introduction, Oden throws down a «gauntlet»: He challenges the reader to assemble a collection of passages from any ten major philosophers as funny as those he has compiled from Kierkegaard's writings; furthermore, he makes bold provisionally — until this challenge is met — to declare Kierkegaard «as, among philosophers, the most amusing.»

The Danish philosopher was particularly hard on religious professionals, and claimed that inconsistent behaviors most often accompany exorbitant professions of good intentions:

The larger problem that I have with this type of argument is that the evidentiary issues re: God have been very thoroughly argued out by 2500 years of philosophers, some of whom must have been the most intelligent people ever to occupy the Earth.

The rejection of metaphysics by most modern philosophers and theologians has seen the gap filled by influential scientists, often with little philosophical training but with the credibility that their status as scientists confers on them.

One of the creative process philosophers, Charles Hartshorne, states in the beginning of Man's Vision of God his conviction that «a magnificent intellectual content — far surpassing that of such systems as Thomism, Spinozism, German idealism, positivism (old or new) is implicit in the religious faith most briefly expressed in the three words, God is love».1 If this be true what is needed is not the discarding of metaphysics but the exploration of this new possibility in the doctrine of God's being.

«The most positive effect of the Pope's visit was one that even the BBC could not prevent - and that was the public display of Roman Catholic ritual at its most gorgeous and replete,» wrote British philosopher Roger Scruton perceptively.

Many disagree, including most of Singer's fellow philosophers.

Unlike most contemporary philosophers, who restrict their examination of induction to the modern sense of the term, in which it is construed as a method of inference which permits some prediction of future events on the basis of past events, Whitehead also recognizes the importance of the ancient meaning of induction.

Recently many environmental philosophers in the West have come to agree.6 One of the most influential among them is J. Baird Callicott, professor of philosophy and natural resources at the University of Wisconsin, author of numerous influential works on environmental ethics and foremost interpreter of the pioneer of Western environmental philosophy, Aldo Leopold.

John Warwick Montgomery, a lawyer and philosopher as well as theologian, provides perhaps the most comprehensive argument by a conservative in his recent book Human Rights and Human Dignity: An Apologetic for the Transcendent Perspective (Zondervan, 1986) He concludes that rights derived from the inerrant teachings of the Bible give authority to the rights set forth in the Universal Declaration, even exceeding its claims in significant ways.

In his review article of Hartshorne's Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method (PS 2:49 - 67), Robert Neville remarks that «one of Hartshorne's most important contributions» has been his concern to deal «with problems as formulated by public discussion, usually that of analytical philosophers.»

With Kant and most philosophers since Kant, Rolston argues that our experience of nature is inevitably interpretive.

It reminds us that our most pressing constitutional questions (on slavery and secession) were settled out of court; that it took more than a wiser judge to reverse our most villainous chief justice (Roger Taney); and that our Constitution's most consequential interpreter wasn't a robed philosopher - king but a self - taught lawyer from Kentucky by way of Illinois.

Like most modern thinkers, Rousseau has an enormous amount of confidence in the ability of the «moral law within» (to quote another Rousseauian philosopher) to point each of us in the right direction.

Dewey, who died in 1952 after reigning for more than fifty years as America's most influential public philosopher and educator, appreciated that the churches had not gone out of business, and that they could even be useful in promoting peace, fighting economic injustice, and, more generally, in «stimulating action» for what he called «a divine kingdom on earth.»

I would add, following the example of the best American Catholic «public philosophers» John Courtney Murray and Orestes Brownson, that we should, as loyal Americans [we Porchers and REM fans are all about standing for the place where we live], actually explain why our Fathers built better than they knew — which means criticizing their thinking and affirming [most of] their practice with a theory that at least wasn't completely their own.

First, as I note at Public Discourse today in» Kermit Gosnell and the Logic of «Pro-Choice,»» the most up - to - the - minute philosophers in bioethics are dispensing with any «sharp distinction,» as Jon puts it, between the unborn child and the one who has been born.

Thus we find examples of the just war tradition in theorists of the law of nations and in positive international law; we have a form of this tradition in modern military codes, rules of engagement, and praxis; and two of the most important theorists of just war over the past forty years have been the Protestant theologian Paul Ramsey and the political philosopher Michael Walzer.

Philosophy's recognition of itself as religion is neither achieved nor admitted by all philosophers, but among these who have recognized the identity of philosophy and religion are Socrates, Plotinus, Erigena, Spinoza, Hegel — in short, and in general, most of the speculative, «Platonic» tradition, in opposition to the mainstream of the analytic, «Aristotalian» tradition (if the reader will forgive such a gross oversimplification of a very complex history of thought).

Richard Swinburne, Oxford Professor of Philosophy, One of the Most Influential Theistic Philosophers

Voltaire French Philosopher and Historian, One of the Most Influential Thinkers of the Enlightenment raised in Jansenism

With regard to justice, I can only agree that the vision of subjective immortality is absurd or selfish if in fact all persons are as privileged as most philosophers and theologians.

I ask you now not to forget this notion; for although most philosophers seem either to forget it or to disdain it too much ever to mention it, I believe that we shall have to admit it ourselves in the end as containing an element of truth.

Unlike most other philosophers of science, he does not immediately cast scorn on the likes of William Dembski and Michael Behe, who have focused on the apparent design of cells and organisms.

Along the way to proving his thesis, Jenkins rewrites the book on Aristotle's Posterior Analytics (his reading, and his devastating criticisms of Oxford's influential Jonathan Barnes, set the standard for such scholarship) and he shows how even the most decorated of contemporary «philosophers of religion» (Plantinga, Stump, Penelhaum, et al.) grossly misread Aquinas.