Sentences with phrase «much argument in»

There doesn't seem to be much argument in the literature on this.

It's always a shame to see academy boys move on, particularly when we've seen how good he can be, like in the 2011 - 12 season, but there can't be much argument in his defence now.

Not exact matches

First, there were 125 men in one large room... The men were very considerate of each other, and I didn't hear a raised voice ever, much less an argument.

Once those respective attorneys are in the mix, they'll likely be pacing the arguments to get their client as much from the settlement as possible.

, 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.

The shale revolution weakened a strong and intuitive argument in favour of the Keystone, namely that the pipeline would serve to transport much needed fuel to be used domestically in the U.S. And Prime Minister Stephen Harper's pledge to turn to China after Washington's temporary rejection of the Keystone in early 2012, hasn't amounted to much so far.

Much of the technical evidence in the case has been filed under seal, making it impossible for outside observers to independently assess the strength of each side's arguments.

It's evident in recent articles and posts that there's just as much argument over how to approach our collective urge to relax during the warm months.

When you run the Watch through this calculus, it's hard to make much of an argument in its favor.

Musk's argument in 2013 was that a hyperloop would cost far less while transporting passengers much more quickly.

For starters, you can use it as a way to list the pros and cons of each side of an argument, much in the same way that ProCon.org does for major and controversial political issues (see my example below).

But in the US, it's much more likely that someone will get angry at an argument, be able to pull out a gun, and kill someone.

All the while, these companies have made an overarching argument that they should not have to follow the kinds of laws that every other industry in the country — very much including the ones that they are disrupting — follow.

There can be no realistic argument not to make adjustments just because it would strain the Mexico economy (which is much in need of reform, why do auto workers only make $ 5 / day?).

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.»

«To succeed in the Gig Economy, we need to create a financially flexible life of lower fixed costs, higher savings, and much less debt,» Diane Mulcahy, a senior analyst at the Kauffman Foundation and a lecturer at Babson College, writes in her book «The Gig Economy,» which is part economic argument and part how - to guide.

In much of the literature on leadership, an argument is made that to lead, one must follow.

The class - struggle argument, however, had much more resonance in the days when stocks, bonds and other wealth were held by a tiny minority while the masses struggled to buy food and pay rent.

Much of your argument such as I've seen, for your sky fairy (and I really think that is an appropriate term for your obviously fictional deity with all the self - contradictory tales about it in the bible), really seems to consist of a combination of willed ignorance and arguments from ignorance.

What Hitchens wrote about the evils of religion was not so much a scholarly argument, but more a wave of righteous indignation that levelled everything in its path.

That way the lobbyists would have to have much better arguments in order to swing elections and laws.

Indeed, much of your argument was the justification of the religious street wars in the 1800's in the US.

With more than a hint of exasperation, Scalia concludes: «One will search in vain the document we are supposed to be construing for text that provides the basis for the argument over these distinctions; and will find in our society's tradition regarding abortion no hint that the distinctions are constitutionally relevant, much less any indication how a constitutional argument about them ought to be resolved.

In 1971, I published In Defense of People, the first book - length critique of «the ecology movement» that was then in ascendancy and that pretty much shaped the arguments that continue to swirl around the varieties of environmentalism todaIn 1971, I published In Defense of People, the first book - length critique of «the ecology movement» that was then in ascendancy and that pretty much shaped the arguments that continue to swirl around the varieties of environmentalism todaIn Defense of People, the first book - length critique of «the ecology movement» that was then in ascendancy and that pretty much shaped the arguments that continue to swirl around the varieties of environmentalism todain ascendancy and that pretty much shaped the arguments that continue to swirl around the varieties of environmentalism today.

Without any evidence for, or even so much as a rational argument in support of your god, or any other god for that matter, believing they exist is patently moronic.

This is much like the argument for the Christian Trinity, it is true because god says so in the bible and the bible is true because god says so.

It's embarrassing that so many Americans, people who say they believe in freedom and equality, have spent so much time and energy trying to justify being anti gay marriage - with false arguments from the Bible (as thought that should be the only source of their decisions).

That statement deserves a much more prominent place in the argument.

The analysis of these texts will be much shorter than the analysis of the flood in Genesis 6 — 8 because explaining all the texts in detail would simply mean that many of the same arguments and ideas presented as an explanation for one text would simply be repeated in an explanation for a different text.

In the past, poets had a much wider array of devices to shape their poems and delight attentive readers: argument, narrative, allegory, extended metaphor, metaphysical conceit, to name a few.

Add to that the variety of doctrines / Theologies within orthodox Christianity... with Consensus on a very small Core of Truths: God Is, We are not God, Jesus Christ is the Messiah and Salvation is Through Faith / Belief in Him... there is much that lacks Consensus and there are mountains of arguments and counter-arguments for each doctrinal / Theological position.

My argument is that if a reasonable, sane and reliable witness tells me he has experienced something which modern science, in all it's glory can not explain, much less degrade, then the simplest rationale is to accept that he has indeed had an encounter with the supernatural.

For the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to be much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist.

In other words, Griffin's argument is that process theology presents a much more plausible explanation for natural evil than can classical theism.

It's too much to reiterate in the limited space we have left, so I urge you to pick up God and the Gay Christian for the full argument.

I appreciate that Julie has acknowledged some of that, but think that — as someone that stands outside the inner circle — your argument may hold much for you than for those in the inner circle.

In his final two sentences, however, he recognizes the contemporary urgency that is intrinsic to his argument: «The hope of solidarity itself, and the recognition of its attendant burdens, still weighs upon us today It has remained a fragile aspiration, as much in need of condensation into symbolic forms of requisite density and imaginative power as it ever was in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries of the Common Era.&raquIn his final two sentences, however, he recognizes the contemporary urgency that is intrinsic to his argument: «The hope of solidarity itself, and the recognition of its attendant burdens, still weighs upon us today It has remained a fragile aspiration, as much in need of condensation into symbolic forms of requisite density and imaginative power as it ever was in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries of the Common Era.&raquin need of condensation into symbolic forms of requisite density and imaginative power as it ever was in the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries of the Common Era.&raquin the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries of the Common Era.»

Indeed, the Common Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas, sets forth in both the Summa Theologiae and the Summa Contra Gentiles arguments in support of the death penalty that are subtle and leave much room for the exercise of prudence by lawmakers.

We live in a country that would never elect a non-christian (which says much about how much power christians have... hello theocracy) The argument is whether or not belief and opinion should affect policy.

The argument is that the Chicago school arose in the context of the social gospel, a movement that had much in common with contemporary political theology and that, under the stimulus of political theology, this school can recover something of what it had lost as well as move forward in new ways.

Archie Bunker, in fierce argument with his agnostic son - in - law, is asked, «Archie, if there's a God, why is there so much suffering in the world?»

Still, without the personal level of knowledge that God exists, mentioned in my first sentence, no intellectual explanation or argument would hold much weight with me at all.

He avoids involvement in the subtle and sophisticated arguments in which much academic theology bogs down.

Having being on the receiving end of the «man - hater» comment more times than I can count, seeing it listed as number one — in the form of «I like white males so much I married one» — rubbed me the wrong way.Being called a man - hater is often unfairly used as a way to silence women and dismiss their arguments outright, which is troubling, especially when it happens in the midst of a theological discussion.

So much for Gopnik's argument that Chesterton's «national spirit» and «extreme localism» led him to his supposed anti-Semitism: they were, in fact, precisely what gave him his respect for other nations and other cultures, including that of the Jews, to which the world owed its knowledge of God, «as narrow as the universe».

But it's not so much an argument of how «we» as Christians chooses to structure our regular meetings or find comfort in them, it's more about the perception those meetings elicit in both believers and those outside the body.

Though this schema remains, in much reduced form, in the present volume, Hopewell found the central image, the body, unsatisfactory as a conveyance for his essentially structuralist arguments about congregational narrative.

Chesterton's Autobiography is not always a reliable source; but there is corroborating evidence for these protective feelings from his childhood onwards: and since this evidence is virtually unknown, it is probably best here to take this opportunity to publish it for the first time (much of it will appear in my forthcoming book Chesterton and the Romance of Orthodoxy, though I discovered some of it too late for it to be included) rather than repeat old arguments.

But Duffy never wanders too far from this one persistent argument» that much of the vitality and resiliency of Catholicism is found in its rituals and worship, in lay devotions and Marian piety, in veneration of the Church's blesseds and saints, in acts of communal discipline and obedience that bind the faithful together as a living organism.

What I dare to query in Professor Lampe's argument is a bias in the direction of exemplarism; this though he insists that the Resurrection of Christ has much more than a purely cognitive significance.