Sentences with phrase «n't know these principles»

If you do not know the principles of research, your paper may be absolutely useless.

Swiss law does not know the principle of «reinstatement» which means that even if the termination is unfair in the sense of the law, the employment relationship is still terminated.

Your employees should embody the company's mission and values and be able to share them with others, but most employees don't know these principles.

Not exact matches

While he didn't know it at the time, he employed several principles British psychologist Richard Wiseman has found to be involved in harvesting good fortune.

This is comforting, because you likely already know how to successfully manage personal relationships (even if you don't excel at it), and you can translate many of those same principles into your sales strategy.

However, with the rise of Internet of Things (IoT) devices, some organizations don't actually know what is connected to their network, says Wael Lahoud, director and principle of Goldmark Security Consulting.

If that's not your cup of tea (I couldn't pull it off beyond a few days myself), know this: To become more productive, first master the principle of managing yourself wisely.

I may not get a shot at Floyd Mayweather's belt, but I do know that certain principles about performance apply both inside — and outside — the ring.

Mastering this way of speaking, especially in high pressure situations or for longer periods of time, can't possibly be so easy, but still it's good to know that the basic principles of improving your voice are completely straightforward.

The answer is no, the technology does not break the laws of physics... if it broke the laws of physics, that's something you can find out pretty early with basic principles and math.

Okay, the cold isn't some medieval plague, but the principle of keeping the sick separate from the healthy still obviously applies, and, as we all know, modern office workers sometimes soldier on when it would be far better for the whole office if they headed home.

They haven't been allowed to though, because of regulations protecting «net neutrality»: the fundamental principle that all content on the web should be treated the same by Internet service providers (ISPs), no matter what kind of data it is.

Wouldn't you like to know Elon Musk «s principles?

Wouldn't you like to know Einstein «s principles?

I know my earlier book Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First has changed lives, and this book not only expands and amplifies those powerful concepts under a specifically eco-friendly lens, its also going to reach a lot more people because it has the support and power not only of my personal network, but also the resources of both a big NYC publisher (John Wiley & Sons) and my superstar co-author, Mr. Guerrilla Marketing himself, Jay Conrad Levinson — the man who brought us not only all the Guerrilla Marketing books but also Uniteds Friendly Skies, Allstates Good Hands, and even the Marlboro Man.

The video also contains measures that are not calculated based on accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, also known as GAAP.

However, as many marketers know, sales aren't just made on the value of a product, but on the principles the product espouses.

-LRB-...) no matter what some denizens of Wall Street profess, principal is not, and never has been, a synonym for principle.

On the same point, I know many, many people of faith who do not «force» their views on others, yet instead use their faith as their guiding principle to share love, kindness, and goodness to others.

If you are trying to convince those who are believers that they should not believe, your efforts are futile since we know not to let anyone take us captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.

I don't know if there's a god or not, but I think religious principles are quite valid.

Thus a responsible politics is one that appreciates the limits to our understanding: we don't know enough and can, in principle, never know enough to advance epistemological and political certitude.

But to get to primary assertion of if not be based on Christian principles — read the Constitution & study Christianity (because judging by your words, you don't know it) and if you can't see the correlation then you just don't want to.

First, you seem to not understand what a «theory» is (since you BOLD theory) A theory in Science is a set of principles that fit the facts that we know of.

We are deeply concerned that this discriminatory law runs counter to our guiding principles of equality and mutual respect and do not yet know what impact it will have on our ability to successfully host the 2017 All - Star Game in Charlotte.

They say then that it is more simple to believe at once in the eternal pre-existence of the world, as it is now going on, and may for ever go on by the principle of reproduction which we see and witness, than to believe in the eternal pre-existence of an ulterior cause, or Creator of the world, a being whom we see not, and know not, of whose form substance and mode or place of existence, or of action no sense informs us, no power of the mind enables us to delineate or comprehend.

I saw where you think that you can argue about «fine - tuning» and strong principles, and I would assert that's because you don't even know what the most implicating evidence even is... thanks to your god, Copernicus.

What Jefferson couldn't foresee, but which Spalding knows well, is that such mandates can only work if the teachers charged with teaching the principles reject reigning dogmas which reject the very possibility of truth.

They have not located the dignity of human beings in a self - modifying freedom that knows no limit and that need never respect a limit which it can, in principle, transgress.

I don't know how a belief system that is founded on the principle of loving others — not just saying it, but actually doing that — can justify enslaving or supporting slavery.

What has changed is that we are no longer the gods of the Victorian image, omniscient and decreeing; but in the new theological image, with freedom our first principle, not authority....

@KatMat: your analogy would begin approaching realism if: — during the pledge of allegiance kids were forced to say «one nation under The Orioles» — our nation's currency said «In Dallas Cowboys We Trust» — if millions were slaughtered, tortured and burned to death because they weren't fans of The Pittsburgh Penguins — if NASCAR fans endlessly attempted to have Intelligent Car Driving taught beside Evolution in science class as a possible explanation for how mankind developed — if «the 5 D's» of Dodgeball (Dodge, Duck, Dip, Dive, Dodge) were constantly attempted to be made into law so everyone would live by the same ridiculous notions, even if those notions knowingly discriminate — if nutters constantly claimed America was founded on the principles of Darts, even though our country SPECIFICALLY calls for a separation between Darts and State because the founders knew the inherent dangers of Darts becoming government instead of staying in the realm of sport where it belongs

I don't know what sorts of «punishment» God might have in store for people after death, but again, using Jesus as the guiding principle, I highly doubt that God is going to torture people for all eternity by burning them in fire.

«What the world is in itself can not be known - phenomena lack any quality or principles.

I know pacifism isn't the issue pre se here but I find many principles of either pacifism or NVR are giving with examples that seem to fit that particular belief and men are lauded who successfully utilized it - but rarely are those circumstances repeated.

One of the greatest intellectual crises of our age, one with enormous practical implications, is the fact that most people simply do not believe that there are any universal principles of right and wrong, or, if there are such principles, that we can know them sufficiently to demand adherence to them.

No, the meaning of man, and the intelligibility of man, which must proceed as a factor from the very fact that man does exist, and must mean something, this intelligibility of man is related not to the Divine Essence as a claim, but only to the Divine Wisdom, as a principle of meaning for the whole of creation.

Aristotle wrote that the criterion of good moral action is not a principle or a law so much as «the man of practical wisdom» ¯ that is, the person in your environment who habitually makes the wisest and bravest decisions of anyone else you know.

That is verifiable, in principle, though I don't know of any actual prospective experiments that prove it.

According to this understanding, the role of religion in political debate is not so much to supply these norms, as if they could not be known by non-believers — still less to propose concrete political solutions, which would lie altogether outside the competence of religion — but rather to help purify and shed light upon the application of reason to the discovery of objective moral principles.

«Nominals» were raised to appreciate (though not know) the Bible, a certain moral code and general Christian - ish principles.

In an reversal of the time - index of the «ontological principle,» we do not know what rules the future will set up for becoming.

Ogden seems to take this to mean that all are equally responsible for not actualizing authentic existence, since the primordial revelation of God already contained the content of the revelation in Jesus the Christ.50 This is, of course, the basis for Ogden's well - known rejection of the distinction between Christian existence as a «possibility in principle» for all men but a «possibility in fact» only for some.51

It is not that the general principles are no longer valid, unimportant or should be replaced by a situation ethics because they are of no consequence.

It makes no difference if some individual Christian does not know it, but regards such precepts as immutable principles of his life and then is surprised when the Church makes changes in them.

I am speaking of... what every one must know in his own case: how difficult it is to command himself, and do what he wishes to do; how weak the governing principle of his mind is, and how poorly and imperfectly he comes up to his own notions of right and truth; how difficult it is to command his feelings, grief, anger, impatience, joy, fear; how difficult to govern his own tongue, to say just what he would; how difficult to rouse himself to do what he would, at this time or that; how difficult to rise in the morning; how difficult to go about his duties and not be idle; how difficult to eat and drink just what he should, how difficult to regulate his thoughts through the day; how difficult to keep out of his mind what should be kept out of it.

On the other hand such personalism iuris divini, which despite its importance can not here be proved theologically, is a principle of resistance against the well - known dangers and shortcomings of democracy in large societies where self - government by the people, for example, by plebiscite is no longer possible and the representation which takes its place be - comes more and moe autonomous.

Even Ted Bundy knew this... Just didn't follow that principle..

Whether he consciously realized what he was doing I do not know; but I am sure that he implicitly thought of metaphysical principles as the axioms of the «logical system» of the world.

In practice, the principle of confrontation holds that making the Jewish community angry or stirring up controversy equates with «publicity,» no matter whether a Jew is converted or not.