Sentences with phrase «not claim experiences»

Don't claim skills that you do not have and do not claim experiences that you do not have.

I can not claim that experience never happened because it did.

I intuitively sense an Immanent, Benevolent Presence in my life; but, of course spiritual experience is a subjective matter dependent on many factors — temperamental tendencies that are genetically predisposed (not determined) and personal experiences, so I am not claiming my experience is any sort of empirical «proof» for the existence of God that should convince others.

I can not claim any experience here but it was intriguing to me (and a bit inspiring) that it's possible to diaper multiples with cloth and sort of enjoy it.

To be very frank I have not claiming experience yet.

Do not lie, do not misrepresent yourself or your skills, and do not claim experience, traits or knowledge that don't represent you, he says.

Not exact matches

«People don't walk around with anti-résumés telling you what they have not studied or experienced (it's the job of their competitors to do that), but it would be nice if they did,» Taleb claims.

I've never been a woman, so I can't speak from experience, but when I was younger the women I knew seemed to fear aging, which they claimed was worse for them.

Ciubortariu admits that he can not attest to how Amazon operated prior to his arrival 18 months ago, but he refuted the Times» reporting claim by claim based on his own personal experience.

I wasn't sure if the new «butterfly» mechanism, which claims to make the keyboard more stable, was going to provide for a smooth typing experience.

During a recent review of a luxury spa client's risk and insurance programs, we found that the insurance broker had not reviewed the current experience modifier, which reflects claims experience during the past three years.

With years of experience in a particular industry, «these types of entrepreneurs are not only very well positioned to feel what is needed in the market — as they understand it perfectly — but they are also usually pretty good at executing their business as they easily earn their customers» and partners» trust because of their credibility and legitimacy,» claims Soussan.

This doesn't just fall foul of the technicalities of net neutrality, but of the core principle itself — generally, while operators claim they want to improve their customers» experience, they also want to use their gatekeeper role to demand a slice of the action from the big ad networks.

Some people claim that too much domain experience can actually harm you because you become cynical of all the things that can't be done — you've got the scars to prove it.

My business experience is unique in Canada, but I do not claim to have all the answers.

That made be true, but I don't see how that validates your claim that Canada has experienced 35 years of continuous tax cuts.

[4] Most worrisome is the warning of Janwillem Acket, chief economist for Julius Baer Group Ltd. (BAER), who claims that Switzerland could experience its own version of the subprime borrowing crisis, saying, «People who shouldn't be borrowing are now seriously considering entering the housing market.»

We don't know much about the author other than he appears to have no professional financial background or qualifications, is well - qualified in computer science and claims experience in data science and simulation.

He then goes on to assert that it is simply not true that strength and weakness in gold stocks tells us anything about the future performance of gold, which as anyone with a little bit of experience in trading this sector knows is incorrect, even if he tries to support his claim with presumably carefully cherry - picked statistics.

Rosales has never filed a claim against a worker who violated a non-disparagement clause with an online post, and in his experience, he said, those clauses don't prevent workers from exercising their rights to speak about workplace conditions.

Jennifer C What I find sad is the degree to which some Christians will go to protect their claimed monopoly to things like «love», as if non-Christians do not any experience with it at all.

To claim most of mankind is delusional because you don't share their experience is illogical.

Insofar as the experience of this self is unconscious, its immediacy and directness offer no exploitable advantage: one can hardly claim to be conscious of the essence of experience as exhibited immediately and directly in an experience of which one is not consciously aware.

This means that a certain metaphysical theory is evaluated not only with regard to its internal intelligibility (as Hartshorne claimed in his program), but also in the aspect of its agreement with experiences.

To that assessment this essay will contribute modestly by arguing (1) that an account of experience must be compatible with the fact that there is no one thing which is what experience is or is the essence of experience, (2) that no philosophically adequate account of what experience is can be established merely by appeal to direct, personal, intuitive experience of one's own experience, (3) that generalization from features found in human experience is not sufficient to justify the claim that temporality is essential to experience, but (4) that dialectical argument rather than intuition or generalization is necessary to support the claim that experience is essentially temporal.

This contention is not defeated merely by a critic's facile claim not to be conscious of any such nonsensuous perception of one's own «self,» or of anything describable as experience mediating one's experiences of trees, dogs, and fire hydrants.

If you claim it didn't happen, then you are denying your neighbor «his spiritual, psychological or emotional experiences.»

One of the most persistent mistakes made by critics of the crop of celibate gay Christian writers that came together around the blog Spiritual Friendship is the assumption that when we use any language that they don't like (most commonly, though not limited to, the word «gay») to describe our experiences, we are using that language to make ontological claims.

I'm not necessarily claiming that Christianity is wonderful (I'm an atheist), but that Christianity as it is known and experienced today is much, much more mellow an ideology both in theory and practice than Islam.

If I am presented with claims that the variety of uses of «experience» does not and could not reveal any normative essence of experience, I can counter that I have a prelinguistic intuition of the essence of my own experience — an intuition against which the adequacy or confusion of language can be authoritatively measured.

Given that people can be deluded or more often, allow their desire to believe something destroy their objectivity to the point their conclusions aren't reliable, your claims about private, personal experiences no one outside your head can verify simply aren't enough for anyone but you.

Remember, neither of you has a shred of external, verifiable evidence to back up anything you claim, so faced with conflicting beliefs supposedly backed by «personal experiences» or some such thing I haven't experienced, why should I take either of you seriously?

The claim of privileged access is not saved by arguing that each of us intuitively grasps this self without analysis or argument, that each of us singly grasps the essence of experience in this intuition, and that the analysis or argument is required only (1) to call it to the attention of those who have not noticed it, or (2) to defend the claim of such an intuition against those who deny it for no or bad reasons, or (3) to develop its implications and describe its content.

Julie - I was especially encouraged and thought of you while reading a particular passage because it is about the story of a woman who was assaulted and not believed... and then about the way that it was necessary for there to be a public forum where she could claim and own her experience.

I do not think I am right because the majority claim I know I am right because of personal experience that matched up exactly with the written evidence we have in the Bible.

(continued from 6/1/09) As little inclined as is Charles Taylor to connect the pre-ontological with the metaphysical, religious «experience» with cognitive assertions, he can not finally avoid making certain claims about the way things are, or at least the way human things are: We all see....

Thus it acknowledges with the apophatic tradition that we really do not know the inner being of divine reality; the hints and clues we have of the way things are, whether we call them religious experiences, revelation, or whatever, are too fragile, too little (and often too negative) for heavy metaphysical claims.

I am not claiming that religious groups have a monopoly, but it has been my experience that these types of activities are very common in religious organizations.

This, of course, is not to say he is not rightly esteemed truly human, a man of flesh and blood with the peculiar Biblical force of that phrase; indeed it might be claimed that the very stress laid on the limited character of his experience makes us more vividly aware of the reality of his human nature.

We do not claim to understand exactly what happened or how the disciples experienced it.

I also notice in my experience that most people who claim to be pro-choice who I have talked to are not open to dialog and seem to deflect with other issues when talking about abortion.

The Easter experience, that Jesus is the living Lord who claims us as his followers, can not be demonstrated to be true like a scientific proposition.

Rabindranath Tagore (1861 — 1941), the Indian poet and writer, said on one occasion that «to reject any part of humanity's religious experience is to reject truth».6 This is not to say that all religious claims are the same nor equally valid.

They apply to every attempt to think about a framework of meaning that transcends human constructions and every claim to truth that can not easily be tested in human experience.

Not only do my own private experiences of the bible's truth claims give me good reason to believe it's assessment, but the success and consistency of biblical anthropology in other quarters (not least literature and philosophy) means that I have absolutely no reason to be ashamNot only do my own private experiences of the bible's truth claims give me good reason to believe it's assessment, but the success and consistency of biblical anthropology in other quarters (not least literature and philosophy) means that I have absolutely no reason to be ashamnot least literature and philosophy) means that I have absolutely no reason to be ashamed.

A theology of women's experience may not make quite so radical a claim.

I can't say that everyone would experience the same thing if everyone did what I did because not everyone who claims to have done the same thing have also stated that they had the same type of experiences nor have they come to the same conclusions as I have.

Insistently attentive to horrendous evils in the actual lives of persons, she boldly draws on both philosophical and theological resources (the two, she says, are inseparable) to support her claim that the person experiencing evil can reach the firm and reasonable conclusion that evil has not defeated the goodness of God.

I'm not sure why some people are making such an issue of this vs. her message and experience, which she claims to be an over-all positive one.

While any knowledge of God must indeed be conditioned by human experience, Ashbrook and Albright actually claim much more than this: that the brain not only patterns our experience of God, but its very structure can inform us of God's nature.