Sentences with phrase «not human conflict»

Now, a team of researchers including Elie Bou - Zeid an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Princeton who experienced the storm while in Lebanon, have found a more likely cause for the unprecedented storm — it was not human conflict, but a combination of climatic factors and unusual weather.

A dust storm that blanketed seven nations in the Middle East in late summer 2015 was caused by climate factors and unusual weather, not human conflict in Syria, concluded researchers including Elie Bou - Zeid, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Princeton.

«Giant Middle East dust storm caused by a changing climate, not human conflict.»

Not exact matches

Yet Saudi Arabia is not without its critics, who lament its poor record on human rights, draconian executions of political prisoners and military intervention in the civil war in Yemen, a conflict that has caused a humanitarian disaster in the country and one which is seen as a proxy war between the kingdom and its regional rival, Iran.

The purpose of the disaster film is not to make small conflicts bigger but to make big ones smaller - to reduce unthinkable catastrophes to a human scale.

The outcome of a war will not only lead to a sharp escalation in human casualties and displaced families, who have yet to come to terms with the death and destruction from the conflicts in Iraq, Yemen and Syria, but the region itself may no longer be the landscape it currently is as most countries in the area will struggle to recuperate from the large - scale devastation caused by a war.

This impending civilizational conflict indicates the fact that tribalism is so deeply entrenched in human behavioral patterns that it not only refuses to wither away but, in times of mounting tension in the face of threatening world crises, it is likely to intensify.

In the end it probably won't matter, we are humans first and we have been in conflict with other humans for all of history.

Even important human needs can conflict with one another, not only within an individual but also between individuals and groups.

If the pacifist position were correct, it would seem logical that throughout history God would either prevent war, or at least not take sides in human conflicts, but that is not the case.

Perhaps Percy's Christianity and his humanism remain in conflict precisely because transcendent grace and the human quest for it are not the two halves of a perfect equilibrium.

This level of conflict always works because it gives the reader no choice — he or she can't help identifying with the humans rather than with the rampaging river, the volcano or the burning building.

So when they experience this universal, timeless yearning, they are likely to envision the therapeutic ideals of deep consolation and genuine human flourishing — two worthy goals that the forces of this world and the conflicts in our hearts do not seem to allow.

The tension that Israel knew throughout her life as a nation between faith in an electing, acting, covenanting God on the one hand, and on the other the rational improbability, if not absurdity, of the divine promises implicit in her faith; the conflict between the divine demand to trust and the human doubt; the incongruity between divine promise for the nation and the incredible historical odds against fulfillment — all of this Israel is mindful of in the shaping of the stories, and in the reading and cherishing of the stories.

The position taken in this book is that such a democracy is inherently self - defeating, in part because the unrestrained pursuit of satisfaction tends to breed conflict rather than harmony, but more importantly because human nature is such that persons and cultures do not grow in beauty, strength, and virtue when people strive only to get what they want.

If all religion never existed, I believe human conflict would not have been much different.

In this latter form of state the compulsive order that persisted would not be based on the exploitation of human conflicts but would represent the stage of development which had been reached.

«Whatever increase in social intelligence and moral good will may be achieved in human history, may serve to mitigate the brutalities of social conflict, but they can not abolish the conflict itself.

The community defined by these two concepts is what our human nature really craves, and what it must have if it is not to be in conflict with itself both within the individual and within society.

The spiritual challenge of our time is to realize our sacred humanness, that there need not be a conflict between the natural and the supernatural, between the finite and the infinite, between time and eternity, between practicality and mysticism, between social justice and contemplation, between sexuality and spirituality, between our human fulfillment and our spiritual realization, between what is most human and what is most sacred.

Religion changes things too — it is solely responsible for all human conflicts and all wars ever since some deadhead looked skyward and tried to put his own spin on something not there.

This means, he continues, that «we can not avoid the conflicts of human interests or evade the demand always to take sides with the oppressed against all who oppress them.»

The claim of Christian belief is not first and foremost that it offers the only accurate system of thought, as against all other competitors; it is that, by standing in the place of Christ, it is possible to live in such intimacy with God that no fear or failure can ever break God's commitment to us, and to live in such a degree of mutual gift and understanding that no human conflict or division need bring us to uncontrollable violence and mutual damage.

@Feanor1: Exactly, and until we see each other as merely human, not American, European, Asian, Sikh, Muslem, Christian, Black or White this sort of crap will continue, and it will cause conflict of all sorts.

Jesus did not hesitate to disregard the sabbath observance and the dietary regulations when they conflicted with human good or to point out the hypocrisy latent in such legalism.

He concludes that the ways in which men will deal with conflict are not determined; and human intelligence and control may make possible a world order which can prevent the terrible destruction of violent warfare.22

Let's point to some of the greatest conflicts in human history: WWI — not religious WWII — not religious American Revolution — not religious French Revolution — not religious 100 Years War — not religious Roman Conquest (s)-- not religious Greek Conquest (s)-- not religious

But what we have established so far is that the exercise of power in history, the expression of the interests, vitalities, and wills which belong to us as human beings, and even the participation in the inevitable conflict of these interests and vitalities, are not in contradiction to the real human good which is the earthly content of our life in the love of God.

Thus there is a legitimate (and in itself higher) principle of freedom and also a legitimate (though in itself lower) principle of justified compulsion, and these two principles can not be simply assigned to separate spheres of human existence and action so that they could never come into conflict with each other.

Actually, the nature of life on Earth makes more sense with a group of malevolent gods who are in constant conflict with each other and don't really care about humans than it does with a single all - powerful loving God.

That mankind has not been placed under the direction of an unfailingly reliable and wholly conclusive moral guide is our unhappy lot; indeed, being subject to conflicting sentiments (or principles) is what it means to be human.

As the conflicting accounts, they don't conflict, yes there is a some difference in various manuscripts, but they were copied by humans, who make mistakes.

Conflict in human communities can not be totally avoided: it is bound to happen regularly.

The problem with such jobs is not that they are useless, nor that the workers do their work involuntarily, but that the job is in «conflict with democratic pride» or destructive of human dignity.

In particular, they do not resolve the conflict between two powerful sentiments: a wish to preserve human life from its first moments of existence and a desire not willingly to impose upon a child a short life of pain and misery.

The trouble is that there are today so many conflicting theories of the interpretation of human signs that we do not know where to begin.

Human affliction, especially the monstrous inhumanity of man to man, was to them a practical, rather than a theoretical, problem; it represented not only a conflict of ideas but a conflict of individual and class interests, a struggle for justice in personal character or social organization against selfishness, ill will, and inequity.

Therefore, we approach the discipline of being a community of moral conversation, not only with our natural human anxieties about conflict and change, but also with the hope we have in God's grace, our belief in the power of the Spirit to work through and among us.

A pacifist of the latter type, if he is sincere, does not withdraw from conflict but gives himself to the limit of his power in deeds of love and ministry to human need.

The first position appeals to reasonable (not simply conformist and hypocritical) Christians who believe that, after all, every period of human history has its values: that it is better to try to Christianize a given situation than to enter into conflict with it; and that one can not sweep the whole socia1 and cultural edifice into outer darkness.

«But all the conflicts of Gog and Magog arise out of those evil forces which have not been overcome in the conflict against the Gogs and Magogs who dwell in human hearts.

A weak moral structure will lead to individuals who act for themselves or with disregard to the needs of the society, resulting in internal conflict and the likely failure of the society if the members aren't capable of completely independent survival (and humans aren't).

Might not a sacramentalist model, one which subordinates human time to God's grand evolutionary scheme best generate the numinous vision and moral courage needed to surmount the conflicts between humankind's wellbeing and the wellbeing of the cosmos?

Among them were pantheism and the positions that human reason is the sole arbiter of truth and falsehood and good and evil; that Christian faith contradicts reason; that Christ is a myth; that philosophy must be treated without reference to supernatural revelation; that every man is free to embrace the religion which, guided by the light of reason, he believes to be true; that Protestantism is another form of the Christian religion in which it is possible to be as pleasing to God as in the Catholic Church; that the civil power can determine the limits within which the Catholic Church may exercise authority; that Roman Pontiffs and Ecumenical Councils have erred in defining matters of faith and morals; that the Church does not have direct or indirect temporal power or the right to invoke force; that in a conflict between Church and State the civil law should prevail; that the civil power has the right to appoint and depose bishops; that the entire direction of public schools in which the youth of Christian states are educated must be by the civil power; that the Church should be separated from the State and the State from the Church; that moral laws do not need divine sanction; that it is permissible to rebel against legitimate princes; that a civil contract may among Christians constitute true marriage; that the Catholic religion should no longer be the religion of the State to the exclusion of all other forms of worship; and «that the Roman Pontiff can and should reconcile himself to and agree with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.»

Not just human freedom explains conflict and evil in the world but also the humbler forms of freedom that no portions of nature are wholly without.

«These are not just political conflicts or economic choices; they are moral choices with enormous human dimensions,» Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of Stockton, California, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops» Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, said in a public letter last human dimensions,» Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of Stockton, California, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops» Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, said in a public letter last Human Development, said in a public letter last week.

To be human, I said, means to be a freedom in a cluster with other freedoms; but such a cluster exists not as a frozen tranquillity but as a dynamic conflict of freedoms.

Human beings do not like conflict, fighting and war.

If you support a health or human rights organisation — and they are not already supporters of the Conflicts of Interest statement (see list of members here)-- you could send them the link to the page to ask if they support the statement.

And they can also explain that conflict in a marriage is not only normal, but essential, if parents are to address and resolve inevitable human differences that will arise between them.