Sentences with phrase «not rhetorical arguments»

(They were meant as geniune questions, not rhetorical arguments, and I'm glad you took them that way.)

Not exact matches

Even a leader with perfect diction and a background in rhetorical strategy can't hope to win the influence of his or her peers through speeches and arguments alone.

They have no facts and present rhetorical arguments that have no real foundation, always quoting Hebrew scholars and Smithsonian experts who, not surprisingly, don't exist.

That intelligent people get converted from time to time is certainly not a proof that what they now believe is true, and I don't get the sense that he's using the intelligence of these people as rhetorical weight to support an argument about the truth of what he believes to be true.

These assertions often do not differ markedly from the kinds of theoretical and explanatory arguments prevalent in the social science literature, but they serve as rhetorical appeals aimed at shaping the way we think about our world, the ways we vote, and the policies we support.

In so polarized a time as ours, such divergences are inevitable, and Donald Trump widens them because of his canny rhetorical habit of coining slogans, not making arguments.

If Bell's book is not an argument for universalism, and that Bell's rhetorical questions are not meant to ridicule the traditional beliefs of eternal conscious suffering, penal substitutionary atonement, and salvation by faith alone in Christ alone, then the marketing mechanism is a paradigm example of what Harry Frankfurt has defined as «bull ****.»

It is still not quite acceptable to say so, but the accusation that transcendental and conversionary theism generally and Christianity particularly are the primary source of our environmental ills (as well as of colonialism, imperialism, militarism, poverty, and the oppression of minorities and women), as many are saying today, is an argument of escalating rhetorical influence, but of declining credibility.

This reduces the rhetorical credibility of his argument because if the Tories can be trusted on those issues, why not Europe?

The purely rhetorical argument that the «party of Lincoln» hasn't wavered in character isn't new; in 2013, continuing a newish post-federal election tradition, Rand Paul became the latest Republican to speak at Howard University to make that case to a crowd rightly skeptical of the idea that the GOP post-Nixon can claim legitimate continuity with its own past.

The most frustrating thing about Diane Ravitch's new book, Reign of Error, isn't the way she twists the evidence on school choice or testing, or her condescending tone toward leaders trying to improve educational outcomes, or her clever but disingenuous rhetorical arguments.

Rhetorical questions are often used in writing, but are much less common in theses, where an argument should be clearly stated, not hinted at by means of rhetorical Rhetorical questions are often used in writing, but are much less common in theses, where an argument should be clearly stated, not hinted at by means of rhetorical rhetorical questions.

If history is any guide, «main arguments» are even now shape - shifting so as to become invisible in any further discussion, following a rhetorical process that is virtually impossible to trace on sentence - by - sentence basis but which will inevitably arrive at «I'm not sure what Gavin is talking about.»

Since the truth of falsity of any scientific claim can only be evaluated on it's own terms — and not via its association with other ideas or the character of its proponents — this kind of argument is only rhetorical.

This site is not the place for rhetorical tricks like strawman arguments.

Just as Lewandowsky couldn't take the perspectives of climate sceptics in good faith — he had to probe inside their minds, using a shoddy internet survey — Read does not take issue with the arguments actually offered by actual climate change - denying libertarians, he takes issue with his own fantasy libertarian, abandoning all the rigour and practice that the discipline he belongs to has established over the course of millennia, to score cheap rhetorical points.

The Court is not buying the Defendants arguments in their Motion to Dismiss that their statements are protected speech under the First Amendment, mere «opinion,» «rhetorical hyperbole,» or «fair comment.»

It should definitely not be about rhetorical arguments or point scoring.

Its the «could've, should've, would've» arguments here that are important, not the never ending crap of simple rhetorical spin and conspiracy theories.

The problem is not the mass - balance argument itself, but the rhetorical interpretation of it.

It is the latter that causes me to ask, and seriously this is not rhetorical or smart - * ss, do you actually know the mainstream skeptical scientific arguments?

WebHubTelescope The issue is not «hurt feelings», but the logical fallacy of argument by rhetorical appeal to issues other than objective scientific facts relative to stated hypotheses, and theories.

But when the argument does not turn on the common law, or on nice and hypercritical explications of the statute, but on the great principles of natural right and justice, as sometimes happens, particularly in criminal cases, the advocate is much more advantageously situated for exhibiting his rhetorical talents.

The underlying philosophy behind the institute's existence is that every argument can be enhanced by obtaining savvy feedback; that even the most silver - tongued lawyer is not immune to rhetorical excess or developing a tin ear when Supreme Court judges commence probing and challenging.