Sentences with phrase «of animals in nature»

The resolution states many sound reasons for this action, including recognition of the correlation between childhood animal cruelty and interpersonal violence in adulthood; the goal of humane education to develop caring, responsible citizens by teaching empathy, compassion, and respect for all living beings; and the chance to reduce the suffering of both wild and domestic animals by addressing deficiencies in children's understanding of the role of animals in nature and people's lives.

The extinction of a species could be considered the ultimate cruelty, but neither PETA nor the Center for Consumer Freedom has much to say about the well - being or viability of animals in nature.

Not exact matches

A recent study published in Nature looked at thousands of different mammal species and worked out the percentage of cases in which animal fatalities were caused by their own kind.

This one is «the capacity to make important, relevant discriminations in the world of nature between one plant and another, between one animal and another.

Indeed in nature today we see many many examples of animals that are partially adapted to flight (frogs, flying squirrels, etc.).

All of nature, his entire creation, vegetable, animal, and human will be made whole in heaven.

«Nature» in the sense of what animals do, will never resolve this argument.

The pamphlet «What makes Man Unique» comments that nature, from its own internal laws, should not produce an animal which is beyond environmental control, as it in fact does in the case of man.

Due to the limited statistical and methodological certainty allowed by biological science, the occurrence of technical errors in biological experiments, the differences between human and animal embryo development, the rapidity by which the cloning procedure produces a totipotent zygote, and the philosophical and theological nature of the question, there is no biological experiment that will prove with moral certainty that a human zygote never exists during the OAR procedure.

While exhorting us to contemplate nature, the Qur» an says, «In the creation of skies and the earth, the difference between night and day, the ships which run at sea carrying that which is useful for mankind, the rain water which Allah sends down from the sky to revive the earth after its death, and to spread animals on it, and the arrangement of winds and clouds between sky and earth, in all those things there are evidences (for the existence of God) for those who make use of their brains» (Surah II, 164In the creation of skies and the earth, the difference between night and day, the ships which run at sea carrying that which is useful for mankind, the rain water which Allah sends down from the sky to revive the earth after its death, and to spread animals on it, and the arrangement of winds and clouds between sky and earth, in all those things there are evidences (for the existence of God) for those who make use of their brains» (Surah II, 164in all those things there are evidences (for the existence of God) for those who make use of their brains» (Surah II, 164).

When we see the consumptive, destructive ways of nature and realize our own inevitable participation in the carnage, it's easiest to say, «They're just animals,» or «That's just the way it is.»

The code of laws provides the regulations which create the proper relations between man and God, such as saying prayers, fasting, and other religious duties; they guide man in his relations with his brother in Islam or the non-Muslim community, in organizing the structure of the family and encouraging reciprocal affection; they lead man to an understanding of his place in the universe, encouraging research into the nature of man and animals and guiding man in the use of the benefits of the natural world.

I'm curious to know why you have ruled out the possibility that Nature might select for optimum forms of eyesight in completely different animals.

In To Gaurus, Porphyry's main concern is to establish the plant - like nature of the embryo over and above its animal - like qualities.

Nor were animals and the forces of nature to be bowed down to by man as in pagan religion; rather man, as a rational being made in the image of God, was to exercise dominion over them.

It is, to repeat, because current formulations of Christian theology in general do not picture our relations to animals in any such way that we need the corrective of a theology of nature.

Although there is much cruelty in the treatment of animals in the Indian subcontinent, as elsewhere in the world, all the Indian religions teach a sense of oneness with nature and a reverence for life.

You said — «God accepts human nature is because we are the only species that can give him what he wants — which, in the view of Genesis, is bloody, burned animal sacrifices.»

With this in mind Christians rightly turn to biblical authors who go beyond stewardship to stress a just treatment of animals; to Orthodox traditions with their emphases on a sacramental understanding of nature; and to classical, Western writers such as Irenacus, the later Augustine, Francis of Assisi, and the Rhineland mystics who stress the value of creation as a whole.

In fact, according to the Bible, the reason that God accepts human nature is because we are the only species that can give him what he wants — which, in the view of Genesis, is bloody, burned animal sacrificeIn fact, according to the Bible, the reason that God accepts human nature is because we are the only species that can give him what he wants — which, in the view of Genesis, is bloody, burned animal sacrificein the view of Genesis, is bloody, burned animal sacrifices.

Study of Scripture through the filter of man's biases results in the type of man - centered ideas proferred by Baden, like «God learns to accept their inherently evil nature», and humans «are the only species that can give him what he wants — which, in the view of Genesis, is bloody, burned animal sacrifices», and «it is, rather, our job to make ourselves uncomfortable that he might be appeased.»

What would a day be in the Divine circadian cycle of an omnimodal, omnipotent being, 24 hours, 24 billion years, 24 milliseconds??? Nowhere in the Bible coes it say that evolution does not exist within the living realm, but Simon Peter does say that to the I Am»... one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years is as one day...» (the Bible DOES recognize the effects of animal husbandry, which is a form of artificially - induced evolution on livestock species, and narrates accounts of Divine intervention to influence it, so you can not factually say that it is outside the realm of Divine probability by biblical accounts, as Divine probability contains, by textbook definition, the sum of the laws of nature.

It's not just life / human nature / NATURE??? There are a lot of beautiful things in this world, but there is the uglier side as well... and to blaim it all on God — good or bad... well you might as well be living in the old testament... I am surprised there aren't still animal sacrifices to the angry, wrathful god that so many believe in... Oh, another question to the thumpers who believe that «God can be cruel» (And I really don't think Stephen King would say any of his work supports that)... So is God actually «perfect&rnature / NATURE??? There are a lot of beautiful things in this world, but there is the uglier side as well... and to blaim it all on God — good or bad... well you might as well be living in the old testament... I am surprised there aren't still animal sacrifices to the angry, wrathful god that so many believe in... Oh, another question to the thumpers who believe that «God can be cruel» (And I really don't think Stephen King would say any of his work supports that)... So is God actually «perfect&rNATURE??? There are a lot of beautiful things in this world, but there is the uglier side as well... and to blaim it all on God — good or bad... well you might as well be living in the old testament... I am surprised there aren't still animal sacrifices to the angry, wrathful god that so many believe in... Oh, another question to the thumpers who believe that «God can be cruel» (And I really don't think Stephen King would say any of his work supports that)... So is God actually «perfect»?

This failure to grasp the universal nature of ideality also results in animals, however virtuous, not qualifying as full - fledged moral agents (AAMB 52) 4

Hence the failure of animal consciousness to grasp the universal nature of ideality or symbol, as in number, structure, goodness, or other abstract concepts such as beauty and God.

His good creation was not intended to function this way, but since He gave humans, angels, and even animals (to a degree) the freedom to make genuine choices, we sometimes use this freedom in ways that are contrary to the will and desire of God, and when we do this, the forces of nature suffer the consequences, and chaos rages over the face of earth, wreaking havoc, destroying lives, and bringing destruction in its wake.

The ancient claim that man is by nature a political animal and must in and through the exercise and practice of virtue learned in communities achieve a form of local and communal self - limitation — a condition properly understood as liberty — can not be denied forever without cost.

Not being particularly Aristotelian in my understanding of the soul, I feel no great need (or desire) to guard the metaphysical and moral partition between sensitive and rational natures, or between animal and spiritual souls.

Perhaps it is our inability to face the prospect of our own death, our own intimate participation in the ways of nature, that causes us to be uncomfortable with killing animals to meet human needs.

Whether and how far these reflections concerning a positive relation between spirit and matter may be significant when it is a question of asking in philosophical and theological terms whether an ontological connection between man and the animal kingdom asserted by the natural sciences to be a fact, is open to an explanatory interpretation on the basis of the nature of spirit and matter, can only be judged after we have examined some aspects of «becoming» in general.

I present urban form to my students in the long and large western humanist tradition that sees cities as communal artifacts that human animals by our nature make in order to live well (with all the teleological and virtue ethics implications of that tradition's notion of living well).

The question of whether such structures exist and what they are is always an empirical question, but whatever they may be, in their transcendence of what man shares with the animal they may be thought of as part of human nature.

Sadly, when this approach is applied to the Book of Genesis, the profound theological insights which are communicated through its narratives can be lost, e.g. the stars, animals, plants, etc. in fact all of nature, is part of creation, that is, it is created by God, it is not a god (contrary to the pagan understanding of the natural world).

In seeking to develop a theology of nature, process theologians are supportive of endeavors to appropriate other images from the tradition, such as St. Francis» compassionate love for the poor and treatment of animals as sisters and brothers, the Orthodox view of the church as inclusive of all of creation, and the use of the elements of bread and wine in the Eucharist, products of the interworkings between God, the non-human natural world, and human labor, that speak, to contemporary needIn seeking to develop a theology of nature, process theologians are supportive of endeavors to appropriate other images from the tradition, such as St. Francis» compassionate love for the poor and treatment of animals as sisters and brothers, the Orthodox view of the church as inclusive of all of creation, and the use of the elements of bread and wine in the Eucharist, products of the interworkings between God, the non-human natural world, and human labor, that speak, to contemporary needin the Eucharist, products of the interworkings between God, the non-human natural world, and human labor, that speak, to contemporary needs.

Another powerful image in the biblical tradition that is helpful in the development of a theology of nature is found in the second chapter of Genesis where God commissions Adam to name the animals.

In relation to the animal then, we can speak of a human nature that is common to every man, but we must be careful to make the qualification that this is a relative «essence.»

In the latter system of thought, nature separates levels of reality according to a hierarchical arrangement — God, angels, man, animals, plants and inanimate matter.

Here and there it may be, we can catch a glimpse of the wonderful order in nature, the regularity of the stars, scattered over the wide spaces of the universe yet obedient to one law; the order to be found even in the microscopic world, as also within visible things concerning which science has given such amazing information in recent years; the order in the construction of a flower or of an animal, from the flea to the whale, a noteworthy obedience to law even in the life of man.

Finally, the mainstream Christian view of existence is one of rigid hierarchy, in which a male creator - god occupies the top link in the chain of being, human beings next, and nature — animals, plants, rocks — the bottom.

the existence isnt any different because no one here can prove what happens when you die, no one, so i suggest you make the best of your time in this planet that has the perfect balance of oxygen for you to breath and be thankful to whatever happened in this planet that made so many animals and plants and nature coexist and allowed us to have a place to live... well sorry to those who were killed by religious agendas... Do you know that someone tried to shut me up once by saying, oh then how can we be so perfect in form, we cant be evolving because how come we do nt evolve today..

For instance, a fellow who says there is no order in nature — nothing like laws of nature — that's not good common sense, because every living animal wants to make expectations about the future on the grounds that there are legitimate expectations about it.

And in any case, when a physicist discusses the velocity of light, or the red - shift which shows that the universe is expanding, he is talking about something that would be there in nature if there were no animals with sensations of color left.

The older teleological view measured morality against man's rational - animal nature; in the sexual realm, this meant evaluating sex acts by reference to the common good of marriage, which integrated spousal union and the bearing and rearing of children.

For example, culture analyst Michael Real notes that «mechanically reconstructed animals and plants in the Nature's Wonderland part of Frontierland stand out as an antithesis to the sensitivity to nature maintained in real life by Native Americans.&Nature's Wonderland part of Frontierland stand out as an antithesis to the sensitivity to nature maintained in real life by Native Americans.&nature maintained in real life by Native Americans.»

madtown, The evolutionary process that effect His will is not interventionary in its process, it follows the law of nature, God is not Human, we are only part of Him, our wisdom is infinitesimaly small, The reason is beyond us, just like History, it is only after thousands or millions of years that we understood why it happened, for example, Why the dynasours got extinct, millions of years ago, to pave the way for smaller animals and ultimately humans, Thats why to apply the present human logic on history is illogically simplistic.

The sense and degree to which psychologists are behaviorists gets its significance from the fact that, in studying animals, that is, the sort of thing that we ourselves are, we have a dual access to reality, which we do not have in studying inanimate nature.

Some believe that the 90 % of our brain which we do not use is not simply empty matter in our skulls, but may have originally been the parts of our brain that communicated with the spiritual realm of the angels so that through them we could communicate with each other, with God, with the animals, with the plants, and even with the forces of nature (For more on this theology of angels, see «The Powers Trilogy» by Walter Wink.)

In fact, all my anxieties run in the opposite direction: that, in order to affirm the uniqueness of humanity within organic nature, as well as the unique moral obligations it entails, we will reject all evidence of intentionality, reason, or affection in animals as something only apparently purposive, doing so by reference to the most egregiously vapid of philosophical naturalism's mystifications — «instinct» — and thereby opening the way to a mechanistic narrative that, as we have learned from an incessant torrent of biological and bioethical theory in recent decades, can be extended to human behavior as welIn fact, all my anxieties run in the opposite direction: that, in order to affirm the uniqueness of humanity within organic nature, as well as the unique moral obligations it entails, we will reject all evidence of intentionality, reason, or affection in animals as something only apparently purposive, doing so by reference to the most egregiously vapid of philosophical naturalism's mystifications — «instinct» — and thereby opening the way to a mechanistic narrative that, as we have learned from an incessant torrent of biological and bioethical theory in recent decades, can be extended to human behavior as welin the opposite direction: that, in order to affirm the uniqueness of humanity within organic nature, as well as the unique moral obligations it entails, we will reject all evidence of intentionality, reason, or affection in animals as something only apparently purposive, doing so by reference to the most egregiously vapid of philosophical naturalism's mystifications — «instinct» — and thereby opening the way to a mechanistic narrative that, as we have learned from an incessant torrent of biological and bioethical theory in recent decades, can be extended to human behavior as welin order to affirm the uniqueness of humanity within organic nature, as well as the unique moral obligations it entails, we will reject all evidence of intentionality, reason, or affection in animals as something only apparently purposive, doing so by reference to the most egregiously vapid of philosophical naturalism's mystifications — «instinct» — and thereby opening the way to a mechanistic narrative that, as we have learned from an incessant torrent of biological and bioethical theory in recent decades, can be extended to human behavior as welin animals as something only apparently purposive, doing so by reference to the most egregiously vapid of philosophical naturalism's mystifications — «instinct» — and thereby opening the way to a mechanistic narrative that, as we have learned from an incessant torrent of biological and bioethical theory in recent decades, can be extended to human behavior as welin recent decades, can be extended to human behavior as well.

Answer me, machinist, has nature arranged all the means of feeling in this animal so that it may not feel?

Growing up in the Midwestern United States, I spent my childhood exploring creeks, plaines and fields, and have loved animals, nature and art all of my life.