Sentences with phrase «of lesser animals»

Cats have a keen ability to get out of situations that would probably be the death of lesser animals.

Not exact matches

In a similar fashion, the Body Shop got skewered when a magazine article questioned its claims about animal testing, alleged that the company used petrochemicals in some of its «natural» products, and charged that its Trade Not Aid program accounted for less of its supplies than it had claimed.

When firms appear to look less like large companies and more like large funds, it's time to have a conversation on what they are: animal, mineral, or a whole new set of ABCs.

And, over time, those benefits could really add up: One animal study found that regular exercise actually reorganizes parts of the brain, making it less reactive to stress.

As part of its pitch, the company explains to potential customers that the so - called «net present value» of a $ 7,000 saddle is actually less than the all - in cost of using an ill - fitting one — expenses that include frequent vet bills, replacement saddles and even the costs associated with the premature death of the animal due to saddle - related health problems.

As for Elanco, it turned in less - than - stellar performance in the third quarter of last year, reviving questions about whether Lilly might spin off what has long been a leading player in animal health.

Only if no options are available will Cape Air offer the less desirable alternative to the passenger with the Service Animal of traveling on a later flight.

They work with corporations to increase the availability of animal product alternatives and have developed a «restaurant report card» to score the top 100 chain restaurants according to their plant - based options.22 In general, we think that corporate outreach is a relatively effective animal advocacy intervention, though we are less certain of the effects of promoting plant - based options in restaurants than we are of the effects of working with corporations to implement welfare reforms.

[2] Quotes out of context, which is a ploy used by the less able [3] Shows a marked desire to escape moral accountability and [4] Relegates man to animal status

Talking snakes, talking donkeys, a boat at sea for half a year with a couple million animals, a temple less than 5000sq feet taking 150,000 workers and 7 years to complete, and then sacrificing 14 animals a minute for 7 days straight, a virgin birth story (like there weren't already a few of them before), a zombie invasion that no third party seemed to witness, a dude living in the belly of a fish for a couple days, a guys last words (before become back as a zombie) being «My god, my god, why hast thou forsaken me.»

However a lesser animal species over a few millions of years can thru a process of random genetic mutations and natural selection evolve into man.

We can assume that all the Justices sitting on the Court today, like other humans, have their own preferences and biases about religion, but the judicial opinions of one of them, Justice John Paul Stevens, raise more than a slight suspicion that some of his actions on the bench stem from animosity, if not to animal sacrifice, at least to certain less exotic religious beliefs and practices.

Kant's approach may hold at bay the antihumanism of modern science (we are just clever animals in an insignificant corner of a vast cosmos), and it may serve as a bulwark against the ruthless rationality of economic efficiency and the putative demands of progress, but Michalson concludes that Kant's approach to the question of God makes theology less and not more plausible.

@Chad «You seemingly have determined that all animals / humans are essentially the same as rocks...» @ Saraswati Yep, more or less, though I don't use the exact terminology you use in the rest of the sentence regarding determinism, but lets go with «close enough».

If there is indeed a soul or purpose for man that is greater than self (animal) evolution would point towards something greater not something less than or limited to the purpose of an ape or a plant.

Africans seemed knowledgeable and concerned about the rapid disappearance of their continent's animals, but less aware of the dangers of environmental abuse.

igaftr, yes you are right cats and all the animals in the world including you is part of the universe, eveything is God, it took Him 13.7 billion years for us to arrive what we are now, meaning the true reality of our existence, you are probably less than 50 years old, so how can you expect to equate yourself or pretend to understand Him, God Who is 13.7 billion years old.

Now he reviews a new book on ethics and writes,» [The author] agrees with what now seems to be a near - consensus among philosophers that «speciesism» - the view that we are entitled to take theinterests of animals less seriously than we take human interests, simply because humans are members of our species - is not a morally defensible position.»

«The animal appears to be less sexually conscious, certainly less sexually addicted, than the mass of mankind».

Recently, Singer repeated this assertion in an interview in the Journal of Practical Ethics, arguing that people with serious developmental and cognitive disabilities have less value than animals with higher capacities, strongly implying that we can treat them accordingly (my emphasis):

If the fetus does not have the same claim to life as a person, it appears that the newborn baby does not either, and the life of a newborn baby is of less value to it than the life of a pig, a dog, or a chimpanzee is to the nonhuman animal.

If these women are really serious and really committed to their cause and that of all women with is to be treated fairly, not as a possession or animal or lesser form of humanity... If the women of Israel really serious, then they must

Animals that had it, out competed animals with lessAnimals that had it, out competed animals with lessanimals with less of it.

No Stone Age family could possible manage the «life - support» needs, (for weeks - to - months) of «ALL - THE - ANIMALS -, TWO - BY - TWO», (as biblically - postulated), on a wooden ship less than 3/4's the size of the aircraft carrier U.S.S. Intrepid, (centerpiece, N.Y.C.'s Intrepid museum)!

It turns out that when we let ourselves surrender to the «Time of the Season,» we are less like the animals and flowers of the field than a) like actors playing parts in some two - bit melodrama about low - class Others, or, b) like the starry - eyed Icaruses of the first verse seeking to take one another «to the sun» and «to promised lands.»

Nothing like being called a depraved animal, a rat, scum, garbage, less than human or any of the other names that atheists get called on a regular basis, not to mention no threats of eternal torture.

Other, rather similar but not identical patterns are individuals of the species Homo sapiens, a great multitude of less similar patterns are representatives of other animal and plant species.

In a little lesser degree the behavior of lower vertebrates allows the conclusion that these animals have sensations, feelings and memory.

Oh, and yes, of course I mean that individual animals — as beings with distinct personal natures — belong to that restored cosmos, no less than individual humans.

However, the lowliest worms have sense organs, nerve cells and nerve centers, and these cells function more or less in the same manner as those of higher animals.

Instead, I find increasingly within the animal rights movement and within discussions of environmental ethics (although less so there) a perspective that illustrates just how alienated from the rest of nature the human species has become.

As reason sets human beings apart from all other animals, it seems that our rational nature can not be explained by evolution alone, for we do not find stages of lesser reflective selfconsciousness before the human species but evolution requires only gradual changes at a time.

Mutations are random ERRORS which almost never benefit the animal much less transform the descendents of a dinosaur into a human being.

Yet, less than a century and a half before, an 11 - year - old boy and his partly crippled great - grandfather had maintained a valley bottom outpost, unaided, against Indians, ice storms and wild animal depredations for almost six months until the rest of their family could return from a trip to Louisiana marked by a rash of mishaps.

Studying and being convinced of the truth of evolutionary biology didn't me love people or animals less.

They can relate us, at least in part, with the finalities of existence and so equip us to live more like true men and less like highly sophisticated yet inevitably limited animals.

This modification of materialist physicalism provides one of the elements necessary to allow for freedom in human beings (and, to a lesser extent, other animals).

Human psychology differs greatly, to be sure, not only because we have much less access to the psyches of other animals, but also because their mentality is so much less developed, so that they — at least most of them — seem incapable of entertaining norms as such, The difference is, nevertheless, one of degree, not of kind.

That an animal body is first and foremost a society (as Whitehead reminds us) is a useful indicator that every rationalization of experience depends at bottom on a more or less happy conjunction of «naturing» and «culturing.»

The Bald Eagle is a wild animal that just came off of the endangered species list a little less than 5 years ago.

More substantially, Hobgood - Oster gets the evolution of animal compassion exactly backwards: «As humans became and continue to become more urban and less connected to animals and the natural world around them, animals are increasingly removed from the sacred circle of hospitality.»

For example, if man were defined as essentially a rational animal, rationality could not admit of degrees, and «more» of it would not constitute a norm or an ideal, without entailing that some human beings are less «human» than others.

«The body,» he continues, «would thus be, not the cause of our thinking, but merely a condition restrictive thereof, and, although essential to our sensuous and animal consciousness, it may be regarded as an impeder of our pure spiritual life.8 And in a recent book of great suggestiveness and power, less well - known as yet than it deserves, — I mean» Riddles of the Sphinx,» by Mr. F. C. S. Schiller of Oxford, late of Cornell University, — the transmission - theory is defended at some length.9

It is preferable to call it a foot - hold because trappers seek to catch the animal on the pad of the foot rather than on the less muscular leg where the bones may be broken.

The other claim, that trapping removes immune adult animals causing a reproductive spike of weaker and less immune animals, [112] also flies in the face of their complaint that trapping is indiscriminate.

This method of slaughter reduces the blood pressure in the brain to zero immediately so that the animal loses consciousness in a few seconds and dies in less than a minute.

It seems to me less arbitrary and more logical to go along with Jennings (quoted by Agar 1943, p. 153), who wrote after years of study on the behavior of amoebae: «I am thoroughly convinced, after long study of the behavior of this organism, that if Amoeba were a large animal, so as to come within the every day experience of human beings, its behavior would at once call forth the attribution to it of states of pleasure and pain, of hunger, desire, and the like, on precisely the same basis as we attribute these things to the dog.»

God could had it been both ways is possible for him... created of all livings from chemicals to full creatures... in the book if looked so simple is because God message was to people with less knowldge premitive whether in the east or west... and had to be in simple examples but that might hold big meanings in today's knowldge and facilities... about mankind God created at it's best, but never in the Quran it was stated that men had been given his (God's) looks... God told us that all creatures are nations like us, which means they were created in the same way... although God as well spoke of integration of mankind and well as animals in cross marriages that made variable nations...

God could had creation either ways is possible for him... created of all livings from chemicals to full creatures... in the book if looked so simple is because God message was to people with less knowldge premitive whether in the east or west... and had to be in simple examples but that might hold big meanings in today's knowldge and facilities... about mankind God created at it's best, but never in the Quran it was stated that men had been given his (God's) looks... God told us that all creatures are nations like us, which means they were created in the same way... although God as well spoke of integration of mankind and well as animals in cross marriages that made variable nations...

The plant is less coordinated as a subject than an animal and is more like a democracy of cells in which no particular group of cells has a central control.