Sentences with phrase «of right and wrong completely»

So my question is this: How does that logic not make our understandings of right and wrong completely arbitrary and meaningless?

Not exact matches

«There are a lot of pitfalls that you can fall into and think this one model is completely clustered right here, but it could be clustered around the wrong solution,» he said.

Yes... so you come here and read and write for what reasons... to prove you are RIGHT... to find someone else to prove to you are RIGHT... because you might be WRONG... an old friend of mine said it is interesting that with only one letter switched around within the word SCARED changes it completely to SACRED... think about it, I think that is one reason you might be here.

Psychotic states can be so severe that the person completely loses his grasp on reality and is completely unable to appreciate whether what he is doing is right or wrong, or even the nature of his own actions.

Given the fact that we have 10 picks and we will likely ignore QB this year (right or wrong), it's completely reasonable to believe that we will come out with most of these positions in as good or better shape than what we had last year.

This time, it was all about the fabled power shift, and how the transfer tactics of the two clubs (opposites as they have been so far this summer) fell completely and utterly in the «right» and «wrong» bracket.

When it came time for me to teach my daughter right from wrong, I popped her tush a couple of times and found it completely ineffective.

But the average, healthy, happy - minded Feedback can't help wondering why it wouldn't be just as easy to get the numbers right, instead of wrong, and say that the double page spread shows a tenth of a second of music instead of the completely incorrect 4.7 seconds.

Most of the people got it right, the the so called experts are absolutely and completely wrong - most weight loss and exercise studies do not have equal calorie deficits, for instance most studies comparing dieters and exercisers have the dieters cutting about 700 calories whereas the exercisers are burning 200 calories.

But what continues to fascinate me is the generally conservative premise of the Primal Blueprint — that the experts who've told us for years that eating whole grains and fiber was a healthy alternative to fatty foods have been completely wrong and that our meat - and - plant - eating ancestors had it right.

This can, of course, sound completely right for some of you and there's nothing wrong with that.

What is means is that an investor could be right that the price of natural gas is going higher, but wrong on the timing and completely miss out on the rebound as this energy ETF's value is eaten away by rolling costs.

your choice of a 360 or Wii is no less right or wrong, and is completely your personal preference.

But let's instead ONLY focus on the word WILL and the words REAL CHANCE and then take that completely out of context and remove it from «future time» in an effort to prove how «terribly unscientific» and Wrong you are Killian and another is oh so Right.

Frightening thought — if and only if the AGW centric prediction of future climate is either not completely correct, or out right wrong, consider extreme scenarios which would result in a drastically (and painfully) different outcome than the prophecied sea level rise / climatic tropical expansion / northerly movement of species model.

Is there any authority you will accept, or is your argument going to remain «I'm completely ignorant of actual thermodynamics and statistical mechanics and mechanics and electrodynamics and quantum theory — beyond the level a bright high school student might have accomplished — but I doubt that any of them are right, so when Jelbring states a result that openly contradicts their content that doesn't mean that he is probably wrong.»?

All completely wrong, and in my view, the bigger they get the more we will see the return of balanced policies from the precipice of the right neoliberalism which many of us are whinging about.

I have always been amused at the thought that the 1960 deviationist tree rings might well have been right and that the grafted on instrumental record was simply a product of confirmation bias in the temp adjustments and, of course, Jones getting the UHI completely wrong (and then having his raw Chinese data «lost».

Instead what Victor is doing is waving the name «Occam» then skipping straight to the bit that goes «So Victor must be right and all of the science completely wrong!!»

@Nij You are incorrect, I gave complete answers to the case of private universities (no constitutional rights implicated because they are private, rather than completely wrong reasons given in the accepted answer) and public universities (they are in fact implicated).

«The opposing sides of the great divorce debate are both completely right and completely wrong.

There is really no right or wrong answer to this question, and it depends completely on the dynamics of each particular family.