I'm the kind that will
offer real arguments and intellectually smack the nonsense out of the uneducated theist.
He ignores the fact that in war you kill people and capture enemies, and then drops every context (while accusing Peikoff of that), and simply argues that we should not torture our enemies in war because it is (somehow) unethical —
he offers no real argument as to why it is immoral, and only tries to make Peikoff look like a buffoon.
Not exact matches
Frank, one assumes, would quarrel with this way of putting his
argument, but he
offers no alternative explanation for how millions of middle Americans are so blind to their
real interests and so self - destructive in their political behavior.
Little
argument is
offered, alternative positions are rarely mentioned and never analyzed nor refuted, no
real evidence for his positive proposals is provided, there is page after page of blunt assertion, and after the first chapter I simply lost count of the leaps of logic which larded every section.
The problem with such an
argument is that while it
offers a very helpful insight into the question of why we suffer and endure hardship, it says nothing about
real evil.
Wenger turned down
offers from other clubs, specifically
Real Madrid, not because he is loyal to Arsenal but because he knew he wouldn't last 2 yrs there before getting the sack.At Arsenal ofcourse he's untouchable, thus your loyalty
argument doesn't hold water
************** Funny, it sounds rather liek the
arguments the Right uses to implement the laws designed to prevent voter fraud: Laws designed to correct a non-existant problem, except that racial discrimination is very
real --- well if it is «very
real» you and the leftist democrats should have no problem with
offering concrete evidence of it.
The sort of problem Sontag has with Jameson is, of course, the very
argument Bordwell has with anyone from Slavoj Žižek to Jacques Lacan, evident in a comment he makes on his blog (but not in the book) that echoes directly Sontag's: «Most of FRT [Zizek's The Fright of
Real Tears]
offers standard film criticism, providing impressionistic readings of various [Krzysztof] Kieslowski films in regard to recurring themes, visual motifs, dramatic structures, borrowed philosophical concepts, and the like.»
This nine page booklet is designed to help students distinguish between fact and opinion and to be able to
offer positive and negative
arguments related to
real and artificial Christmas trees.
In 1981, my Harvard colleague, political scientist Steven Kelman surveyed Congressional staff members, and found that support and opposition to market - based environmental policy instruments was based largely on ideological grounds: Republicans, who supported the concept of economic - incentive approaches,
offered as a reason the assertion that «the free market works,» or «less government intervention» is desirable, without any
real awareness or understanding of the economic
arguments for market - based programs.
Moreover, unlike the fall course, this spring
offering will not involve
real judges (in the fall course, students» briefs and oral
arguments are assessed by
real appellate judges, who meet with students).
The
argument put forward is that there are too many
real estate sales reps in the field competing for a limited amount of business, making the industry more ruthless and diluting the services that a professional sales agent should be
offering.
Nearly half (46 percent) of those surveyed favor government rule changes to make it easier for
real estate companies to
offer one - stop shopping, even after hearing all the
arguments against such changes.