Sentences with phrase «real argument for us»

That is really not relevant to the discussion on the real argument for GHE & EHGE, which depends on frequency - specific issues like the absorption coefficient.

The book also didn't present any real argument for Christianity as being the universal truth.

The real argument for choice is to be found in the arts and the humanities, so that is why I have been devoting the last few years to this line of research.

The real argument for investing in classroom observations is their potential diagnostic value.

Despite Hertzberg's attempted defense of Israel on ethical grounds, his real argument for Israel is «the continuity of community.»

Stop playing the victim card and come up with a real argument for your position.

«The property tax cap doesn't pick on NYSUT, it picks on New York state's children, and we will be out there making real arguments for why it doesn't provide property tax relieve,» NYSUT President Dick Iannuzzi told me last week.

Not exact matches

No call to action for either site, and no real argument why anyone should support Romney.

«To place defendants» argument in a real world context,» she wrote, «they assert that for the payment of approximately $ 100 a year to the Copyright Office (the payment for a Section 111 compulsory license) and without compliance with the strictures of the Communications Act or plaintiffs» consent, that they are entitled to use and profit from the plaintiffs» copyrighted works.»

Blaming Levandowski also could bolster Uber's argument that Waymo's real motivation for suing Uber is retribution for losing Levandowski, other top talent, and possibly ceding ground to Uber.

An example of the argument for volatility - based caution about Bitcoin, chosen at random, appears in Professor David Yermack's December 2013 NBER working paper, «Is Bitcoin a Real Currency?

He makes the now familiar point that if negative real rates are sometimes desirable on counter cyclical grounds there is a strong argument for an inflation target high enough that the ZLB does not bind or binds only very infrequently.

If the Fed believed that a 2 percent inflation target was appropriate at the beginning of 2012 when it believed the neutral real rate was above 2 percent, I can not see any argument for not adjusting the target or altering the framework when the neutral real rate is very plausibly close to zero.

The irony being that he was threatened by the church for going against the whole «god did it» argument, which is what this guy was trying to claim, and has nothing to do with «real science»

In the real world, we define fallacies for debate purposes and validating arguments which is not happening here in the forums with hateful trolls like you.

In closing arguments, Assistant US Attorney Nathan Williams mocked Roof for calling himself brave in his hate - filled journal and during his confession, saying the real bravery came from the victims who tried to stop him as he fired 77 bullets at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal church.

Get back to me when you have a real counter argument for the issues I raise.

Holiness for me was found in the mess and labour of giving birth, in birthday parties and community pools, in the battling sweetness of breastfeeding, in the repetition of cleaning, in the step of faith it took to go back to church again, in the hours of chatting that have to precede the real heart - to - heart talks, in the yelling at my kids sometimes, in the crying in restaurants with broken hearted friends, in the uncomfortable silences at our bible study when we're all weighing whether or not to say what we really think, in the arguments inherent to staying in love with each other, in the unwelcome number on the scale, in the sounding out of vowels during bedtime book reading, in the dust and stink and heat of a tent city in Port au Prince, in the beauty of a soccer game in the Haitian dust, in the listening to someone else's story, in the telling of my own brokenness, in the repentance, in the secret telling and the secret keeping, in the suffering and the mourning, in the late nights tending sick babies, in confronting fears, in the all of a life.

When this is done, no argument is needed against the real presence of a past figure, for a past figure by definition is not the present subjectivity, is not contemporary, and is precisely one no longer subject to being presented through the senses.7 The presence of a past figure can be made intelligible and justified only by a quite different notion of presence specifically appropriate to the relation of the past to the present.

This is played for laughs later in season, but the real comedy is how obvious it probably comes off to everyone watching that there's no real argument here.

Scandalously to oversimplify his argument, it is, says Heidegger, the history of this nihilistic impulse to reduce being to an object of the intellect, subject to the will, that has brought us at last to the age of technology, for which reality is just so many quanta of power, the world a representation of consciousness, and the earth a mere reserve awaiting exploitation; technological mastery has become our highest ideal, and our only real model of truth.

In terms of Newman's distinction between «real» and «notional» apprehensions and assents, Hartshorne's a priori arguments justify the notional assents which provide the intellectual and theoretical grounding for the experientially informed real assents of living faith.

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.

Anyone who make's an argument against anyone or any idea by simply calling others idiot, is truly lacking any real ability to articulate logical reason for their opposition.

One of the main arguments for the X-Men poster is that the action in the poster isn't real.

We have opened up the question sufficiently to show that there is a very real possibility that the whereabouts of the burial place of Jesus was not known when his resurrection first began to be proclaimed, and that unless this can be established as an historical fact, that argument for the «bodily resurrection» which we have been considering remains invalid.

Neither does one improve the argument by setting up and knocking down straw men as a substitute for answering the real question.

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.

but thats not what i'm talking about... i am discussing the god you claim to worship... even if you believe jesus was god on earth it doesn't matter for if you take what he had to say as law then you should take with equal fervor words and commands given from god itself... it stands as logical to do this and i am confused since most only do what jesus said... the dude was only here for 30 years and god has been here for the whole time — he has added, taken away, and revised everything he has set previous to jesus and after his death... thru the prophets — i base my argument on the book itself, so if you have a counter argument i believe you haven't a full understanding of the book — and that would be my overall point... belief without full understanding of or consideration to real life or consequences for the hereafter is equal to a childs belief in santa which is why we atheists feel it is an equal comparision... and santa is clearly a bs story... based on real events from a real historical person but not a magical being by any means!

If you are at all dubious about slippery slope arguments in this area, Smith's catalogue of real - life examples will cure your doubts once and for all.

Other indications of evolution are too numerous to actually list in full, but a few might be the clear genetic distinction between Neanderthals and modern man; the overlapping features of hominid and pre-hominid fossil forms; the progressive order of the fossil record (that is, first fish, then amphibians, then reptiles, then mammals, then birds; contradicting the Genesis order and all flood models); the phylogenetic relationships between extant and extinct species (including distributions of parasitic genetic elements like Endogenous Retroviruses); the real time observations of speciation in the lab and in the wild; the real time observations of novel functionality in the lab and wild (both genetic, Lenski's E. coli, and organsimal, the Pod Mrcaru lizards); the observation of convergent evolution defeating arguments of common component creationism (new world v. old world vultures for instance); and... well... I guess you get the picture.

What is most salient for the present argument is that here we see the tension that exists in the relationship between the virtual and the real.

some of your posts have been straw men arguments against total depravity that are real easy for you knock down and in reality the text has nothing to do with inability and no Calvinist believes it either

What is needed is a Catholic theological interpretation of modern pluralistic democracy, one that insists on real space for the ideas and active contributions of religious traditions, while underscoring the value of respectful argument and even friendship among those who hold competing views.

Concerning the meaning of «order» in my cosmological argument, all that my view requires is that the order be nonstrict in such a fashion and degree as to allow for a real distinction between causally possible and causally necessary, or between the totality of necessary conditions and a strictly «sufficient» condition, and that this be true in every concrete case.

If we did not teach young people to compete (the argument goes), we would not prepare them for the «real world.»

Smith says that my principle of «modal coincidence» (to be possible is to be possible for God, to be actual is to be actual for God) is addressed to the problem of the factual side, but that my ontological argument must appeal to modal logic as expressive of real possibility and necessity, and that logicians express doubts about these.

As for asking me to get real...... Valid arguments I will gladly hold my hands up and admit - but yours isn't..

One of the NFLs stronger arguments could be that the prejudice against concussions is actually a symptom of participation trophy culture where everyone gets a healthy brain - by coddling our kids mental health we're actualy doing them a disservice and leaving them ill - equipped for the real world when their brains eventually stop working altogether.

Look, this is real simple... If you're going to set up arbitrary endpoints — the decade of the 1990s, for example — then you don't get to ignore those endpoints when it suits your argument.

Your only real argument seems to be «he's english, so he's over-rated» while neglecting the fact that he's had two very productive seasons for a young player.

And am sick of the he needs game time after injury argument... He's been match ready for two months or more and should be willing and able to prove he is a first team contender... instead each time he appears it's the jogging around plus the ocassional darting run on display again along with the demonstrated ability not to be able to dribble with the ball the failure to give real defensive support to full back and the persistent fragility in front of goal... Should be part of a buy one get one free package with wenger

On one hand, it's a fair argument as it will have been a source of real frustration for many fans not to have won more silverware in recent years, and just like any other supporter, he has the right to voice his opinion and it has ultimately centred around wanting change.

Not gonna get in to an argument and I hear you — but haven't we kept hearing the same old boll ** ks now for 20 years — «team A / B / C has improved massively», «no top four this season», «team X / Y / Z is spending wisely and shows real ambition».

Your argument can still be used for the defending case, i.e. «this is Real we are talking about, with Ronaldo, Asensio, Vasquez, up front, supported by Kroos and Kovacic».

The arguments that nut bans limit the food allergic children from learning to advocate for themselves or that they need to live in the real world which will not accommodate them are also very tired ones indeed.

We find the suggestion that this is the real reason for the MPA far more compelling than we do the argument that our return would be detrimental to the island, particularly when 1,500 servicemen and 2,000 civilian workers currently live there.

The answer is for the left to win arguments with real people and stop is time honoured Fabian strategy of, manipulating the system to vastly exaggerate the power held by a small minority whilst simultaneously complaining about their inability to concentrate even more power with Left Liberal courtiers via PR What the left hate and what they can not admit is that their leaders despise the views of many of their voters, perhaps a majority.

They found themselves in the wonderland of Labour Party policy making, the real world would barely encroach, many policy arguments would take place with no regard for recognisable logic and most processes were strange and absurd.

Another argument for not killing the provision, put to me but a key Clegg aide, is that nobody in the real world cares.